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

RE: [10GBASE-T] EFM OAM...




Pat,

Please see comment 5700 in http://www.ieee802.org/3/efm/public/comments/d1_3/D1_3_comments_final.pdf

I recommend going directly to D1.414 to see the changes in C46. Especially note the request for comment regarding issues with lanes.

jonathan

| -----Original Message-----
| From: pat_thaler@agilent.com [mailto:pat_thaler@agilent.com]
| Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 12:23 PM
| To: Jonathan Thatcher; Shimon.Muller@sun.com; 
| stds-802-3-10gbt@ieee.org
| Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] EFM OAM...
| 
| 
| Jonathan,
| 
| I agree with Shimon that 10GBASE-T is not an appropriate 
| place for work that adds OAM to 10 Gig Ethernet. When placing 
| "service to humanity" work in a group, one needs to consider 
| whether the expertise of a group is a good match to the work. 
| OAM adaptation isn't a good match to a PHY group. 
| 
| If it is small and easy, than the OAM subtask force in 
| 802.3ae should take it on. If the work extent is too 
| difficult or not a good match there, then it should be 
| considered as a separate project.
| 
| Pat
| 
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Jonathan Thatcher 
| [mailto:Jonathan.Thatcher@worldwidepackets.com]
| Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 10:28 AM
| To: Shimon Muller; stds-802-3-10gbt@ieee.org
| Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] EFM OAM...
| 
| 
| 
| Because, Shimon, you know as well as any that the symbol 
| error counters do not exist two layers above the PHY. 
| 
| Also, just as with clause 24 and 36, 10 Gig needs to have the 
| unidirectional aspects clarified during operation with OAM.
| 
| Besides, if there is anyone that understands the concept of 
| "benefit to humanity," we have ample evidence that you do.  ;-) 
| 
| As 10 Gig passes the baton to 10GBASE-T, I beseech you guys 
| to "do the right thing." 
| 
| jonathan
| 
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Shimon Muller [mailto:Shimon.Muller@Sun.COM]
| Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 9:47 AM
| To: atuncay@solarflare.com; stds-802-3-10gbt@ieee.org; 
| Jonathan Thatcher
| Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] EFM OAM...
| 
| > OAM is implemented as a sublayer above the MAC, using frames. So,
| > exactly what would be the trouble? Passing frames?
| 
| Precisely.
| 10GBASE-T is a PHY project. So why are we arguing about support or
| non-support of functionality that is two layers above it?
| 
| I don't believe there is any need for an objective with regard to
| OAM in 10GBASE-T. It's a non-issue.
| 
| 
|                                         Shimon.
|