Re: [802.3BA] proposed 100GbE standard and roadmap to 1TbE question..
The choice of 20 virtual lanes was disccused earlier also in December 2007. In this regard, I draw your attention to a paper on "A Physical Coding Sublayer for 100GbE" by Gary Nicholl, Mark Gustlin and Oded Trainin, of Cisco Systems Inc.
The paper discusses at length as to why the option of 20 virtual lanes suit 100GbE requirements.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Fritz, Karl <fritz.karl@xxxxxxxx>
Greetings Task Force
My name is Karl
Fritz and I work for the Special Purpose Processor Development Group at the Mayo
Clinic in Rochester, MN. Some of us are studying Terabit communication, so
we have recently been paying more attention to your efforts. I was pleased
to see the following article in Networkworld, which mentioned that you folks are
looking ahead to Terabit communication around the 2015
However, I do have a question related to the way the signals are grouped
for 100GbE protocol. It appears that the data will be striped across 20
lanes, then down to 10 lanes (for the CAUI protocol) and then again
possibly muxed down to 4 and then 1 (according the the Ethernet Alliance
November 2008 Technology Overview document). Being that 10Gbps serdes
exist, why does the standard start at 20 lanes (5 Gbps each)? If this
standard is expected to be scaleable, it appears things could get rather messy
if we want to scale this to Terabit speeds (effectively multiplying all this by
enlighten me a bit or point me as to why 20 lanes was selected as a
standard? Why not go directly to 10 lanes at 10 Gbps?
Purpose Processor Development Group (SPPDG)
First Street SW