Re: XAUI, SFF connectors
Roy,
The HSSG and Task Force presentations have been very helpful to me. I
don't know if you were in attendance or paying attention, but multiple
presentations have shown exactly why XAUI is needed for 10 GbE
equipment. One of those presentations is "Applying 'Hari' to Ethernet"
by Howard Frazier, Cisco Systems:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/10G_study/public/nov99/frazier_2_1199.pdf,
see especially slide 2.
I know that I have provided you the same reasonable explanation for XAUI
on more than one occasion. I'm happy to hear that Pat's explanation has
convinced you that XAUI is the right way to go for 10 GbE. The P802.3ae
Task Force is already convinced by a vote of 113 to zero in La Jolla.
Best Regards,
Rich
--
Roy Bynum wrote:
>
> Pat,
>
> You are the first person to come up with any reasonable explanation for the
> need of etch extension. I am still contending that it is an vendor
> implementation issue, not a standards issue and should never have been part
> of this task force. As a customer, I am incensed that I will be paying for
> XAUI technology development, even on systems that will have no use for it.
>
> Thank you,
> Roy Bynum
>
> At 04:38 AM 7/25/00 -0600, pat_thaler@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >Roy,
> >
> >No one has said that the form factor of 10 Gigbit Ethernet devices requires
> >that distance between a port and its transceiver. A major reason that we
> >need the distance is to support devices with many ports. For instance,
> >it is possible to build a switch chip serving 8 or more ports. If one needs
> >to connect 8 to 16 transceivers from a front panel to a single chip then
> >they can not all be within the distance reachable by XGMII. Also, the lower
> >pin count of XAUI is very useful in this situation.
> >
> >Pat
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Roy Bynum [mailto:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> >Subject: Re: XAUI, SFF connectors
> >
> >Rich,
> >
> >What need does an interface card have for SFF connectors that can only put
> >one optical port within a 13 inch copper etch radius? From what you and
> >others are making us believe, the form factor requirements for 10GbE are so
> >large that SFF connectors are a non-issue. If 10GbE interfaces are going
> >to be so dense that we will need SFF connectors, why did we need XAUI? I
> >can't see how you would need both.
> >
> >Thank you,
> >Roy Bynum
> >
> >At 10:13 PM 7/23/00 -0700, Rich Taborek wrote:
> >
> > >Roy,
> > >
> > >As is usually the case, you always bring up interesting tangential
> > >issues in your email. This time it's:
> > >
> > >"Given the form factor that would use XAUI, SFF connectors would not be
> > >a requirement."
> > >
> > >What in the world does the XAUI interface, specified for use as an XGMII
> > >extender, have to do with SFF connectors???
> > >
> > >Please enlighten me.
> > >
> > >Best Regards,
> > >Rich
> > >
> > >--
> > >
> > >Roy Bynum wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Chris,
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure of your comment about LC having a proven track record for
> > > > single mode implementations. At present, WorldCom has not deployed any
> > > > LC. All of the connectors currently specified for SM installations is
> > > > SC. A particular vendor is attempting to get WorldCom to make use of
> >their
> > > > connectors. ( I will not say how successful or not they are. ) Several
> > > > system vendors are attempting to make use of LC, but at present, none
> >have
> > > > been certified. Given the form factor that would use XAUI, SFF
> >connectors
> > > > would not be a requirement.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > > Roy Bynum
-------------------------------------------------------
Richard Taborek Sr. Phone: 408-845-6102
Chief Technology Officer Cell: 408-832-3957
nSerial Corporation Fax: 408-845-6114
2500-5 Augustine Dr. mailto:rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxx
Santa Clara, CA 95054 http://www.nSerial.com