Re: [802SEC] Comments on 802.3bf
Hi James,
The IEEE 802.3 Time Synchronisation Study Group met today to consider your
comments on the PAR and 5 Criteria and the following are the responses
approved by the Study Group. As a results of your comments the 5 Criteria
have been updated. Please note that these updated 5 Criteria are yet to
be approved by the IEEE 802.3 Working Group, and will be considered for
approval at the Closing IEEE 802.3 Working Group plenary tomorrow
afternoon.
Best regards,
David
PAR comment 1:
5.3 - This is dependent on the completion of P802.1AS and it should be
noted as such.
PAR comment 1 response:
While the proposed IEEE P802.3bf project would be developed to support the
needs of P802.1AS, it would also support any time synchronization
protocol. In addition, the proposed project would not rely on any
specification contained in P802.1AS.
Based on this, the completion of this proposed project is not dependant on
IEEE P802.1AS.
5 Criteria comment 1:
Slide 3: Multiple vendors, multiple users - This question is not answered
in the slide.
5 Criteria comment 1 response:
The slide has been updated to answer this question:
"This capability has been available from many vendors on a proprietary
basis for some years. Having an interoperable standard will significantly
expand the market."
5 Criteria comment 2:
Slide 4: I don't think these questions match the OpsManual. Please
reformat to answer the questions in the OpsMan.
5 Criteria comment 2 response:
Items a) and b) are the questions required by the IEEE 802 Operations
Manual. Items c), d), and e) are additional questions required by the IEEE
802.3 Working Group rules.
5 Criteria comment 3:
Slide 5: Easy for the document reader to select the relevant specification
- I don't think this question is directly answered. I am not sure why we
ask this question, but since we do, it should be answered.
5 Criteria comment 3 response:
We have added text that states that this is the only time synchronization
interface and management in IEEE 802.3.
5 Criteria comment 4:
Slide 6: "Cite to MT journal article" seems to be a broken link, was this
supposed to be replaced with the actual citation?
5 Criteria comment 4 response:
The citation was unavailable when the draft was posted. It has been added
to Slide 6.
5 Criteria comment 5:
Slide 7: My suggestion would be to expand the description of why the cost
is low, e.g., the impact is to add additional logic elements to record the
time packets are received and pass this to the higher layers or to embed
the information in the Ethernet frame.
5 Criteria comment 5 response:
The TSSG accepts the commenter's point, but does not want to go into great
technical detail. Here is replacement text:
"Time synchronization will require a small number of additional logic
elements to provide the necessary information to the interface."
The PAR may be found here:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/time_adhoc/public/nov09/P802_3bf_PAR_11
09.pdf
The updated 5 Criterai may be found here:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/time_adhoc/public/nov09/P802_3bf_5Crite
ria_1109.pdf
Motions to accept responses:
Accept the responses to the PAR question from James Gilb.
(1109_tssg_agenda.pdf)
M: M. Hajduczenia
S: F. Effenberger
Technical 75%
Y: 13 N: 0 A: 0
11/18/09 1:19PM
PASSES
Accept the responses on the 5 Criteria from James Gilb
(1109_tssg_agenda.pdf)
M: M. Hajduczenia
S: J. Innis
Technical 75%
Y: 14 N: 0 A: 0
11/18/09 1:20PM
PASSES
***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** <STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org>
wrote on 17/11/2009 21:25:02:
> Dear David
>
> Here are my comments on the 802.3bf PAR
>
> PAR
> 5.3 - This is dependent on the completion of P802.1AS and it should be
> noted as such.
>
> 5Cs
>
> Slide 3: Multiple vendors, multiple users - This question is not
> answered in the slide.
>
> Slide 4: I don't think these questions match the OpsManual. Please
> reformat to answer the questions in the OpsMan.
>
> Slide 5: Easy for the document reader to select the relevant
> specification - I don't think this question is directly answered. I am
> not sure why we ask this question, but since we do, it should be
answered.
>
> Slide 6: "Cite to MT journal article" seems to be a broken link, was
> this supposed to be replaced with the actual citation?
>
> Slide 7: My suggestion would be to expand the description of why the
> cost is low, e.g., the impact is to add additional logic elements to
> record the time packets are received and pass this to the higher layers
> or to embed the information in the Ethernet frame.
>
> James Gilb
> 802 EC Recording Secretary
>
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.
> This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.