| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
None of the proposed C66 changes make any sense for 25G-EPON. In fact, they directly contradict the requirements of C143 MCRS.
MCRS is not an extension of existing 10G or 25G RS. MCRS is a new Reconciliation Sublayer that has its own state diagrams and its own requirements.
-Glen
From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:mxhajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx]
We can discuss if we want to make changes applicable to 10G-EPON and Nx25G-EPON at the same shot, or delay 10G-EPON related changes to maintenance. I’d say do them all right now and have it over with, since any maintenance request will likely come back to our TF anyway.
Marek
From: Duane Remein <Duane.Remein@xxxxxxxxxx>
Marek, Good points. I initially looked at this wrt BiDi clauses and didn’t go after fixes that really should have been made for 10G-EPON. I have no problem including those if we choose to do so. I’ll add the basic text and highlights you’ve pointed out below to my MS Word file for the call and we can discuss additional changes. Best Regards Duane
From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:mxhajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx]
Duane rightfully pointed out it is modification to Clause 66 and not 46, my bad on that.
However, on closer look, there are more places that need updates IMO, with target locations highlighted. There are list of clauses in introduction text, plus list of PHYs, which should be extended to cover 25 Gb/s Clause and PHY alike. Also, the second para does not even mention 10G-EPON, and I believe it should, since 10G-EPON builds on top of 10GBASE-R.
In the absence of unidirectional operation, the sublayers in this clause are precisely the same as their equivalents in Clause 24, Clause 36, and Clause 46. Otherwise, this clause describes additions and modifications to the 100BASE-X, 1000BASE-X, 10GBASE-R, 10GBASE-W, and 10GBASE-X Physical Layers, making them capable of unidirectional operation, which is required to initialize a 1000BASE-PX network, and allows the transmission of Operations, Administration and Management (OAM) frames regardless of whether the PHY has determined that a valid link has been established. However, unidirectional operation may only be enabled under very limited circumstances. Before enabling this mode, the MAC shall be operating in full-duplex mode and Auto-Negotiation, if applicable, shall be disabled. In addition, the OAM sublayer above the MAC (see Clause 57) shall be present and enabled or (for 1000BASE-X), the PCS shall be part of a 1000BASE-PX-D PHY (see Clause 60 and Clause 64). Unidirectional operation shall not be invoked for a PCS that is part of a 1000BASE-PX-U PHY (except for out-of-service test purposes or where the PON contains just one ONU). Failure to follow these restrictions results in an incompatibility with the assumptions of IEEE 802.1 protocols, a PON that cannot initialize, or collisions, which are unacceptable in the P2MP protocol.
Thoughts?
Marek
From: Marek Hajduczenia <mxhajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx>
Thank you, Duane
Re the following text,
The 10 Gb/s RS and 25 Gb/s RS for P2MP subscriber access networks shall conform to the requirements of the 10 Gb/s RS specified in Clause 46 (as modified in Clause 106 for the 25 Gb/s RS) with the following exception: The 10 Gb/s RS and 25 Gb/s RS for subscriber access networks may have the ability to transmit data regardless of whether the PHY has determined that a valid link has been established. The following are the detailed changes to Clause 46 in order to support this additional ability.
I am confused why we would be adding 25 Gb/s statements into Clause 46. Clause 106 already does extend 10 Gb/s RS into 25 Gb/s operation, so the statement you’re adding should go into Clause 106, and not 46 IMO
Marek
From: Duane Remein <Duane.Remein@xxxxxxxxxx>
Marek, Please see the attached. I will also cover updates to Fig 142-2 and 14. Best Regards Duane
From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:mxhajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx]
Hi Curtis,
Is the material for the call available anywhere? I check the archive and no trace there …
Marek
From: Curtis Knittle <C.Knittle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear Colleagues,
We have one (1) item on the agenda for the consensus-building call today (2/28 /19):
· Clause 66 (Remein)
11:30 am MDT. Call details are below.
Curtis
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGEPON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGEPON&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGEPON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGEPON&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGEPON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGEPON&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGEPON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGEPON&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGEPON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGEPON&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGEPON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGEPON&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGEPON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGEPON&A=1 |