| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
George and editorial staff, I would like to request that comments #102 and #114 be removed from the EZ bucket motion. My reasons are set out below. #102 It is proposed to change the equation for FTFC in 190.3.4.2.3
from “FTFC = mod(PFC, lpi_qr_time) >> 4” to “FTFC = mod(PFC,
lpi_qr_time) / 16”. This would create ambiguity since mod(PFC,
lpi_qr_time) is never divisible by 16 when the PFC value corresponds to a partial frame containing an
InfoField. The _expression_ “/ 16” does not clearly indicate that the fractional bits are to be removed by truncation. #114 It is proposed to change the meaning of
pam3_detected = TRUE from “A signal is detected, that is compatible with PAM3
signaling from the remote PHY and is not compatible with PAM2
signaling from the remote PHY” to “a compatible signal is detected”. Although the current definition is repetitive, it makes it unambiguously clear that a signal that is compatible with PAM2 should not cause
pam3_detected to be set TRUE even though such a signal may also be considered compatible with PAM3. The proposed new wording is vague in this respect and could cause problems. Regards Philip Curran Analog Devices To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-SPEP2P list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-SPEP2P&A=1 |