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

Re: [802.3_SUPER-PON] PCS Proposal

Hi Marek,

I see the possibility of an optional second PCS as something similar to clause 74, "Forward Error Correction (FEC) sublayer for BASE-R PHYs".

As stated in clause 74:
"The 10GBASE-KR and 40GBASE-KR4 PHYs described in Clause 72 and Clause 84 optionally use the FEC sublayer to increase the performance on a broader set of backplane channels than are defined in Clause 69. The FEC sublayer provides additional margin to account for variations in manufacturing and environmental conditions."

One PCS, the 10G-EPON one, is able to support all that we need for Super-PON. Enabling the option of a second higher performance one (the 25G-EPON PCS) goes in the same direction of the statement I just quoted, "provides additional margin to account for variations in manufacturing and environmental conditions". 

From the Super-PON PMD perspective, replacing the 10G-EPON PCS with the 25G-EPON PCS has the same effect as enabling the FEC sublayer of clause 74: it goes from operating on a 64/66 encoded bit stream to a 256/257 encoded bit stream, at exactly the same clock. Slide 6 on the presentation attempts to convey this.

Although along the same lines, I understand that having the option of a second higher performance PCS goes a step further than clause 74. This is why I like people to think about it..

Thank you,

        Claudio.

On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM <mxhajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Claudio,

 

Since the deck does not speak to it … why would you want two solutions to the same problem? It seems odd at best to have two different PCS designs for the very same job

 

Marek

 

From: Claudio DeSanti <00000b528d17fa95-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2019 3:37 PM
To: STDS-802-3-SUPER-PON@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.3_SUPER-PON] PCS Proposal

 

Dear Colleagues,

 

at today's P802.3cs call, this PCS proposal was reviewed: http://www.ieee802.org/3/cs/public/AdHoc/20190822-Super-PON_PCS_Proposal.pdf

No objections were raised by the people participating to the call, however it was recommended to have other task force participants to review it for further discussion at the next meeting.

 

Thank you,

 

        Claudio.

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-SUPER-PON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-SUPER-PON&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-SUPER-PON list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-SUPER-PON&A=1