RE: XAUI and 64b/66b
Roy,
Thanks for taking the trouble to draw a diagram. I think I
understand the point you are making, but it is difficult to
reconcile your diagram with what is generally accepted as
network-speak. The XGMII is an interface, not a functional layer. As
such, it cannot have anything inside it. Interfaces don't have any
"thickness".
I think you can remove your "container" description of XGMII and
still make your point.
Thanks,
Vipul
vipul.bhatt@xxxxxxxxxxx
(408)548-0813
=======
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Roy Bynum
> Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2000 6:14 AM
> To: Walter Thirion; HSSG
> Subject: Re: XAUI and 64b/66b
>
>
> Walter,
>
> As a non-vendor participant, representing an industry
> that will buying a
> large amount of these interfaces, I would like to
> reiterate your comments.
> XAUI is being presented as an optional PHYSICAL DISTANCE
> EXTENDER for the
> XGMII not an optional additional sublayer between the RS
> and the PCS. This
> means that XAUI is inside the XGMII.
>
> As an optional physical distance extender XAUI will give
> vendors more
> flexibility to build larger form factor chassis. Why
> they would do that in
> an era when customer would like to see the form factor
> reduced is a mystery
> to me, but it is an option. As long as it remains
> optional, it also means
> that vendors do not have to use XAUI when their
> chassis/ASIC form factor
> does not require it. As a customer this gives me more
> options from diverse
> vendors that remain interoperable. It has the effect of
> increasing the
> overall market for more vendors and more customers.
>
> I have attached a slide that represents what I understand
> the XAUI was
> presented to be. Perhaps this will help explain my
> understanding and
> provide a better center for the discussion.
>
> Thank you,
> Roy Bynum
>
>
>
<snip>