Re: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] FW: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] any new presentations for Wednesday's PHY Link ad hoc committee call?
Joe,
I am not sure that helps in any way. Values that should be met imply double
testing - with system that meets them and with a system that does not . we
just have way too many of them, something that I noted when we voted on
these
Marek
From: Solomon, Joe [mailto:Joe_Solomon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:05 PM
To: Marek Hajduczenia; stds-802-3-epoc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] FW: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] any new presentations
for Wednesday's PHY Link ad hoc committee call?
Thanks, Marek. Yes, there is a lot left to be defined.
As far as the values in the tables and your goose pimples go, these were the
values approved in Motion 26 during the Victoria meetings. The downstream
values are the entire set of allowed values. The upstream, at this point,
are only agreed upon to be "recommended values". I don't know if this means
that this list is a SHOULD requirement or if it means they are still up for
debate.
From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 6:12 PM
To: Solomon, Joe; STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] FW: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] any new presentations
for Wednesday's PHY Link ad hoc committee call?
Hi Joe,
Thank you for sharing these on the reflector.
When I see requirements like "The CLT transmitter shall support the cyclic
prefix values defined in Table 1 for both 4K and 8K FFTs" and then a list of
values in a table, I get goose-pimples. It is a testing nightmare, when
someone will have to go through all these combinations and test them. What's
even worse, is that the same seems to be required on the CNU side, and then
we have to confirm what happens when both sides of the link are operational.
I wonder whether we cannot try to narrow this list down to specific values
that actually make most sense (2-3 values at best),
The second thing that caught my attention is that there is no explanation
(right now) as to when CP is inserted, at what position within a frame (?),
in what order etc. I assume such text with respective figures explaining
that will be added at some point of time, correct ?
Finally, when I see values like 5.3125 expressed in us, I wonder whether it
does not make more sense to express them all in ns and avoid many decimal
places.
I understand that it is a beginning of a larger section, because right now
"This section describes how cyclic prefixes are inserted into the output of
the IDFT." does not really hold true J
Regards
Regards
Marek
From: Solomon, Joe [mailto:Joe_Solomon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 2:54 PM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] FW: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] any new presentations for
Wednesday's PHY Link ad hoc committee call?
Mark,
Attached are a presentation and a text proposal that I sent to the reflector
last week. Can Saif and I have some time in the Wednesday meeting to
socialize these with the team?
j
From: Mark Laubach [mailto:laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 1:55 PM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [STDS-802-3-EPOC] any new presentations for Wednesday's PHY Link ad
hoc committee call?
Dear IEEE P802.3bn Task Force participants,
There are a number of PHY Link presentations underway for the upcoming
meeting and we've pretty much discussed the work plan status as much as
needed at this time.
If there any new presentations to socialize in the PHY Link ad hoc
committee, please post on the reflector by tomorrow Tuesday, by 5PM pacific
time.
Thank you on this request.
Mark Laubach, Chair
IEEE P802.3bn Task Force
Broadband Communications Group
Broadcom Corporation
1351 Redwood Way
Petaluma, CA, 94954
broadcom.jpg
Tel: +1.707.792.9093
Cell: +1.650.996.2219
_____
<="" p="">
_____
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1
