| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Well, one fix is to remove the first comma. It is the thing making you think that and actually makes the sentence incorrect. 1.4.418aa Type 3 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 6 or a dual-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 4 on both Modes during Physical Layer classification, implements Multiple-Event classification, and accepts
power on both Modes simultaneously. (See IEEE 802.3, Clause 145). 1.4.418ac Type 4 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 7 or Class 8 or a dual-signature PD that request Class 5 on at least one Mode during Physical Layer classification, implements Multiple-Event classification, is capable of Data
Link Layer classification, and accepts power on both Modes simultaneously. (See IEEE 802.3, Clause 145). it would also be needed in your other option: 1.4.418aa Type 3 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 6 or a dual-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 4 on both Modes during Physical Layer classification. Additionally,
the PD implements Multiple-Event classification, and accepts power on both Modes simultaneously. (See IEEE 802.3, Clause 145). 1.4.418ac Type 4 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 7 or Class 8 or a dual-signature PD that request Class 5 on at least one Mode during Physical Layer classification. Additionally,
the PD implements Multiple-Event classification, is capable of Data Link Layer classification, and accepts power on both Modes simultaneously. (See IEEE 802.3, Clause 145). Chad Jones Tech Lead, Cisco Systems Chair, IEEE P802.3bt 4PPoE Task Force Principal, NFPA 70 CMP3 From: George Zimmerman <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> OK, so the path of various solutions has gotten convoluted, and Heath pointed out to me offline that we need to straighten out Lennart & Andrea’s different parts. This combination seems to work: 1.4.418aa Type 3 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 6, or a dual-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 4 on both Modes during Physical
Layer classification, implements Multiple-Event classification, and accepts power on both Modes simultaneously. (See IEEE 802.3, Clause 145). 1.4.418ac Type 4 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 7 or One minor thing is that we can expect a comment on both of these that it reads like any single-sig class 1 to 6 (type 3, or 8 for type 4) is a type 3,4 PD; while a dual-sig requires the additional features listed. The English doesn’t
parse uniquely like a logic equation. What I was trying to wrap my head around was whether there was a reordering or rephrasing that made it clear that the logic was: ( (SS = class 7 + class 8) + (DS = maxclass 5) ) * (features). Breaking these into two sentences might work: 1.4.418aa Type 3 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 6, or a dual-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 4 on both Modes during Physical Layer classification. Additionally, the PD implements Multiple-Event classification,
and accepts power on both Modes simultaneously. (See IEEE 802.3, Clause 145). 1.4.418ac Type 4 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 7 or Class 8, or a dual-signature PD that request Class 5 on at least one Mode during Physical Layer classification. Additionally, the PD implements Multiple-Event classification,
is capable of Data Link Layer classification, and accepts power on both Modes simultaneously. (See IEEE 802.3, Clause 145). From: George Zimmerman [mailto:george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
This does not fix the problem, because both type 3 and type 4 still include single-sig class 6. Add to that, that this is trying to make the definition complex. I suggest we stick to fixing the type 4 definition, and your suggestion below (on type 3) may provide the fix, but it isn’t readily apparent. The problem is that dual-sig which classify as class 5 or 6 on a pairset are outside the type 4 definition. We should focus on including those into type 4. -george From: Andrea Agnes [mailto:andrea.agnes181@xxxxxxxxx]
ok I agree but dual signature PD Class 5 would became both Type 3 and Type 4. I suggest accordingly modification of Type 3 definition: 1.4.418aa Type 3 PD: A single-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 6, or a dual-signature PD that requests Class 1 to Class 4 on both Modes during Physical
Layer classification, implements Multiple-Event classification, and accepts power on both Modes simultaneously. (See IEEE 802.3, Clause 145). 2017-10-20 11:54 GMT+02:00 Lennart Yseboodt <lennartyseboodt@xxxxxxxxx>:
|