|
Nick -
This email captures the comment resolution discussions held on the last two
TP2 con-calls, and represents the attendance of those calls.
Specifically, see the proposed resolutions given below in blue text.
-
Comment 49 & 50
-
No disagreement that overshoot masks should
be relaxed. Lew was not on call to present his view that overshoot masks
should be eliminated, so final value decision was deferred. Plan to
discuss next week.
-
Propose accept in
principle. Set Y3 = 0.8.
-
Re-raised concern that absolute overshoot
power may need to be limited for Rx linearity. No specific proposals were
given, and no specific comment was submitted, so this is a potential
future item.
-
Comment 81 & 83
-
Recalled that prbs pattern is for component
level testing. Normative test will use a subpattern from AnAi or
BnBi.
-
Agreed that final prbs pattern must be
better defined, preferably referencable through another standard.
-
Agreed that final prbs pattern should be
convenient, preferable built-into pattern generators.
- It is understood that prbs7 is probably not adequate, but more work is
required to determine the best option. Work is planned (see TP2 notes).
-
Discussion about insertion of extra zero to
balance prbs pattern not conclusive.
-
Agilent has reported that
"zero-insertion" is standard on new equipment.
-
Idea was raised to insert long(er) runs of
1's and 0's into pattern to stress lower frequency impairments. Not
concluded.
-
Plan to discuss again next week.
-
Propose accept in
principle. In table 68-5
- Add footnote to table
68-5 '2^9-1 PRBS': 'A suitable pattern may be generated by the
polynomial x^9+x^5+1 as specified in ITU-T V.52. The data sequence d(n)
is given by d(n)=d(n-9)+d(n-5), modulo 2. The pattern is
not inverted such that there is a run of nine ones in its length
of 511 bits.'
- Add another sentence
'A balanced pattern with one additional bit is also
acceptable.'
-
Comment 104
-
Comment 105
-
Comment 106
-
Okay.
-
Propose accept. For the
figure, I suggest we use "Test figure" that I submitted with my comments,
except:
-
Locate the TP2 arrow
at the output of the patchcord (per comment 111 by
Lew).
-
Replace "Signal
Analyzer" with "Oscilloscope".
-
Replace the histogram
plot figure with the block presently in Figure 68-5 labeled
"Analysis...".
-
In the DUT block, add
"Test pattern 1 or 2^9-1 PRBS".
-
Comment 109
-
Okay. Waiting to discuss MATLAB code 1/20
on TP2 call. Editorial format for the code, including scope of comments,
should follow precedence of other standards (clause 40). TL - clause 40
appears to have minimal comments.
-
Propose accept. Code to
be exactly as distributed by Norm Swenson for review for two recent TP2
calls. Insert at Figure 68-6.
- Comment 111
-
- Comment 107
-
Spirit of comment is good.
-
Need noise <<N0 of simulated Rx white
noise density.
-
Jan Peeters Weem to test effect of
noise in lab and run through MATLAB code, report on 1/20 call.
- TL - some follow-on discussion are occurring with good progress.
Expect to conclude next week. A recommended # of averages value
may be given, leaving an actual number of averages up to the
tester.
- Propose accept in principle. Agreed text is
"Averaging should be used to avoid a pessimistic estimate of
TWDP."
-
Comment 108
-
Comment 110
-
Okay. Location and format of the
informative section not clear. Editor's preference, but should follow
precedence of other standards, perhaps clause 40. Comment suggest
appendix, since body of standard should focus on normative material.
-
Propose accept in
principle.
-
Instead of an annex,
the TP2 group proposes to put text in body of document adjacent to
Figure 68-6. I propose it be subclause 68.6.5.2.1. The title of the
subclause should be "Description of the TWDP processing
algorithm".
-
In document, replace
"annex" with "text".
-
"Laser response" in
Figure 1 of document should "TP2 transmitter
response".
-
Beyond this, I
believe the editor will be able to apply the appropriate
formatting.
Please respond if I
errored in recording these discussions or
conclusions.
|