RE: Chapter 46: preamble length
Booth,
At 08:39 PM 03/27/2001 -0800, Booth, Bradley wrote:
>
>Sanjeev,
>
>You may wish to re-read 802.3, as Ethernet has always had the ability to
>shorten the preamble. This was very true in the CSMA/CD half duplex days of
>Ethernet, and it has remained a part of full duplex Ethernet. The transmit
>side of the MAC generates the full preamble, but the receive side never
>requires reception of the full preamble.
Does 10GE supports CSMA/CD? Has everything been same in 802.3's
every version of Ethernet? What is the reason in 10GE for preamble to be shortnened?
Are you suggesting that there is no reason but just because it was so in the older
versions, therefore, 802.3ae HAS to allow preamble to be truncated?
And though many things have been added and/or removed from version to version BUT preamble has to be allowed to be truncated without any reason, right? If this is the case then I do not have any further question.
Thanks,
Sanjeev
>
>Cheers,
>Brad
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: Sanjeev Mahalawat [mailto:sanjeev@xxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 8:08 PM
>To: Grow, Bob; 'Danielle Lemay'; stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
>Subject: RE: Chapter 46: preamble length
>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>At 02:21 PM 03/27/2001 -0800, Grow, Bob wrote:
>>
>>On transmit, a conforming implementation will send seven preamble plus the
>>SFD.
>>
>>On receive, there is no current function that will change that length, but
>>the concensus of the committee was to keep the option open. (In 802.3z we
>>did change preamble length for idle alignment.) The D3.0 text should make
>>it clear that an implementation should be tolerant to changes in preamble
>>length, though it can still rely on lane alignment (Start in lane 0, SFD in
>>lane 3). Text was added to warn that the Start and SFD could appear in the
>>same column.
>
>What is the reasoning behind letting a layer lower than
>MAC to touch the preamble?
>
>Since preamble is coded as data it belongs to MAC
>and no lower layer should be allowed to change
>and/or remove the length of preamble.
>
>Thanks,
>Sanjeev
>
>
>>
>>--Bob Grow
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Danielle Lemay [mailto:dlemay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>Sent: Monday, March 12, 2001 10:38 AM
>>To: stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
>>Subject: Chapter 46: preamble length
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Is it possible for the preamble+SFD to be less than 8 bytes ?
>>
>>thanks,
>>Danielle
>>
>>
>>
>>*******************************************
>>Danielle Lemay
>>Design Engineer, Nishan Systems
>>dlemay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>408-519-3985
>>
>