|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Comment i-209 addresses the 10GBASE-T midspan requirements, which we inadvertently left out of clause 33. Yair pointed out when pulling the comment that the midspan insertion loss requirements for 10GBASE-T are too tight to practically meet. I looked into it – he is right, it is a consequence of cat 6 connector specs – and allowing more insertion loss should only matter in a very small percentage of cases where all the other cabling components together have less than 0.5dB to the full 100m IL spec. In those cases, if we allow a 10GBASE-T midspan to displace more than one connector (up to two connectors) the cabling / link segment specs can be met with the midspan.
(note that in practical situations, cat6a is used for 100m 10GBASE-T links. Cat 6a has 2dB margin to the 10GBASE-T link segment spec so replacement of 2 connectors will not be needed)
Attached is a presentation (zimmerman_3bt_01_0917.pdf – aka ‘darshan_99’) with the changes to resolve comment i-209 and use comment i-209 to resolve the issue Yair raised.
George A. Zimmerman, Ph.D.
President & Principal Consultant
CME Consulting, Inc.
Experts in PHYsical Layer Communications