Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

[802.3ae_Serial] D4.3 ballot comments



Here are my comments for Friday's call. Hopefully the html attachment method will work.
 
I do not expect any more.

Tom
Stratos NW
(425) 672-8035 x105

 
BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:Lindsay;Tom
FN:Tom Lindsay
ORG:Stratos Lightwave;Opto NW
TITLE:Prin. Engr.
NOTE;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:Home: lindsayta@aol.com=0D=0A=0D=0Aom
TEL;WORK;VOICE:(425) 672-8035 x105
TEL;HOME;VOICE:(425) 775-7013
TEL;CELL;VOICE:(206) 790-3240
TEL;WORK;FAX:(425) 672-8014
ADR;WORK;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:;;6100 219th Street SW=0D=0ASuite 520;Mountlake Terrace;WA;98043
LABEL;WORK;ENCODING=QUOTED-PRINTABLE:6100 219th Street SW=0D=0ASuite 520=0D=0AMountlake Terrace, WA 98043
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com
REV:20020219T195001Z
END:VCARD
CalcTextForExport
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~52.9.10.2~479~26~T~The present description for eye closure contradicts with itself. On one hand, we call out minimal noise and data dependent effects, yet on the other hand, we limit the amounts of sine jitter and sine interference. If one is succesful on the first hand, they will not be able to achieve the required stress values because of the limitations of the second hand.

Relatedly, there is concern that allowing more sine interference will unduly stress receivers, as this is not a type of degradation found in real systems.~2 options:
1. Simply allow more sine jitter than 0.15.
2. Impose tighter limits on sine interference and allow more sine jitter. Sine interference limits could be imposed by limits of pulse shrinkage.~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~Table 52-18~469~1~T~Table 52-18 specifies 0.5 dB for additional allowable insertion loss. With the new TDP method, this is no longer appropriate.

If it is correct as/where it is, then the min Rx power in Table 52-17 must be decreased by this amount.~Set addtional insertion loss allowed to 0 dB and set allocation for penalties to 4.1 dB.~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~52.9.8.XXXX~476~38~E~Clause does not appear to be removed...~Remove.~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~52.9.10.1~479~13~E~Misleading.~Replace end of sentence with "...all sources is normal, but can lead to more stress than specified."~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~52.9.10.1~479~~E~Clean up descriptions.~1. Remove the sentence starting in line 16. It is not related to the topic of the paragraph (the test source), and its intent is better stated in the next paragraph.

2. Add to the end of line 31. "The reference receiver should have very low noise (be highly sensitive), high linearity, and minimal baseline wander, jitter, or other distortions."~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~52.9.10.2~479~42~E~0.1% of 1% of what?~I believe we are requiring this to be 1% of the total number of hits, not pk-pk width.
~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~52.9.10.2~480~20~E~A0 should be italicized.~per comment.~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~52.9.10.2~480~29~E~We really want to minimize such jitter.~Get rid of 0.25 UI value. Truncate sentence after "...small".~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~52.9.10.3~481~54~E~Not clear.~Change to "The values for sinusoidal jitter must comply with Table 52-19 at all test frequencies."~~X~O
0~Lindsay, Tom~tlindsay@stratoslightwave.com~(425) 672-8035 x105~(206) 790-3240~Stratos Lightwave~52~Figure 52-6~473~~E~I would gladly offer a more realistic square wave. The present one is pretty bad...~Just let me know.~~X~O