RE: Jumbo Frames in 10GbE?

["Booth, Brad" <bbooth@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: RE: Jumbo Frames in 10GbE?

I think we're discussing semantics now.  J  Determining how and where Jumbo Frames get standardized is up to those that would like to pursue that effort, but I think the desire of the HSSG is not to muddy the waters of the 10GbE development with Jumbo Frames.

Thanks,
Brad

Brad Booth
bbooth@xxxxxxxxxx
Level One Communications, Austin Design Center
(512) 407-2135 office
(512) 589-4438 cellular

-----Original Message-----
From:   Ariel Hendel [SMTP:Ariel.Hendel@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:   Tuesday, June 22, 1999 1:07 PM
To:     stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx; bbooth@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject:        RE: Jumbo Frames in 10GbE?

Let's keep in mind that what IEEE (and most standards) emphasize is
observable external behavior. The IEEE process could be bypassed for
RMII because RMII is able to preserve the same observable behavior on
the cable.




Consortia can do whatever they please (subject to antitrust law, I
guess) but they do not seem appropriate for modifying observable
behavior. The appropiate analogies for Jumbo Frames would be the 802.3
adoption of Full Duplex, Priorities, and VLAN tagged formats.  In all
these cases the adoption was done as a dedicated IEEE effort that
tapped the expertise of 802.3 and 802.1.




Ariel Hendel
Sun





> From: "Booth, Brad" <bbooth@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "'HSSG_reflector (E-mail)'" <stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: Jumbo Frames in 10GbE?
> Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 11:02:05 -0500
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> X-Resent-To: Multiple Recipients <stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> X-Listname: stds-802-3-hssg
> X-Info: [Un]Subscribe requests to  majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> X-Moderator-Address: stds-802-3-hssg-approval@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Bruce,
>
> Good catch!  That's what I get for typing late on a Monday night. :-)  I
> should have stated "Given that Jumbo Frames capability has been
> implemented by some companies, ..."
>
> The point was that there are companies out there that have implemented
> Jumbo Frame capability, and a consortium may be a better way to proceed
> to develop a compatibility standard rather than generating an IEEE
> standard.  This is how the RMII consortium was done.  There were a few
> companies that realized they were developing a lower pin count MII, and
> upon showing each other their wares, they discovered that they had
> similar concepts.  A consortium was formed to develop an RMII standard,
> which permitted the work to be done quicker and with less overhead than
> if they had developed an IEEE standard.
>
> If there is a real interest in Jumbo Frames, then it should be developed
> on its own and not burden other standards' development.
>
> Thanks,
> Brad
>
> Brad Booth
> bbooth@xxxxxxxxxx
> Level One Communications, Austin Design Center
> (512) 407-2135 office
> (512) 589-4438 cellular
>