Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [8023-POEP] IEEE 802.3at Vport ad hoc meetings Tuesday June 26; materials



Hi Anoop,

 

Thanks for the comments.

See my response below.

 

Yair

 


From: Anoop Vetteth (avetteth) [mailto:avetteth@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 6:10 PM
To: Yair Darshan; STDS-802-3-POEP@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: RE: [8023-POEP] IEEE 802.3at Vport ad hoc meetings Tuesday June 26; materials

 

Hi Yair

 

Some more comments on your presentation:

 

- Rather than having PSE Ilim_min = PD Ilim_max + 1mA; I think it will be a cleaner solution to increase the Tlim_min for PSE from 50ms to 51ms (or 55ms to make it a round figure). My third point will make it clear why I like this approach (This makes energy based policing easy).

Yair: Do you mean to increase Tcut_min or Tlim_min. To increase Tcut_min in PSE may be also good solution, I need to check. Tlim_min is not opart of the problem here since we want to gurrantee that in the worst case when PSE set ILIM=ILIM MIN and PD consume exactly Icut_max then the net charging current is zero so the Cpd will not be charged to 7V. So if PSE ILIM_MIN=PD ILIM_MAX+1mA = PSE ICUT_MAX+1mA then problem solved.

If we limit PD ICUT_MAX=PD ILIM_MAX to 50msec max and PSE ICUT_MAX to Tcut_min=51msec or more (probably more) then after 50msec we will have net charging current >0 so as you say it will solve the problem too.

Regarding what is cleaner solution between the above too, well, I like the 1st one due to the fact that it creates gray area between PSE ILIM_MIN to PD_ILIM_MAX AND WE DON’T have to touch timings that are already set in the silicon for other purposes.

Any way, both solutions are OK.

-----------------------

-          I do not like the term Ilim_min for PSE. The whole reason why we have current limiting at PD is so that we do not have to do current limiting at the PSE. We need to come up with a better name.

 

Yair: You want to change the names for 802.3af too? Or only for 802.3at?.

        I like the current names because they are clearly indicates a max. or min current. I understand your concerns and I suggest to ad in table 33-5 in the "addional information" column that ILIM doesn’t mean to implementation of current source only and user may prevent port current to exceed ILIM value by other means e.g. series elemt in PSE is fully on and yet PSE port current is maintained below ILIM_MAX by design. We can worry about the wording later. (Editor's problem..).

 

----------------------------

- In 802.3af we had Ilim_min/Icut_min = 14.28%. There is no rational reason why we need to keep this ratio the same for 802.3at. We have much more advanced processes today.

We need to come up with the minimum PD Ilim_max that is acceptable to everyone. 

 

Yair: The rational for 14% and not 7% is cost. Accuracy, design margins and chip yield costs. Wide range of a parameter solve it.

        We agree several times during the last 2 years to keep the same ratios of 802.3af in 802.3at.

       

Regarding the advanced processes that we have today: in order to allow all kinds of implementations you have to assume that the worst case implementation in terms of circuit accuracy is when PSE's ILIM_min and max are at narrow range e.g like in 802.3af  so during the last 5 years processes has not improved by a factor of 2. Actually if I want to implement linear current source then processes still requires 14-15% marging range so it will be +/-7-7.5% for each side to reduce chip cost.

 

So if vendor A can be satisfied with total 7% and vendor B can use 10% and Vendor C 14% so as you said we have to use margins that are exaptable to every one which is 14-15%..

 

We can not use 7% total margin and guarantee full 29.5W at the PD. It is not practical. On the other hand to have margin of 14% instead of 7% should be good to every one..

 

--------------------

 

There is also no reason why we need to specify that there be a maximum duty cycle of 5%. Even if we impose this, it is highly unlikely that a PSE is going to check for 5% dutycycle over 1s. All we care is the threshold and average current.

 

Yair: Regarding the 5% duty cycle: 802.3af chips should impose 5% duty cycle limitation since it is required by the standard. PSEs that are not meeting this requirement are not compliant. See 33.2.8.4 and PSE38 in the PICS.

Regarding 802.3at: we could leave the decision of imposing 5% duty cycle limitation to the system and making it optional the problem might be interoperability.

If 802.3at PD that is requesting only 12.95W and uses ripple current that exceeds overload requirements, will work in 802.3at (if not imposing 5% duty limitation) and will not work in 802.3af PSE. So for the sake of interoperability I suggest to  use the same 802.3af definitions.

We can discuss it more in the group.

-----------------------------

If the PD draws more than Iport_dcmax (720mA) for more than 51ms (or 55ms) then the PSE can shut off the PD. There is no averaging involved here. This is a hard threshold as in AF - Icut/Tcut

    If the average current drawn by the PD over 1 second is greater than Iport_dcmax (720mA) then the PSE can shut off the PD.

 

Yair: This is correct. This arrangement allows utilizing the max 12.95W in af and 29.5W in 802.3at. If the PD draws 720mA with sine wave ripple of 100mA pp then the average will be 720mA DC so PSE shall not disconnect the port while PD current is between 920mA and 620mA ..so you cant count on the DC value only you need to know the peak current, duration and duty cycle. This is the reason for how it was specified in 802.3af.

I hope that I understand your point here.

 

 

Yair

---------------

Thank you

 

Anoop

 


From: owner-stds-802-3-poep@ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-poep@ieee.org] On Behalf Of Yair Darshan
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 4:22 AM
To: STDS-802-3-POEP@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [8023-POEP] IEEE 802.3at Vport ad hoc meetings Tuesday June 26; materials

Hi Fred,

 

Some comments:

Slide 4: Icut_max/Icut_min is 0.4/0.3-1=14.28% and not 7% as stated.

 

Slide 5: I like the simplicity of how PD is specified in 802.3af then how it presented in slide 5: We should allow utilizing the full 29.5W as permited by the average current of 0.72A. We can do it easily by keeping the same concept and margins as in 802.3af. Having 14.28% margin between Icut_max to Icut_min allows it.

It is difficult to understand slide 5. I disagree with the 1st bullet. We should allow implementations that uses dc current with ac ripple within the range specified between Icut_max to Icut_min limited to 50msec max and 5% duty as in 802.3af.

 

Slide 6: The point of having the current limit at the PD was to solve inrush current due to dv/dt in PSE and dealing with long TLIM_MIN.

            This slide suggests that PD with less then Cpd_max don’t have to implement current limit. This was exactly the case in 802.3af so what is the purpose of having all this PD current limit discussion? If Cpd is 179.9UF<180U then Tlim _min may be still 12.6msec and we are back to square 1 = 3month ago..

 

The solution is what I thought last meeting: PD will limit the current within 1msec to ICUT_MAX so we will have to charge only 0.12uF for the rest of the 50msec max of TCUT. See my presentation that explains the whole thing.

 

Slide 6: This slide is relevant only if PD limits to Icut_min. which doesn’t support a solution to utilizing max 29.5W. See my presentation for proposal to solve this issue.

 

In addition, please allocate time to discuss my presentation that may help to solve some issues that was supposed to be solved by moving the current limit to the PD and in my opinion are still requires some discussion.

 

The rest looks fine.

 

Yair

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


From: Fred Schindler (frs) [mailto:frs@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2007 3:58 AM
To: STDS-802-3-POEP@listserv.ieee.org; Parker, Tim (SC100:321); Andrew Smith; Wael Diab; mike@akrossilicon.com; Hugh Barrass (hbarrass); david_lucia@sifos.com; sajol@sbcglobal.net; Dove, Dan; keith@phihongusa.com; Dinh, Thuyen; Patoka, Martin; Daniel Feldman; Yair Darshan; Anoop Vetteth (avetteth); Clay Stanford; Matthew Landry; David_Law@3com.com; Krellner Jan-r35458; david@akrossilicon.com; Riccardo RUSSO; Huynh, Thong; Youhao Xi; McCormack, Michael; Bill Delveaux (bdelveau); Pavlick Rimboim; Chad Jones (cmjones); Sanita Gianluca; Shinkyo, Kaku; Joseph Maggiolino; Taylor, Rick; Brian Buckmeier; Soe, Myat Myitzu; Unterdorfer, Pascal; EVM(Elsa Madrigal); christian.beia@st.com
Cc: Fred Schindler (frs)
Subject: IEEE 802.3at Vport ad hoc meetings Tuesday June 26; materials

 

Hello,

IEEE 802.3at, Vport ad hoc team meetings are scheduled for Tuesday June 26,  July 3, and July 10 (9 AM, PST) to cover current limits required for PoE. Please review the direction we are heading at:

http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/at/public/may07/schindler_5_28_07.pdf

Please also review:

http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/at/public/may07/avetteth_0507.pdf

 

Please ensure that you review the IEEE-SA PatCom slides [ http://standards.ieee.org/board/pat/pat-slideset.pdf ] prior to the start of the conference call. At the start of call I will ask that everybody confirms that they have read this material - if anybody hasn't we will pause the call until they confirm that they have done so.

 

Thanks,

Fred

 

______________________________________________________________________________

Frederick Schindler has invited you to a Cisco Unified MeetingPlace Conference

 

Date/Time:               JUN 26, 2007 at 9:00AM America/Los_Angeles

Length:                  60

Frequency:               3

Meeting ID:              131128329

Meeting Password:       

 

Global Access Numbers:

http://cisco.com/en/US/about/doing_business/conferencing/index.html

 

    US/Canada:  +1.866.432.9903    United Kingdom:   +44.20.8824.0117

    India:      +91.80.4103.3979   Germany:          +49.619.6773.9002

    Japan:      +81.3.5763.9394    China:            +86.10.8515.5666

 

TO ATTEND A WEB AND VOICE CONFERENCE:

 

CISCO INTRANET ATTENDEES

Join the Web & Voice Conference*

1. Go to http://meetingplaceinternal.cisco.com/join.asp?131128329

2. Enter your CEC User ID & Password then click OK

- Accept any security warnings you receive and wait for the Meeting Room to initialize

3. Click on CONNECT from the Meeting Room to join the Voice Conference portion of the meeting

 

EXTERNAL ATTENDEES - Outside the Cisco Intranet**

Join the Web & Voice Conference*

1. Go to http://meetingplace.cisco.com/join.asp?131128329

2. Fill in the My Name is field then click Attend Meeting

- If you have a CEC User ID, click on the Cisco icon

- Accept any security warnings you receive and wait for the Meeting Room to initialize

3. Click on CONNECT from the Meeting Room to join the Voice Conference portion of the meeting

 

*If this is your first time attending a Web Conference, disable any pop-up blockers and visit http://meetingplace.cisco.com/mpweb/scripts/browsertestupper.asp to test your web browser for compatibility with the Web Conference.

**Not all meetings are scheduled to allow external attendees into the Web Conference portion of the meeting, if the URL does not work, please follow the Voice only Conference instructions below to attend.

 

TO ATTEND A VOICE ONLY CONFERENCE

1. Dial into Cisco Unified MeetingPlace (view the Access Numbers and link above)

2. Press 1 to attend the meeting

3. Follow the prompts to enter the Meeting ID 131128329 and join the meeting

 

SUPPORT

Information about this Conference: Contact Frederick Schindler, 14085259859

Cisco IT Support Center: Attend the Voice Conference and then press #0 on your phone keypad

 

GLOBAL ACCESS NUMBERS

 

COUNTRY            LOCATION            LOCAL NUMBER           TOLL FREE-FREEFONE

AMERICAS          

United States      East               +1.919.392.3330         1.866.349.3520

                   West               +1.408.525.6800         1.866.432.9903

Argentina          Buenos Aires       +54.11.4341.0101

Brazil             Brasilia           +55.613.424.0220

                   Rio de Janeiro     +55.21.2483.6302

                   Sao Paulo          +55.11.5508.6311

Canada             Calgary            +1.403.514.2435

                   Edmonton           +1.780.441.3715

                   Halifax            +1.902.474.0214

                   Kanata             +1.613.254.0005

                   Markham            +1.905.470.4810

                   Montreal           +1.514.847.6875

                   Ottawa             +1.613.788.7250

                   Quebec             +1.418.634.5645

                   Regina             +1.306.566.6410

                   Toronto            +1.416.306.7230

                   Vancouver          +1.604.647.2350

                   Winnipeg           +1.204.336.6610

Chile              Santiago           +56.2.431.4936

Colombia           Bogota             +57.1.325.6065

Mexico             Mexico City        +52.55.5267.1800

Peru               Lima               +51.1.215.5101

Puerto Rico        San Juan           +1.787.620.1865

Venezuela          Caracas            +58.212.902.0210

EMEA              

Austria            Vienna             +43.12.4030.6022

Belgium            Diegem             +32.2.704.5072

Bulgaria           Sofia              +359.2.937.5938

Croatia            Zagreb             +385.1.462.8908

Denmark            Aabyhoj            +45.8.939.7131

                   Copenhagen         +45.3.958.5010

Finland            Espoo              +358.204.70.6227

France             Paris              +33.15.804.3116

Germany            Eschborn           +49.619.6773.9002

                   Hallbergmoos       +49.811.554.3016

Greece             Athens             +30.210.638.1303

Hungary            Budapest           +36.1.225.4621

Ireland            Dublin             +353.1.819.2717

Israel             Netanya            +972.9.892.7026

Italy              Rome               +39.06.5164.4006

Netherlands        Amsterdam          +31.20.357.1487

Norway             Oslo               +47.23.27.3647

Poland             Warsaw             +48.22.572.2615

Portugal           Lisbon             +351.21.446.8756

Slovakia           Bratislava         +421.2.5825.5309

South Africa       Johannesburg       +27.11.267.1011

                   Pretoria           +27.12.844.7401

Spain              Barcelona          +34.93.393.4037

                   Madrid             +34.91.201.2149

Sweden             Gothenburg         +46.31.63.4409

                   Stockholm          +46.8.685.9035

Switzerland        Glattzentrum       +41.44.878.7335

Turkey             Istanbul           +90.212.335.0208

United Arab

Emirates (UAE)     Dubai              +971.4.390.7840

United Kingdom     Bedfont Lakes      +44.20.8824.0117

                   Edinburgh          +44.131.561.3643

                   London City        +44.20.7496.3743

ASIA PAC

Australia          Canberra           +61.2.6216.0643          86.16.0643
                   Melbourne          +61.3.9659.4173

                   North Sydney       +61.2.8446.5260

China              Beijing            +86.10.8515.5666

HongKong           HongKong           +852.3414.1802

India              Bangalore          +91.80.4103.3979

                   Mumbai IL & FS     +91.22.4043.4030

                   New Delhi          +91.11.4261.1088

Indonesia          Jakarta            +62.21.7854.7476

Japan              Tokyo Akasaka      +81.3.5763.9394

South Korea        Seoul Asem         +82.2.3429.8102

Malaysia           Kuala Lumpur       +60.3.7723.8620

                   Penang             +60.4.631.5125

New Zealand        Auckland           +64.9.355.1968

                   Wellington         +64.4.496.5554

Phillipines        Makati (Manila)    +63.2.750.5886

Singapore          Singapore Capital  +65.6317.7088

Taiwan             Taipei             +886.2.8758.7088

Thailand           Bangkok            +66.2.263.7008

Vietnam            Hanoi              +84.4.974.6250

                   Ho Chi Minh City   +84.8.823.3418

                   (Saigon)                  

 

 

Fred Schindler

Technical Leader

CISCO Systems

170 West Tasman Drive

M/S SJ-19-3

San Jose, CA 95134-1706

Tel. (408) 525-9859