RE: Clause 51 - tx_data_group Bit Order

["Rabinovich, Rick" <rick.rabinovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Justin,

Can you be more specific, which comment or the statement itself?

Thank you,

Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: Jscquake@xxxxxxx [mailto:Jscquake@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 8:11 PM
To: pat_thaler@xxxxxxxxxxx; rick.rabinovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Clause 51 - tx_data_group Bit Order

Hello Pat and Rick,

This was caught in the last TC comments. It has been corrected in version 2.1

Thanks,
Justin

In a message dated 1/31/01 5:53:11 PM Pacific Standard Time,
pat_thaler@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:

Bit 0 should be transmitted first and bit 15 last. 51.2.2 needs to change.
If the problem is still their in D2.1, please submit a ballot comment. Pat

-----Original Message-----
From: Rabinovich, Rick [mailto:rick.rabinovich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 4:36 PM
To: 'stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx'
Subject: Clause 51 - tx_data_group Bit Order



Version D2.0

Clause 51.2.2 reads:
line 36
"... with tx_data-group<15> transmitted first, and tx_data-group<0>
transmitted last."

Clause 51.3.1 reads:
line 42
"... The order of transmission is tx_bit<0> first, followed bit<1> through
tx_bit<15>."

Are these two, contradictory statements?

Please comment.

Rick Rabinovich
Spirent Communications

Justin Chang
Quake Technologies, Inc.
2880 Zanker Road, Suite 104
San Jose, CA 95134
Tel: 408-922-6888 x108
Fax: 408-922-6827
email: justin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
internet: www.quaketech.com