Thread Links  Date Links  

Thread Prev  Thread Next  Thread Index  Date Prev  Date Next  Date Index 
Hi Lennart, Thanks for reviewing. Please see my response to your comments below. Thanks Yair From: Yseboodt, Lennart [mailto:lennart.yseboodt@xxxxxxxxxxx]
EXTERNAL EMAIL Hi Pete, Yair, Updated comments. Yair, your minimum PD voltages are wrong. Yair: I agree in principle. We need that Type 3 and 4 PDs class 13 will be supported by Type 1 and 2 PSEs with Vpse=44V for class 13 with 12.5 ohms. So these are the numbers I got. Class 1: 42.88V
è 42.8 (rounding down for worst case) instead of 42.9 Class 2: 42.07V
è 42 (rounding down for worst case) instead of 42.1 Class 3: 39.94V
è 39.9 See calculations attached.
About rounding... convention has always been to have "nice" numbers on the PSE side and accept PClass_PD as calculated. We have made a couple small roundings to PClass_PD (eg. Class 5 was rounded up to 40W). Yair: Since this is a spec, and spec need to be accurate and sync, accurate and make sense with text and related Tables, we must make sure that the calculated values will not be higher than
the fixed worst case numbers in Table 14511. So, to round up PClass is OK. Rounding done is not. As a result, we can round the following up: 3.92W
è 4W 6.72W
è 6.8W 451.W stays 45.1W since the calculated value is higher than 45W. We can adjust PD number, I don’t
like it, but we can do it. Are you preferring this option? In This case Ppd for Class 5 will be 39.94W instead of 40W. See other solution to this issue in the document to add a text to clarify the source of potential differences between the calculated values and fixed values in Table 14511. Having easy to remember numbers is more important than being precise down to 10 mW. Yair: It was never an objective to remember numbers…. As such I've rounded the numbers to make as much sense as possible (matches with Pete's PClass numbers). Yair: Please see above for what is the definition in my opinion for
“making sense” underlined above. Yair: Regarding your comment in page 4:
“Does not match D2.4 text, nor does it produce a valid sentence. Please check.”
The text without the changes is D2.4 text. The modified proposed changes is to split the sentence to two parts. The first part says the when you plug the Vpse_min and Rch you will get the overmargined values in Table 14511. The 2^{nd} part is explaining that the overmargined values where taken per the lowest PSE Type which is Type 3. Kind regards, Lennart From: Peter Johnson <peter_johnson@xxxxxxxxx> Yair, Lennart: If rounding mathematically, I get same values as Yair except at Class 3, I get 13.9W. If rounding UP to nearest 10th in order to be conservative at the PSE, it would be: Class 1 4W Class 2 6.8W Class 3 14W The calculation for Class 5 is 45.1W – rounding this down is of course, NOT conservative. I don’t like the language “worst case PSE Type parameters”. Worst case is never very descriptive. Not sure new text is needed – it should be already covered in footnotes to the table I think. Also, if we toss out Option B, then the footnotes for the table 14511 will need be adjusted as they presently say “for minimum Vport_pse2P” and these values are all for 50V Vport_pse2P. Regards, Pete J Sifos From: Yseboodt, Lennart [mailto:lennart.yseboodt@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Hi Yair, Review & comments attached. Looks OK but needs couple of fixes. Lennart From: Yair Darshan <YDarshan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Hi all, 1.
Based on the last conclusions, my proposal to exclude the 20 ohms’ cases form the calculations of Pclass fixed values in Table
14511 as derived from the worst case of Type 3 and 4 PSEs connected to all PD types, stays as proposed. Agreed? 2.
Please see attached Rev003 in which most of the reviewers choose Option A solution. 3.
In addition, I add proposed changes for Vpd, as result of the consequences of (1) and (2). I’ll appreciate your inputs. Yair From: Chad Jones (cmjones) [mailto:cmjones@xxxxxxxxx]
EXTERNAL EMAIL Excellent, that’s not what I got from your original message. But it’s been a long day. My reading comprehension might be lowered…
☺ Chad Jones Tech Lead, Cisco Systems Chair, IEEE P802.3bt 4PPoE Task Force From: Geoff Thompson <thompson@xxxxxxxx> Chad We are in violent agreement Geoff

Attachment:
darshan_03_0517_Pclass_fixed_value_vs_calculated_value_baseline_Rev003a_....pdf
Description: darshan_03_0517_Pclass_fixed_value_vs_calculated_value_baseline_Rev003a_....pdf