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

[802.3_100GEL] [802.3ck] Annex 162B mated test fixture FOMILD specification

Hi 802.3ck task force,

At today's comment resolution meeting we attempted to resolve comments relating to selecting a value for the mated test fixture FOMILD parameter. There seems to be consensus on a value of 0.18 dB, but there was no consensus on the value for the transition time parameter (T_t) used for calculating FOMILD.

We took a pair of straw polls (#6 and #7), one "pick one" and the other "chicago rules" with results shown below. Neither of the straw polls was terribly decisive and unfortunately the two poles did not support each other. The meeting ended immediately after the straw poll concluded.

Note that comment #130, which proposes to remove the FOMILD specification altogether, must also be addressed.

After discussion amongst the leadership team, we decided to defer addressing this comment further until next week. In the meantime (tomorrow), we will be addressing comments relating to the C2M host output and module output transition time specifications which might provide some helpful input to the FOMILD discussion.

So between now and next Tuesday some offline discussion is required to build some consensus on the following:
(a) whether to retain the FOMILD parameter or remove it
(b) if FOMILD is retained, what transition time is to be used for calculation of FOMILD

Straw polls from today's meeting...

Straw poll #6 (chicago rules)
Straw poll #7 (pick one)
I support the following value for the FOMILD transition time (T_t) parameter:
A: 7.5 ps (currently in D1.4)
B: 9 ps
C: 9.6 ps
D: 10 ps
SP6: A: 12 B: 16  C: 14  D: 11
SP7: A: 8  B: 5  C: 5  D: 7

Matt Brown
Huawei Technologies Canada
Chief Editor, IEEE 802.3ck Task Force


On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 4:12 PM Matt Brown <mbrown8023@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi 802.3ck task force,

At today's comment resolution meeting, we began resolving comments relating to updating specified values for eye height (EH) and vertical eye closure (VEC) in Annex 120G.

To facilitate the discussion we used the following presentation listing the related comments, summarizing proposals, and providing some consensus values (determined at the meeting).
https://www.ieee802.org/3/ck/public/21_01/brown_3ck_01a_0121.pdf

This version includes updates that occurred at or were triggered at the meeting.
- added comment #146 to the set of comment
- updated some values in the summary to better match the proposals
- inserted consensus values resulting from discussion and straw polls
- added a presentation reference

Note that we also considered, in relation to the EH value at TP4, slides 5 and 6 in the following presentation (not yet listed in the discussion slides):

We arrived at consensus values for EH and VEC at test points TP1a (host output) and TP1 (module stressed input).

We also arrived at provisional consensus values for EH at TP4 (module output). However, the task force agreed to address a related comment (#146) before moving ahead. Comment #146 does not propose values but rather proposes some modifications to the test method that might result in a different set of values if accepted.

To move forward on this we need to address comment #146. If the proposal in the comment is not addressed then I assume we can use the provisional consensus values and move on. If not, then we may need to reconsider the set of values. Hopefully, we can still leverage the provisional consensus values we determined earlier today.

Note that we are likely going to have similar discussions related to VEC at TP4.

To make best use of our scheduled meeting time when we return to this topic, some healthy offline discussion and consensus building relating to the remaining consensus values is key.

Matt Brown
Huawei Technologies Canada
Chief Editor, IEEE 802.3ck Task Force

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-100GEL list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-100GEL&A=1