Re: Interface reality check
Dear Ben and Rich,
At 8:33 AM -0500 00.4.1, Brown, Ben [BAY:NHBED:DS48] wrote:
> Please, let's get some new blood in on this discussion! I feel
> like we're in a vacuum.
I would like to add another side dish for your Guinness;
this is a bit reinforcement for XGXS to propagate /A/K/R/ rather
than having to translate them to /I/.
I have guessed the /A/K/R/ randomization in Rich's mail to work
pretty well for EMI reduction, but still would like to reserve my
last one cent to future idle-sequence up-grade by other standard
such as fibre channel. Also another peculiar application
may utilize the /A/K/R/ sequence itself for some other purposes,
such as field maintenance debugging tool hinted by Mr. Edward Chang.
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/10G_study/email/msg01916.html
Once we carriers invest in a 10 Gigabit Regenerator that is a
pair of two Attachment Units connected back to back with XAUI
backboard interface, we hope the regenerator can enjoy the future
up-grade benefits and can carry another idle sequences without any
field upgrade operation.
If XGXS on the regenerator does not propagate /A/K/R/ or any other
interpacket gap sequences as it is, our investment may lose strong
support of potential automatic field upgradability/interoperability.
Cheers,
Osamu
---------------------------------------
Osamu Ishida
NTT Network Innovation Laboratories
TEL:+81-468-59-3263 FAX:+81-468-55-1282
---------------------------------------