| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
[Date: 06/04/2000 From Seto] Ishida-san, I think your point#2 is very valid especially for the cases like attached. Also, I feel the need for link confirmation taking place right before the link establishment. There is no way to tell the link partner is recognizing the link in 10GbE at this time. Your proposing scheme would serve for this purpose as well. Seto > > Tom, Rich, Praveen, > > I think we had better separate the local Rate Control from > the far-end WIS implementation shown in Rich's slide #9. > http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/ae/public/may00/taborek_3_0500.pdf > > In summary; > (1) How does MAC recognize locally whether he is WAN-PHY or LAN-PHY? > - I like to use station management (STA) register. > > (2) If we implement far-end WIS, do we need auto-negotiation? > - No, but we will need 'local' auto-configuration. > > Note that I have assumed that 802.3ae adopt the Shimon Muller's > Open-Loop Control for the MAC rate down to 9.29 Gb/s.(Not the bit rate.) > http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/ae/public/may00/muller_1_0500.pdf > > > (1)How does MAC recognize locally whether he is WAN-PHY or LAN-PHY? > > Assuming that we have optional XAUI/XGXS, 10GbE router port > could be implemented in separated two parts: a router/MAC > package and an Attachement Unit (AU). The latter may be a > slot-in package or daughter card. In this case, MAC should > recognize whether his AU is LAN-PHY or WAN-PHY. The STA > register would be the promising candidate for this purpose. > I don't think manual setting at each AU installation is less > troublesome than defining/using a register bit for this auto > configuration. > > In my sense, this auto configuration is far from 'negotiation'. > MAC will check the register bit when he recognize that the > AU is newly installed. No timing issue. No acknowledgement. > I think this STA register bit is extremely useful and worth > for the standard. > > (2) If we implement far-end WIS, do we need auto-negotiation? > > No, I don't think so. We can use similar 'auto-configuration' > mechanism. LSS provides the Layer-1 information reporting > from far-end STA to local STA, so it could send the far-end > 'WIS' existence or a register bit to the local STA periodically > by using Link Status [r] together with Remote Fault and Break Link. > http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/ae/public/may00/ishida_1_0500.pdf > I don't think this is WAN mode 'negotiation'; it's still just a > reporting mechanism. No timing/speed issue here; always > advertising the same bit status. > > In this far-end WIS implementation, the local MAC should recognize > the 'far-end AU/PHY installation' event to initiate the auto- > configuration of his local MAC rate. Every time the Link is > initialized, MAC had better check his local STA register bit > that is reflecting the far-end WIS existence. > > In short, if the community reaches the consensus not to prohibit > anyone from implementing far-end WIS, LSS could provide the > practical solution without adding any control codes. > > Best Regards, > Osamu > > At 03:59 00/06/03 -0700, Richard Taborek wrote: > http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/10G_study/email/msg02587.html > > Tom Alexander wrote: > http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/10G_study/email/msg02568.html > > > - the 802.3ae objectives do not provide for any form of > > > autonegotiation over the link. The proposed LSS does > > > not include speed negotiations, nor is it likely to > > > be able to do so with current coding schemes. > > > > WAN mode would be configured by SMT in the same manner as other > > options such as flow control, etc. > > > > The primary reason for the committees rejection of Auto-Negotiation > > at 10 Gbps is that the preferred mode of link management is to > > configure a link and have the link come up in the same mode after a > > power event or other disturbance. There is no apparent benefit in > > having a 10 GbE backbone negotiate down to 1 Gbps on its own accord > > like a modem. > > > > LSS can easily accommodate WAN mode negotiation. I don't believe that > > we have any speeds to negotiate. > > At 19:19 00/06/02 -0700, Praveen Kumar wrote: > http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/10G_study/email/msg02583.html > > In summary, I don't see why parking the WIS on the far end will not > > work. That being said, Iam not sure either, about whether there > > are enough benefits in allowing this to be a part of the standard > > (it sure does cause some confusion). > > > > --------------------------------------- > Osamu Ishida,ishida@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > NTT Network Innovation Laboratories > TEL:+81-468-59-3263 FAX:+81-468-55-1282 > --------------------------------------- >
10GbE LAN-WAN Connectivity.pdf