| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Hello Yunteng,
Yes, EEE can be done independently in UL and DL direction and you do not have to implement it on the camera side. However, how would
you handle it if you only needed to transmit a camera video stream of 6 Gbps, while you have 10 Gbps link rate available. Would you want to use EEE to also safe power or rather send continuously filling the capacity with idle/alike?
Also, in many discussions I had, there was a desire to reuse existing parts. They would have EEE in both directions. However, if you
make extra parts, it would be desirable to optimize. Of course. Kind regards,
Kirsten Von: Yunteng Huang <yunteng@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear Kirsten, Kamal,
Thank you for your contribution on buffering analysis:
https://www.ieee802.org/3/dm/public/0724/matheus_dalmia_dm_03_buffering_07152024.pdf
In slide 12 of the presentation, you write that an FDX/EEE (802.3ch) would
need “Normal MAC buffers (esp. pause), wake time buffers for min 9us @ high rate” on the camera side. An implied assumption here is that 802.3ch based camera system would go in and out of LPI for power savings in the downstream
direction analogous to TDD scheme. In practice, frequent entering/exiting LPI is not needed in the downstream direction thanks to FDX. If you leave the downstream direction active and only enter/exit LPI in the upstream direction, which is a rational use
of EEE for this application, there would be no need for wake time buffers at high rate on the camera side.
Sincerely, Yunteng Huang 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 |