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

Re: it's time for another poll

OK here is my vote, with comments also.

> Rick Brooks wrote:
> OK,
> we have decided one thing, but there are many other items that we have
> not really agreed to yet.
> I wanted to take a non-binding poll to see what people are thinking.
> In order to facilitate this, I have compiled several PD front end
> schematics for your enjoyment.
> I show the needed polarity diodes and the under-voltage lockout
> circuit, followed by some kind of power supply.
> The under-voltage lockout circuit could close the series load FET at
> the same time as opening the signature FET,
> but that is of course optional.
> These circuits help to illustrate how many components are needed for
> the various options.
> Please look at this file before proceeding:
> *************************************************************************************
> Please reply with you votes, or comments on these questions:
> 1) Should we accommodate crossover cables, i.e. take either polarity
> of power?  (more cost in the PD)
> yes__X___    no_____ crossover cables are allowed, so we should not break the system if they are used. Also, there are A and B wired jacks which when used together do the same thing.
> 2) Should we require having a non-linear component in series with the
> signature resistor for discovery?
> yes_____    no__X___
> 3) Should we pick one and only one pair at this time to send power?
> yes_____    no___X__
> If yes, then pick one:    1236_____     4578_____
> 4) Should we specify power for both pairs, with the second pair being
> optional for higher power?
> yes_____    no_____ This is hard to decide, because of major effect on the design of the PSE. If yes, we could end up with a two-tiered standard where some PD's would not work with some PSE's, and It looks like this leads to proprietary systems. If yes, then it follows that PSE must supply on both pairs.
> 5) Should we leave open the possibility of using the second pair for
> power in the future?
> yes_____    no_____ This is tempting, but probably not any easier to decide later on.
> 6) If we were to allow power on both pairs,
> should we make discovery on each pair independent of the power on the
> other pair?
> yes_X____    no_____
> *************************************************************************************
> This poll is certainly not official or binding, I'm just trying to get
> some discussion and opinions going.
> thanks,
> - Rick