Re: [RPRWG] Rough outline of PAR for the RPR on the backplane
David -
Some comments interspersed below, based on my own recent experience of the
kinds of comments that you are very likely to receive from NesCom members
if you submit the Scope & Purpose shown below "as is".
Regards,
Tony
At 06:41 06/04/2004, David V James wrote:
>Mike,
>
>As per last P802.17 WG meeting, we concluded that
>RPR on the backplane PAR should be provided for comment,
>one week before the MSC meeting.
>
>I'm a bit tired, so this is not as good as it should be.
>Feel free to refine, wordsmith, revise, etc. based on
>suggestions. While the MSC meeting is next Monday night,
>inputs would be most valuable if received before Sunday PM.
>
>
>
>Scope:
The Scope is expected to be used as the basis of the Scope clause in the
standard that the project will develop, and on submission to RevCom, they
will check to see that the Scope clause does actually match the scope of
the PAR. It therefore should be written with the intention that it can
essentially be cut & pasted verbatim into the Scope clause of the draft.
>Provide a network-based backplane interconnect, based on
>the ring topology and baseline protocols of P802.17 RPR,
>while retaining the RPR payload (after HEC) format and
>function.
This is a sentence fragment, rather than a complete sentence. Change it to
be grammatically correct - for example: "The scope of this standard is to
provide..."
>While this is not an amendment of P802.17 RPR,
>large portions of that standard will most likely be
>included by reference.
This is commentary, rather than a statement of Scope. It should therefore
be moved elsewhere - for example, to the supporting comments section of the
PAR.
>Extensions for the short-latency environment include
>destination-based flow control, hardware-based fault-retry,
>time-of-day synchronization, synchronous data transfers,
>and standardized direct-to-memory {read, write, and
>read-modify-write} operations.
As above, this needs to be converted into a gramatically correct sentence.
>While the standard will include the definition low-power
>short-distance PHYs, these may be included in the standard
>by reference to existing and/or active standards.
This is mostly commentary about the process of constructing the document,
rather than a statement of scope.
Overall, the above Scope statement is way too big; the PAR form indicates 5
lines as the target size.
>Purpose:
As with Scope, the Purpose should be written in a form that will allow it
to be cut-and-pasted verbatim into the Purpose clause in the draft. For
example, "The purpose of this standard is to simplify...".
>To simplify and supplement the baseline RPR capabilities
>to facilitate their adoption in the backplane (or collection
>of nearby backplanes) environment.
>
>Coordination:
> Sync-Ethernet (when approved)
> through exchange of drafts
> Ethernet on the backplane
> through exchange of drafts
> P802.17
> through PAR review
> through exchange of drafts
> through WG ballot participation
>
>DVJ
>
>
>David V. James
>3180 South Ct
>Palo Alto, CA 94306
>Home: +1.650.494.0926
> +1.650.856.9801
>Cell: +1.650.954.6906
>Fax: +1.360.242.5508
>Base: dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Regards,
Tony