Re: [802.3_DIALOG] Removing error ratio requirements from Std 802
- To: STDS-802-3-DIALOG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [802.3_DIALOG] Removing error ratio requirements from Std 802
- From: George Zimmerman <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 2 May 2023 17:14:27 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=2; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@CMEconsulting.onmicrosoft.com header.s=selector2-CMEconsulting-onmicrosoft-com header.b=TZmBkjmS; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=cmephyconsulting.com dkim=pass dkdomain=cmephyconsulting.com dmarc=pass fromdomain=cmephyconsulting.com); spf=pass (google.com: domain of george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx designates 40.107.92.130 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cmephyconsulting.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cmephyconsulting.com; dkim=pass header.d=cmephyconsulting.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :accept-language:in-reply-to:references:message-id:date:thread-index :thread-topic:subject:to:from:dkim-signature; bh=mCpLsKQxGMZhOMh2tTDvjv1UEbhVZib/59B1hG3wLlg=; b=TjJgFrWlDYF2aQptZLKmVtZs5EajuhQSwhgx+NgcmrAz++PXcX4ysbdofVpFT2IYXY mVjc5fXOFJsQhohU4VAHw2riuwbit6MJuOjN2YvJYgxgcvJy0sy6hoVhVWsg+eHY5Twq my/qAdKKHcE/0T6TiGH6pWrtXWw/XsyqtoftGwuyz7FOSnW77vnoamb/XQYdjfwOjq50 k7JobH8va3SrzJypcpC0u3zMttP3wQbithTcfvPQPkFW302EHxvvyAUO1dXTB8IEuMMa inmAt4I3AqY7tp5Gevdqhi1f4t/TH3ef5VoMzTEZO6gYFTO/JvTiuUVC/MoaYz6fXlEp yVjg==
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=mCpLsKQxGMZhOMh2tTDvjv1UEbhVZib/59B1hG3wLlg=; b=He0mtvGp1pYe+1Blp6z9LNy01dr6sZTA4Wv0MSo3D+CCUGS8zIsZ7R6nN4/z9DKIUh0sSLe634ApkKsxI44tTVpaV5zMcTiHeFvBk+FI2gWPwuhODNTLp5dks3T6dlTTQrVb5+4Ar/ybEd7MX8dky5EeQXYEhxGyP8vDETA8x6NAg4udibefKivCbQyaE2FDKSEbLeii6sd4qj4ZYMnqbcHMnussDuOM3pPJAfdl6RREhvM2nvRUMqj4wfN5yH150GK9FZ37oN5MX3/gVH6HQIUK9TCq86Jo+cgkCARjFzQ9dAETYRoHxRv/Ew2rCxjrqnDrJmeAdRw9mRYRgVInlQ==
- Arc-seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1683047673; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Ve1fVRBep/RkHteojUtRe01guGkH92kphJKsltF/rFhPlpw/4LdoTTkYWDSUnh3xLC bPKRBSjSCoL3V8al+3IL2Vtu/AxixPxB8vPH73pWrrEBMUwNZxXFaZV8Mq46Rg7eGK2P 5a7xvxROLCsGqhujJggyIuatlglFAAvt9wAXolqTKKfCzn/sCvW4P/KniclHMSiZr/OO IiPWOT4FZdKznFVUl12oExxL3mb2XDHsBf98S4g5qPdK+e837lOLdPIKlukrJqkasMqy cmoUnErK2cXF2PzlasKbIRYNG62RlZK3yWfVU3yjoE1oBhtjDDy5m0a6lLWUrzPV4jCz qDYw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=eVeideBUdWcC+tFkQULxcP+jeQL0TvRBRthZUbiCEKhxrc2i2aRhBgPJQv0tsx87ITEsuZlLD9ZSBA9NUYHSHTPd2TnycgzGNNzapL3c1UAcLGXa8NuTTp6mv079A0qxQ7z7bWJHjzzCQZ1lfMmatBn/UEApoQ+zoQGgSOK9LTZxk7DYYDkj4xxZkm3HwsMKZIbvRAOBAfauRb1GQPGjP0HDL41LZnrxYOWc5rZpBdldbkwKK6mSuDKQloTXIM0KWDqYxVK1wmNMvy492AuEyfS6fG/nT2h+1CkVQZG1hXoAHZ01wFYIjM99NLrFXh0kAwa+kIoNG3BKN69RyyGXxw==
- Delivered-to: mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: STDS-802-3-DIALOG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <FA7D91B9-67C9-4B9A-B8EE-F13C5E147EB3@cox.net>
- List-help: <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=STDS-802-3-DIALOG>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20STDS-802-3-DIALOG>
- List-owner: <mailto:STDS-802-3-DIALOG-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
- List-subscribe: <mailto:STDS-802-3-DIALOG-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:STDS-802-3-DIALOG-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
- References: <FA7D91B9-67C9-4B9A-B8EE-F13C5E147EB3@cox.net>
- Reply-to: George Zimmerman <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Thread-index: AQHZfRS31IPxQzr/GkGHr/F1t2YHI69HNc8A
- Thread-topic: [802.3_DIALOG] Removing error ratio requirements from Std 802
Bob - it's not just the tradition of 'life of the universe' for false packet acceptance, but 802.3 is full of frame loss (or in earlier test BER) requirements. Most (if not all) of the recent phys have some kind of a frame-loss-rate specification in their clause.
It is stated in different ways in different places. Not sure whether this was your concern, as the "Error ratios" in 5.3 of 802rev is stated somewhat ambiguously both interms of the probablility that "a transmitted MAC frame is not reported correctly" (item a in 5.3), as well as the probability that an MSDU delivered contains an undetected error" (item b in 5.3). While "a" would count frames that are marked errors, "b" would exclude (be tolerant of) them. Which are we doing? The big issue here is how FEC is considered.
-george
See, for example:
Clause 92:
Differential signals received at the MDI from a transmitter that meets the requirements of 92.8.3 and have passed through the cable assembly specified in 92.10 are received with a BER less than 10–5.
For a complete Physical Layer, this specification is considered to be satisfied by a frame loss ratio (see
1.4.344) less than 6.2 × 10–10 for 64-octet frames with minimum interpacket gap.
Others are more explicit on the requirement:
Clause 95:
95.1.1 Bit error ratio
The bit error ratio (BER) shall be less than 5 × 10–5 provided that the error statistics are sufficiently random that this results in a frame loss ratio (see 1.4.344) of less than 6.2 × 10–10 for 64-octet frames with minimum interpacket gap when processed according to Clause 91.
If the error statistics are not sufficiently random to meet this requirement, then the BER shall be less than
that required to give a frame loss ratio of less than 6.2 × 10–10 for 64-octet frames with minimum interpacket gap when processed according to Clause 91.
Clause 97:
Differential signals received at the MDI that were transmitted from a remote transmitter within the
specifications of 97.5.3 and have passed through a link segment type A (specified in 97.6.1 and 97.6.3) are received with a BER less than 10–10 and sent to the PCS after link reset completion. This BER specification shall be satisfied by a frame loss ratio less than 10–7 for 125-octet frames. Operation on link segment type B is optional. If supported, the frame loss ratio shall also be met for link segments specified at 97.6.2 and 97.6.4.
Similarly, there are alien crosstalk tests which are specified in terms of meeting a frame loss ratio...
-----Original Message-----
From: ROBERT GROW <bobgrow@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2023 9:40 AM
To: STDS-802-3-DIALOG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.3_DIALOG] Removing error ratio requirements from Std 802
Colleagues:
Today, working on P802-REVc comment resolution, a proposal was make to delete the error ratio text from Std 802. My recollection is that we don’t have these requirements in Std 802.3 but have used the requirement in Std 802 as the basis for analyzing if PHY proposals are acceptable for basic PHY link error rate and for undetected error rate at the MAC service interface.
The current Error Ratios text for wireless networks does not include normative requirements.
I’m asking those more expert than I on this for reaction to this proposal to delete subclasses 6.2 Error Ratios from P802-REVc/D1.0.
—Bob
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-DIALOG&A=1
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-DIALOG list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-DIALOG&A=1