| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hello together, what the automotive industry wants is the possibility of transferring Power and Communication on the same wire. It doesn’t need to be compliant to IEEE802.3at. But I see a strong need for a standardized solution! We want plug and play. From a Tier1 perspective, we don’t want to implement for the same application for OEM1 RTPGE with the specific PoAE solution from Chip-Vendor A and for OEM2 RTPGE with the specific PoAE solution from Chip-Vendor B. This would be very expensive in many ways ( we can discuss this in San Diego) From an OEM perspective I could imagine that they also look for Plug and Play, they may want to buy ECU A from Supplier 1 and ECU B from Supplier 2, and they should work together seamlessly. I do understand the question of parameters for the PoAE components, therefore the concept of several Power Level can solve the problem. Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards Von: Geoff Thompson [mailto:thompson@xxxxxxxx] Stephane Geoff, as a car manufacturer, Renault wants: - smallest cost (and standard cameras should be cheaper than specific ones) but also : - small volume for cameras (room is scarce where we want to locate them) - minimum harness for cameras (room is scarce also for harness in door connector, in outside mirror connector, ..., and harness is cost also) Should I understand from your comment that maybe ISO 17215 specification would be a good place for "PoE cameras"? Could we have the same PoE spec for 100 Mbps and 1Gbps Automotive Ethernet? As yet, I see cameras as a good candidate for PoE in cars, but maybe others exist ... Stephane. De : Hugh Barrass (hbarrass) [mailto:hbarrass@xxxxxxxxx] Geoff, That’s an interesting thought. If that line of thinking is used, then the requirement would be that the PHY specification is “compatible with PoAE” – in other words, that the PHY is able to be implemented in such a manner that does not interfere with the delivery of power. For example, if the PHY uses a band-limited definition and leaves the DC-xxxKHz band free, then a splitter can be used to insert power in the same manner as POTS or DSL. Of course, there’s a whole spectrum between “use PoE” and “let the implementer design it.” We could also consider different levels of specification. Hugh. From: Geoff Thompson [mailto:thompson@xxxxxxxx] Dave- Does the automotive industry actually want "standardized PoE" of the same style that the current PoE standard provides? That is, does the auto industry really want the sort of multi-vendor plug-and-play facility that we provide along with its lack of optimization for cost? All - Here is the final question list from the PoE Ad-hoc in Minneapolis. End users (automotive/industrial/other): please look at this list and be prepared to discuss these points in San Diego. Thanks to those who contributed questions, and I look forward to seeing you at the Plenary - Dave -- Disclaimer ------------------------------------ *** This e-mail and any attachments is a confidential correspondence intended only for use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient or the agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender by phone or by replying this message, and then delete this message from your system. |