Re: [10GBT] Proposed PAM8 vs. PAM12 resolution process
Jose, I was thinking along the same lines. I have a modified version of the code targeted to specific baud rates which may be a better stating point. I suggest adding a file-driven transmit psd, and some easy, default channel models as a starting point. I'll call you Monday and we'll talk over the logistics.
George A. Zimmerman
cell: 310 920 3860
(sent from my mobile)
-----Original Message-----
From: "Jose Tellado"<JTellado@TERANETICS.COM>
Sent: 7/17/04 3:05:48 PM
To: "STDS-802-3-10GBT@listserv.ieee.org"<STDS-802-3-10GBT@listserv.ieee.org>
Subject: Re: [10GBT] Proposed PAM8 vs. PAM12 resolution process
All,
I would like to make some further suggestions. The code in
solarsep_varlen7a.m was a useful tool to approximate the DFE performance
when the potential design space was very large. Therefore it has many
parameters to adjust and is prone to operator error if you are not very
familiar with it (e.g. as George Z pointed out Sailesh did not adjust
the noise bandwidth correctly in his analysis)
When this code was generated there were multiple proposals for coding
(TCM, TCM+RS, LDPC), multiple symbol rates (~range of 800-1250MHz),
multiple tx voltage levels (~range 1.5-3Vpkpk) and PAM levels from PAM4
to PAM16. Moreover we had multiple channel models.
We have made significant progress in the last couple of meetings,
narrowing the PHY channel models to 4, and limiting our solutions to
THP+LDPC+{PAM12+825MHz or PAM8+1000MHz}. I would suggest we should
narrow down this code to evaluate only the two remaining alternatives
over the approved channel models.
This will require additional work, but will likely avoid some the
confusion the group had in the last meeting. I will make the necessary
updates with input from the interested parties.
Cheers,
Jose
________________________________
From: stds-802-3-10gbt@IEEE.ORG [mailto:stds-802-3-10gbt@IEEE.ORG] On
Behalf Of Sailesh Rao
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:56 AM
To: STDS-802-3-10GBT@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [10GBT] Proposed PAM8 vs. PAM12 resolution process
All,
I would like to propose the following process for resolving the
robustness of PAM8 vs. PAM12 towards external noise.
1. Compute the Optimum DFE SNR Margin for PAM8 and PAM12 using
solarsep_varlen7a.m for Models 1 and 3 using default cancellation
parameters and -150dBm/Hz background noise.
2. Compute the input-referred RMS noise power at the slicer by
integrating the residual noise in the Optimum DFE solution. I volunteer
to add this code to solarsep_varlen7a.m unless someone else wants to do
so.
3. Compute the input-referred external noise power that can be tolerated
for a BER of 1E-12 for both systems using the results from (1) and (2)
above. I volunteer to add this code to solarsep_varlen7a.m unless
someone else wants to do so.
Regards,
Sailesh Rao.