RE: XGMII a/k/r
Ben,
Okay. :-) But this time, let's make sure Rich doesn't walk into the
kitchen. :-)
The idea stemmed from Rick Walker's presentation in March where he showed
"Building frames with XAUI(HARI) mapping." There was a lot of discussion
about the need to use XGMII at this interface, and not XAUI. That got me
thinking that both XAUI and XGMII, being optional, are not the PCS service
interface. If the PCS Service Interface, which talks to the RS, were to
have a coding that made Rick's proposal work better and made the XAUI have
less of an EMI issue, then it might be worth tossing out for review.
I left the /k/ and /r/ in as Rick has in his proposal (except his were the
10-bit versions /K/ and /R/). I left /a/ in from the XAUI /A/ because I
felt this might be useful to guarantee alignment of the XGMII lanes (like in
XAUI). I figured that if I was going to go that far, I could put a
pseudo-random generator in for the /k/ and /r/ to make XGXS a simpler
design.
I do have another slide that is much simpler in format, but I thought I'd
try the radical one first to gauge feedback.
Thanks,
Brad
-----Original Message-----
From: Brown, Ben [BAY:NHBED:DS48]
[mailto:bebrown@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 11:23 AM
To: HSSG
Subject: Re: XGMII a/k/r
Brad,
I think this meeting should be close to your birthday again.
I'll treat you to an entire evening of Guiness or Scotch,
whichever you prefer.
I still don't agree with your idea and I'd like to
understand
more about why you think it is required. I still feel like
it
is a solution looking for a problem. If you could possibly
ignore the nasty tone of my previous message, I would still
appreciate a response.
Ben