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

Re: [RPRWG] More comments on preemption




Hi,
My understanding of William's proposal for the IDLE/Escape marking is
in the 802.17 MAC level and it is not clear to me why PCS layer is getting
involved.
It looks to me that if we use the POS transport, the special ESC sequence
can be
used for detecting the special markings. However, if we use the GFP for the
transport,
the escape sequences will be stripped before encapsulating the packets into
the GFP.
So, it looks like this method will work if we use the POS.
 Regards
Raman
----- Original Message -----
From: Devendra Tripathi <tripathi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <jeanlou.dupont@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: William Dai <wdai@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 6:17 PM
Subject: RE: [RPRWG] More comments on preemption


>
> Hi William,
>
> Actually, it is not just a question of symbol. The PCS layer of 1/10 G
> Ethernet
> PHY makes quite a few assumtions on where an IDLE can come. IDLE is also
> used to decide on clock compensation. In all likelyhood such a packet will
> be declared erroneous ( I need to look this more seriously to be
> conclusive).
> If we decide to use the reserve symbol to mark Escape, there may be
> compatibility (of PHY devices) issues.
>
> The other issue is related to frame format change at gateway (LAN/MAN)
> points.
> The default understanding which I had was that when a Packet from LAN
comes
> to
> Metro area, it requires add/delete of header and that is about it (as
> for as frame format is concerned). But this may not be strong issue
though.
>
> Regards,
> Devendra Tripathi
> VidyaWeb Inc.
> Pune, India
> Tel: +91-20-433-1362
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jeanlou.dupont@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jeanlou.dupont@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 4:53 AM
> > To: Devendra Tripathi
> > Cc: William Dai; stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [RPRWG] More comments on preemption
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Could you clarify your statement "... definitely takes us away
> > from Ethernet"?
> >
> > If you are targeting your comment at the Ethernet PHY layer:  the
> > Ethernet (100
> > & 1000) uses 8B/10B encoding.
> > There are some "spare symbols" not used (if I am not mistaken)
> > that could be
> > redefined to mean "IDLE/Escape".
> >
> > Jean-Lou Dupont
> > Marconi Networks.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > To:   "William Dai" <wdai@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx
> > cc:    (bcc: Jeanlou Dupont/MAIN/MC1)
> >
> > Subject:  RE: [RPRWG] More comments on preemption
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 3. Each M and L packet transfer will be inserted an "IDLE/Escape"
> > >     word for every 256 byte (for the sake of alignment/padding
concern)
> > >     as the preemptive insertion point.
> >
> > This is very good idea to manage pre-emption and other QOS related
> > considerations but this definitely takes us away from  Ethernet.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Devendra Tripathi
> > VidyaWeb Inc
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>