Re: [8023-10GEPON] Presentation on FEC for 10G
To summarize the previous call...
The meeting was a brief 30 minutes. We discussed the presentation by Frank
Effenberger. The attendees were Frank Chang, Frank Effenberger, Roger
Merel, Jeff Mandin, and Ryan Hirth.
There was some discussion if the clock rate should be increased to
accommodate FEC parity, or if the parity should consume data space
decreasing the efficiency. There were no decisions made.
There was also some discussion if the time quanta should be changed to match
the 66 bit code word.
We agreed to put together a presentation that would summarize the issues
related to FEC in order to inform the entire group. We would work together
on this and meet on Sunday night before the meeting to edit it.
Smaller groups could make presentations which push a particular issue if
desired.
Regards,
Ryan Hirth
Director of ASIC Engineering
(707) 665 - 0400 x145
cell (707) 342-2630
Teknovus Inc.
1351 Redwood Way main (707) 665 - 0400
Petaluma, CA 94954 fax (707) 665 - 0491
-----Original Message-----
From: Glen Kramer [mailto:glen.kramer@TEKNOVUS.COM]
Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 11:08 AM
To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] Presentation on FEC for 10G
Frank,
Thank you for organizing the FEC discussions.
Few people have asked me for a summary of the FEC call. Would you please,
post to the reflector a short overview of the call: what was discussed and
any steps planned next.
Also, if you plan another conf call, please announce it on the reflector, so
that those who are interested, but missed the first call could join this
time.
I also want to remind everybody that the Ethernet Alliance has offered
10GEPON group a sponsorship in a form of hosting conference calls. Please,
let me know if you would like to have a conference call in preparation for
the September meeting.
Regards,
Glen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Effenberger [mailto:feffenberger@HUAWEI.COM]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 9:44 AM
> To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: [8023-10GEPON] Presentation on FEC for 10G
>
> Dear All,
>
> I am interested in putting together a presentation on FEC for 10G (serial)
> PONs. Judging from the materials from the July meeting, I think that
> there
> is some common support for the following basic ideas:
>
> 1. FEC should be applied at the very lowest layer (streaming-FEC).
> 2. FEC should be a mandatory part of the line code.
> 3. FEC codeword size should be aligned with the other EPON structure sizes
> (such as 66b blocks and MPCP time quanta)
>
> There are related topics that I don't think we've reached consensus on:
> a. Choice of basic FEC algorithm (e.g, RS, BCH, etc.)
> b. Line-rate increasing versus MAC-rate reducing approach
> c. Code-rate and objective gain values
> (some of these require collaboration with PMD specialists.)
>
> If there are people who are interested in working with me on a
> presentation
> on these topic areas, please let me know.
>
> Sincerely,
> Frank Effenberger
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Kramer [mailto:glen.kramer@teknovus.com]
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 5:04 PM
> To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: [8023-10GEPON] presentations for September meeting
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> It appears that our next meeting will take place on September 18th and
> 19th
> (Monday and Tuesday) and the High-Speed SG will meet on 20th and 21st, so
> there will be no overlap and interested people will be able to attend both
> meetings.
>
> The meeting venue has not been finalized yet. A venue should be announced
> at
> least 30 days before the meeting, so expect the announcement very soon.
>
> Meanwhile, it is time to start working on presentations for the next
> meeting.
>
> There are many specific topics/features that we have to reach consensus
> on:
>
> Downstream Wavelength
> Upstream Wavelength
> Power budgets
> FEC: Optional or Mandatory
> FEC Category: Stream-based vs. Frame-based
> other topics - anything that is in scope of our PAR can be discussed.
>
> If you can think of any other topic not listed here, please propose it on
> the reflector.
>
>
> If you have opinion on any of these or other topics, make a presentation
> with arguments in favor of it. Remember, a proposal should have > 75%
> support to get accepted as a baseline. It is a good idea to circulate
> proposals on the reflector and get feedback, and to enlist additional
> supporters.
>
> Regards,
> Glen