| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
I agree that 1G downstream is worth looking into. Regards Kamal From:
William Lo <will@xxxxxxxxxx> CAUTION: This email is from an external origin! Hi Ragnar, I think there was interest in 1G downstream rate and not just multi-gig.
Also I don’t think we closed out the possibility of considering 25G. The rest of the items I agree with.
Thanks, William From: Ragnar Jonsson <rjonsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
All, As promised, I am sending a short summary of the conclusion from the discussion of my presentation in the Monday meeting:
https://www.ieee802.org/3/ISAAC/public/082823/jonsson_3ISAAC_01_082823.pdf The main takeaways from the discussion is that the camera link physical layer needs to support the following: - Downstream data rates should be multi-Gig Ethernet data rates up to 10Gbps - Upstream data rate should be 100Mbps - Cost efficient power delivery is important - Should support both Shielded Balanced Pair and Coax - Compatibility with existing MAC specification is important - It is important to control latency Please let us know if I am missing any other key conclusion from the discussion. I am starting to work on presentations (more than one) to address the feasibility of camera link PHY that archives all of the above. As always, I would welcome any collaborators that may be interested in this
subject. Ragnar To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-ISAAC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-ISAAC&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-ISAAC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-ISAAC&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-ISAAC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-ISAAC&A=1 |