|
Meeting details (same numbers as before):
-
Date: Thurs, 8/19/04 (regular
day/time)
-
Time: 9:00 AM
-
Duration: 1:00 goal, 1:30 max
-
Number: 401-694-1515
-
Access code: 421721#
Topics
-
Approve agenda
-
Approve previous minutes
-
Presentations/results?
-
Cost vs. performance studies (Intel,
Opnext, and Bookham?)
-
Non-linear laser effects
(Agilent?)
-
Others?
-
TP2 test metrics
Thanks,
Tom Lindsay ClariPhy Communications tlindsay@ieee.orgphone: (425)
775-7013 cell: (206) 790-3240
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 4:18
PM
Subject: [10GMMF] Minutes/notes for TP2
call, 8/6/04
All - here are my notes for last Friday's TP2 call. Please send
corrections.
Attendees
- Martin Lobel, Intel
- Jan Peeters Weem, Intel
- Jim Heckroth, Silicon Labs
- Abhijit Shanbhag, Scintera
- Andre Van Schyndel, Bookham
- Piers Dawe, Agilent
- Tom Lindsay, Norm Swenson, Bharath Jagannathan; ClariPhy
- Brent Whitlock; RSoft
- Nick Weiner, PhyWorks
- Sudeep Bhoja, Big Bear
- Ed Cornejo; Opnext
- Lars Thon; Aeluros
- Others?
Housekeeping
- Proposed agenda was approved (see below).
- Previous minutes were approved with the correction on attendance
(see below).
- Project objective statement was approved (see below). There was some
discussion on whether to mention interactions with other groups, but it was
felt to be sufficiently implied.
- We decided to not have specific liaison reports from TP3 or channel
modeling groups; Given the common attendance by many, if those groups need
to represent a relevant point or view to this group, they are encouraged to
do so, and vice versa.
- Dates/location for interim meetings still TBA.
- Call dates: weekly, Thursdays, 9 AM Pacific time, starting
8/19.
Progress, technical discussions
- Refer to slides uploaded with tlindsay email to LRM reflector, 8/6/04
AM.
- 1st slide, with contribution from John Ewen, shows Tx and components.
Need to determine which components have the most impact on cost, then
evaluate their impact on budget (penalty): % cost savings/dB penalty metric.
- Effect of TP2 performance may be dominated by long channels. This is the
motivation for considering low cost components, such as TO-cans.
- This work will be implementation-dependent; depending on design
approach, levels of integration, etc.
- Desirable to have existence proof of running 10G traffic with real
hardware using low cost components.
- Some relaxed spec vs. cost work done, but not yet ready to present.
- Intel is doing work on packaging, impedance mismatches and
laser (rate equations, RO, etc.) variations, including use of 4G
components.
- Bookham is performing internal studies, seeing potential of ~10% cost
savings.
- Others?
- Even though components may be capable of relaxed specs (e.g., risetime),
performance should still be controlled (to some level) over the
spectrum required for 10G transmission. That is, there may be hidden costs
that offset some of the savings.
- Volume may provide more potential cost savings than relaxation of specs.
- Relaxed component specs may enable lower costs sooner, allowing market
volume to begin sooner.
- Non-linear lasers do not exhibit Gaussian impulse response - more work
required to evaluate range of laser properties against EDC to assess
equalizable and non-equalizable power penalties.
- In trying to focus your work, please consider what inputs are needed
from others.
- Regardless of cost reduction effort, we must determine set of TP2 test
metrics to ensure interoperability.
- Simple mask test does not account for all potential penalties allowed
in the current budgets.
- Goal is for tests to be simple and not high cost.
- Test metrics should be used during cost studies.
Next call (8/19, 9 AM Pacific time)
- Expect results of cost vs. performance studies from Intel,
Opnext, and Bookham.
- Agilent may look into non-linear laser effects.
- Others encouraged.
- Work on TP2 test metrics must proceed independently.
Comments?
Tom Lindsay ClariPhy communications tlindsay@ieee.orgphone: (425)
775-7013 cell: (206) 790-3240
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 8:37
AM
Subject: Re: [10GMMF] Planning for TP2
call, 8/6/04
Here are some slides for today's TP2 call, if needed.
Tom
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 2:14
PM
Subject: [10GMMF] Planning for TP2
call, 8/6/04
Meeting details (same as last week):
Date: Friday, 8/6/04
Time: 9:00 AM
Duration: 1:00 goal, 1:30 max
Number: 401-694-1515
Access code: 421721#
We need to agree on a regular time. Understandably,
several have requested we move away from Friday's. The TP3 group has
settled on Tuesdays, 9 AM Pacific time. I propose Wednesday's, same time.
Will this work?
Project objectives
I was asked to draft a succinct objective statement for the TP2
group. Try this (with some words borrowed from Mike Lawton):
- Present a proposal for TP2 signaling parameters and associated
conformance testing at the September Meeting. The work must consider and
provide tradeoff information among component cost, test cost, and power
penalties.
Proposed agenda for 8/6
- Agree on agenda
- Review previous minutes (see below)
- Review project objectives (see above)
- TP3 group liaison report?
- TP2 task progress
- Cost models, sensitivities, etc.
- TP2 test methods
- Simulation work
- Experimental work
- More volunteers?
- What information is required from others?
- Expectations for next week
- Schedule (Interim, tasks, calls, etc.)
Previous minutes from last week's meeting are
repeated below but with a correction for Yu Sun's attendance. Again, my
apologies.
Thanks, hope to talk to everyone tomorrow. I hope to have some more
thoughts on simulation work.
Tom Lindsay ClariPhy Communications tlindsay@ieee.orgphone: (425)
775-7013 cell: (206) 790-3240
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 10:45
AM
Subject: [10GMMF] Notes from 1st
TP2 working group call, 7/30/04
Attendees
Petar Pepeljugoski; IBM
John Ewen; JDSU
Tom Lindsay, Norm Swenson, Bharath Jagannathan; ClariPhy
Jens Fiedler; Infineon
Mike Fukatsu; OCP
Brent Whitlock; RSoft
Nick Weiner, Ben Wilcox; PhyWorks
Sudeep Bhoja, John Jaeger, Jonathan King; Big Bear
Ryan Latchman; Gennum
Matt Traverso; Opnext
Lars Thon; Aeluros
Pete Hallemeier; Optium
Yu Sun; Optium (correction from 1st release of minutes)
Badri Gomatam; Vitesse
Others?
Notes
Discussions were based on Tom's emails of 7/29 (agenda for call)
and 7/25 (project outline), as well as lindsay_01_0704. The agenda from
the 7/29 email was approved.
Purpose and objectives
- A succinct statement is required. Action to Tom to draft. Cost is
a motivation. Per 7/25 email, purpose is to gather and study cost,
test methods, and penalty information and make a proposal to the
LRM task force in September. I expect refinement will continue beyond
that time. Any work from this group may be traded against work from
the channel modeling group or the new TP3 group.
- Work and proposal must include test methods. An important goal is
that test methods should be simple and practical to keep test cost
low.
- This group's charter does not include launch geometries. That work
is being done as part of the channel modeling. This group's work is
focused on the time and frequency domain aspects of signals (masks,
edge rates, etc.).
- The main LRM reflector is to be used.
The high-level task list (per 7/29 email) was approved. Task order
was discussed. Cost information must be shared early so that
experimental and simulation work know where to focus. Test metrics must
be proposed early to also support experimental and simulation
work.
- Propose/develop TP2 test metrics - probably required anyway; see
slide 14 of lindsay_01_0704 for initial ideas
- Simulations - penalty and test metric results vs. signal
specs/characteristics
- Experimental work - penalty and test metric results vs. signal
specs/characteristics
- Develop cost models - relative costs vs. signal
specs/characteristics
- Present tradeoff data and recommendations
The scope of study must include anything that both affects cost and
TP2 signaling properties. This includes laser drivers, driver to laser
coupling and packaging, laser chips, and optical power coupling
efficiency (and electrical drive).
Task details need development by the volunteers doing the work,
although some thoughts may be available in lindsay_01_0704. Some tasks
require inputs from other tasks, such as
- Experimental work must be guided by where cost benefits may lie.
- Simulation work must also be guided by where cost benefits may lie
but also by the practical range of parameter values determined by
limits or availability of actual hardware.
- Both experimental and simulation work require test metrics/methods
to compare their tracking with penalty results.
In general, as folks develop details for progressing their task(s),
please determine what information you need from other parts of this
group or to share within the same task. This is critical to bound
and focus the work.
Volunteers
- Cost
- TP2 test methods
- Tom Lindsay
- Jens Fiedler
- Matt Traverso
- Simulations
- Tom Lindsay
- Norm Swenson
- Jens Fiedler
- Intel (not on the call, but I know they are working on
this)
- Experiments
- John Ewen
- Badri Gomatam
- Intel (not on the call, but I know they are working on
this)
More volunteers are requested! Please let me know what you are
interested in supporting. There were several folks that indicated
interested in this work that were not able to make this call.
Schedule
- Since we are trying to support the September interim, we need to
know its dates as soon as possible.
- Calls will be held ~weekly.
- Next call will be Friday 8/6 at 9 AM PDT. Same
numbers.
Comments?
Tom Lindsay
ClariPhy Communications
|