Re: Jitter and PMDs
Rohit:
These issues have been debated very intensely in the past. I suggest that
you check the email archive and presentations on the WAN PHY at meetings of
the HSSG.
yours
Bruce
At 08:35 AM 9/19/00 -0700, mittalr@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>I had a question for the whole PMD group.
>
>Why can't we seperate the jitter, mask etc. specifications for WAN and LAN
>phys.
>
>It seems to me that we can just copy the SONET sepcs for the WAN phy. That
>way, any vendor who makes Sonet complaint transceivers etc. can use them for
>10gigE also. Also, the methods and equipment to test for Oc192 is pretty
>straightforward. The added BIG advantage is that we can support Regens etc.
>and allow people to go even longer distances (We don't need to specify how
>much distance - this can remain a non-standard spec). This will immediately
>kickstart the 10gigE WAN.
>
>On the LAN side, we might need more discussions since we are not likely to
>want regenerators there. However, I still believe we can borrow a lot from
>Oc192. This might be simplifying things too much, but we could look at Oc192
>components and look at their jitter generation, tolerances etc. in the
>broadband sense. Sonet looks more at jitter vs. frequency. We can just
>measure without any filters and get a feel for what we can do with present
>technologies. Of course, in the LAN case we don't need to consider transfer
>
>Thanks
>Rohit Mittal
>ONI systems
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________
>Say Bye to Slow Internet!
>http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html