RE: 64/66 control code mapping
Ben,
You are correct that it necessary for us to transpose the 64/66 proposal to
indicate a direct mapping from the XGMII. In my brief review of the code, it
appears to be a fairly direct mapping from XAUI, which appears to be a
fairly direct mapping of the proposed XGMII. I therefore see a fairly
direction mapping from XGMII to 64/66.
Rich,
Do you see any reason why we can't have this complete going into the May
meeting?
jonathan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Benjamin J. Brown
> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 8:14 PM
> To: stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: 64/66 control code mapping
>
>
>
>
> Rick Walker,
>
> I've been looking at your 64b/66b presentation and, in
> particular, looking at your control code mapping. The
> 7-bit line code is specific to encodings from the 8b10b
> XAUI interface. This is an optional interface and may
> not exist between all MAC and PCS layers. When the XAUI
> doesn't exist, what 7-bit line codes should be used?
>
> Given the protocol stack shown by Brad Booth, I would
> expect that this PCS layer be specified to an XGMII
> and not to an XAUI. Implementations may choose to short-
> cut the conversion from XAUI to XGMII to 64b/66b but
> the specification should assume it communicates to the
> XGMII.
>
> Thanks,
> Ben Brown
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------
> Benjamin Brown
> Router Products Division
> Nortel Networks
> 1 Bedford Farms,
> Kilton Road
> Bedford, NH 03110
> 603-629-3027 - Work
> 603-629-3070 - Fax
> 603-798-4115 - Home
> bebrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> -----------------------------------------