Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Mike, If we can decide that KR4 FEC will not have sufficient performance for CAUI-2 C2C and/or C2M, it shall have big impact on how other things proceed or not. Without the use of an extender sublayer, one will have
no means of interoperation other to run the new 50G lanes at 25G. Jeff From: Mike Dudek [mailto:mike.dudek@xxxxxxxxxx] It won’t be a slam-dunk to create a CAUI-2 using KR-FEC when the CDAUI-8 is using KP-FEC. Also if we are considering 100GBASE-DR or 100GBASE-LR2 those are likely to want the KP-FEC. I expect also that the
50G serial backplane and copper links are going to want the KP4 FEC. Ie the KP-FEC will be in any chips designed for 50G PAM4.
Mike Dudek QLogic Corporation Director Signal Integrity 26650 Aliso Viejo Parkway Aliso Viejo CA 92656 949 389 6269 - office. From: John D'Ambrosia [mailto:jdambrosia@xxxxxxxxx]
Jeff, If I get your point here – the only thing you are adding to what I already pointed out was the interaction between a x2 C2C with a x4 C2M. Right? John From: Jeffery Maki [mailto:jmaki@xxxxxxxxxxx]
I support what Chris is saying. In addition, I think we will need to examine support of existing 100G PMDs with a new optional electrical interface, the CAUI-2 (2x50G) C2M. Further, we should examine CAUI-2 C2C,
where the C2M interface is CAUI-4. The desire for things to persist to work with KR4 FEC rather than requiring a new FEC code shall be high. Jeff From: Chris Cole [mailto:chris.cole@xxxxxxxxxxx]
The idea of rolling 200G into the 400G project is compelling. In prior discussions, we had rejected this as too late for 802.3bs TF, so it’s encouraging to see we are willing to revisit. One mental test of why
this makes sense is to consider what we would have done in 400G Study Group if we knew what we know now. Given the CFI support, it could be argued that most people would have supported both 200G and 400G. If anything, 200G is more compelling.
Chris From: John D'Ambrosia [mailto:jdambrosia@xxxxxxxxx]
Dear Task Force Participants, This email is to make sure that everyone is aware of conversations happening in the 50/100/200G Study Group Phone Conference that happened yesterday – Dec 2. There has been discussion at how the multi-lane 100G/200G solutions might be
rolled into the 802.3bs project. To that end – I gave a presentation at the conference call that looked at potential modifications / additions to our PAR / CSD. See
http://www.ieee802.org/3/50G/public/adhoc/archive/dambrosia_120215_50GE_NGOATH_adhoc_v2.pdf I encourage everyone to review this presentation and consider the findings on the last few pages. Individuals may wish to participate in the upcoming 50/100/200G ad hoc calls that Mr. Nowell has planned. For more information see
http://www.ieee802.org/3/50G/public/adhoc/index.html. I will be working on the meeting announcement for the January interim, and anticipate that there will be a joint session of our Task Force with the Study Groups to further consider these implications. Regards, John D’Ambrosia Chair, IEEE P802.3bs 400GbE Task Force |