| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Ed Turner, I reviewed the bit assignments in the current PMA/PMD control/ status registers for applicability to each sublayer and submit the evaluation for your review. As you can see, there are both a number of common and a number of non-common variables. The change would require adding a new subclause to for the PMA to clause 45 (most of it can be duplicated from the existing 45.2.1) and I am willing to generate the necessary comments to cover the changes. Changes to the other clauses will generally be limited to clause 45 references (which should be automatic). Please let me know what you think. Thanks, Bill P.S. what is your new e-mail address? At 03:50 PM 4/11/2001 +0100, you wrote: >Bill, > >I'm still in support of this approach. >Note that my e-mail address is changing and I can be >reached on this one for the next couple of weeks. >Look forward to hearing from you. > >Regards, >Ed > >--- "William G. Lane" <blane@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> All, >> >> During the March plenary, there was a tentative >> agreement between >> clause 45 and 54 and others (I don't specifically >> remember who was >> in the room at the time) to split the PMA/PMD MDIO >> registers into >> a PMA set and a OMD set. I am planning a technical >> comment >> recommending that action and will be working with Ed >> Turner and >> others on the specifics. >> >> Bill >> >> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >> At 12:57 PM 4/10/2001 -0400, you wrote: >> > >> >Justin, >> > >> >As currently defined, there is only a single PMA in >> the stack which is >> >attached to the PMD. An XGXS doesn't have a >> separate PMA sublayer. I think >> >we should leave it that way. We already fragment >> the physical layer into a >> >lot of sublayers. >> > >> >Regards, >> >Pat >> > >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Justin Gaither >> [mailto:jgaither@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] >> >Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 7:19 AM >> >To: 802.3ae >> >Subject: Management PMA/PMD registers for XAUI >> > >> > >> > >> >When a 10GBase-X PCS is being used as a PHY XGXS, >> it has a XAUI PMA. >> >Should this PMA have all of the Management >> registers specified (ie. 1.0, >> >1.1, 1.2&1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.8, 1.9)? Or are these >> registers for the >> >PMA/PMD that actually tied to the fiber PMD? >> > >> >Regards, >> > >> >justin >> > >> >-- >> >Justin Gaither Phone: >> 512-306-7292 x529 >> >RocketChips a Division of Xilinx Fax: >> 512-306-7293 >> >500 N. Capital of TX Hwy. >> >Bldg 3 email: >> jgaither@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >Austin, TX 78746 WWW: >> www.rocketchips.com >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >____________________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk >or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie > > >
PMA-PMD control-status bit comparison.doc