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

[802.3_ISAAC] AW: [802.3_ISAAC] Main conclusions from Monday's discussion of jonsson_3ISAAC_01_082823

Hi all,

 

I also agree that 1Gbps downstream should be considered (if it adds minimal effort to the specification work, while being able to be competitive, i.e. even simpler).

 

In respect to 25Gbps: from my perspective, this will stay exotic (and too power hungry and costly) for a while. I would not want to risk competitiveness to the core market (<= 5Gbps) in order to address something exotic. If costs and complexity are of so little concern that someone wants to build a 25 Gbps Ethernet camera, IEEE already provides solutions (e.g. 802.3cy).

 

Kind regards,

 

Kirsten

 

Von: Kamal Dalmia <kamal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 31. August 2023 00:33
An: STDS-802-3-ISAAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: Re: [802.3_ISAAC] Main conclusions from Monday's discussion of jonsson_3ISAAC_01_082823

 

Sent from outside the BMW organization - be CAUTIOUS, particularly with links and attachments. 

Absender außerhalb der BMW Organisation - Bitte VORSICHT beim Öffnen von Links und Anhängen. 

I agree that 1G downstream is worth looking into.

 

Regards

Kamal

 

 

 

From: William Lo <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 3:25 PM
To: STDS-802-3-ISAAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <STDS-802-3-ISAAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [802.3_ISAAC] Main conclusions from Monday's discussion of jonsson_3ISAAC_01_082823

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>
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2023 15:02
To: STDS-802-3-ISAAC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.3_ISAAC] Main conclusions from Monday's discussion of jonsson_3ISAAC_01_082823

 

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

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