RE: [802.3ae_Serial] From serial PMD call: next call tomorrow, Tuesday
Folks -
After LA, we listed as a topic Jonathan's TR comments on specifying
requirements for traffic in the opposing direction during jitter
testing. However, we have not yet discussed it on the serial PMD calls.
Not being in the ballot pool, I had to submit my comments to Jonathan by
11/4. I took a stab at proposed resolutions to the comments, and they
are given below. I listed them as "technical", and I suggested that he
review them to see if they are appropriate for this ballot cycle; I am
certainly willing to withold them if not (in fact, I think the present
documentation is adequate). Because we had agreed this was a serial PMD
topic, I am placing these on the reflector for discussion.
I am trying to avoid defining specific test conditions, so I have
created wording that hopefully addresses the more general performance
requirements.
1. 52.9.7, page 452, line 45.
Comment: In response to a previous comment by Jonathan, the Rx input
signal conditions during transmitter eye mask testing should be
specified more completely.
Proposed resolution: Replace the present paragraph with "Compliance to
the transmitter mask of the eye shall be assured while any allowable
combination of signal conditions is input to the optical receiver of the
system under test. These signal conditions may include the ranges of
data patterns, signalling speed, jitter, optical power, rise/fall times,
etc. at the receiver input that are allowed by this standard."
2. 52.9.9.1, page 454, line 24.
Comment: In response to a previous comment by Jonathan, the Rx input
signal conditions during transmitter jitter testing should be specified
more completely.
Proposed resolution: Replace the present paragraph with "Compliance to
the transmitter jitter requirements shall be assured while any allowable
combination of signal conditions is input to the optical receiver of the
system under test. These signal conditions may include the ranges of
data patterns, signalling speed, jitter, optical power, rise/fall times,
etc. at the receiver input that are allowed by this standard."
3. 52.9.10, page 455, line 38.
Comment: In response to a previous comment by Jonathan, the Tx output
signal conditions during Rx conformance testing should be specified more
completely.
Proposed resolution: Replace the last sentence with "The output data
pattern from the transmitter of the system under test during this test
shall be Pattern 2 as defined in subclause 52.9.1." Also, page 457, line
16 - Modify to "The range of signalling speeds specified in...".
Comments are encouraged.
Thanks, Tom
425/672-8035 x105
-----Original Message-----
From: DAWE,PIERS (A-England,ex1) [mailto:piers_dawe@agilent.com]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 11:18 AM
To: '802.3ae Serial'
Subject: [802.3ae_Serial] From serial PMD call: next call tomorrow,
Tuesday
1. Standardisation process
There was an inconclusive discussion on the schedule, and ability to
make
changes without triggering unexpected recirculations. Clause 52 editor
asked reviewers to pay particular attention to cleaning up the PICS this
time, and thanked Rhett and Eric for their care and time in reviewing
the
last draft.
2. Link model
We carefully reviewed recent developments in the link model with the
assistance of participants who were not able to attend the Los Angeles
face
to face meeting. There was a desire for stability in the model to
assist
the standards process. However, it was pointed out that the values for
modal noise on multimode fibre in the 1300 nm band seemed to be
different to
the number used for Gigabit Ethernet. This was probably an oversight
and
would not significantly affect the standards process, as it relates to a
parameter for one PMD, not "the model" itself.
There was a discussion of the meaning of Uw, "RMS spectral width". I
dislike this term because, as dictionaries tell us, width is measured
"from
side to side" and this quantity, which is the standard deviation, is a
one-side measurement - sort of from middle to side. But people found
that
the spreadsheet was adding to their confusion, not reducing it. Since
the
meeting I have revised the explanation in the spreadsheet, hopefully
being
simultaneously clear, unambiguous and comprehensible this time!
3. Cross channel MPN
Optoelectronic effects
Petar reminded us of a comment he made a while back about the risk of
cross
channel MPN that the 10GBASE-LX runs with its "zero-SMSR" way of
specification.
4. For next time
The next PMD teleconference is tomorrow at the usual time. Usual
coordinates:
4:15 pm GMT = 17:15 CET = 11:15 am EST = 8:15 am PST, Tuesday
+1(816)650-0631 Access code 39209
Question of the 10%-90% risetime of the 4th order Bessel-Thomson like
response functions built into modern DCA. Petar would write to the
reflector to set the scene.
Piers