| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
I
would like to withdraw my previous message (below) on this topic and state that
I would like to stick to the current naming of the standard
"ER4".
Apologies for the back and forth
Alessandro
From: Alessandro Cavaciuti (acavaciu)
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 7:42 PM To: 'STDS-802-3-HSSG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' Subject: [802.3BA] Nomenclature comment I was
shy to propose a 4 letters acronym yet, as the ice is now broken, I
support it a lot!
Alessandro
Cavaciuti
Cisco
From: Brad Booth [mailto:bbooth@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 6:05 PM To: STDS-802-3-HSSG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [802.3BA] Nomenclature comment Pete, H
for high-sensitivity works for me. It would also means that it’s a
receiver characteristic which may make some people more comfortable if we call
it HLR4 instead. Thanks, From: Pete Anslow
[mailto:pja@xxxxxxxxxx] Brad, Thanks
for bringing this up via the exploder. A
difficulty with your proposal of using “H” for either “Higher power” or “Higher
intensity” is that the total average launch power max for LR4 is greater than
that for ER4. The OMA max power for the two is the same and only the
Average min and OMA min are lower for LR4 than ER4. I think
that describing ER4 as “higher power” cannot really be
defended.
LR4 ER4 Total
average launch power (max)
10.5
8.9
dBm Average
launch power, each lane (max)
4.5
2.9
dBm Average
launch power, each lane (min)
–4.3
-2.9
dBm Optical
Modulation Amplitude (OMA), each lane (max)
4.5
4.5
dBm Optical
Modulation Amplitude (OMA), each lane (min)
–1.3
0.1
dBm The real
difference between the two PMDs is that the ER4 receiver is much more sensitive
than the LR4 receiver (-21.4 dBm vs. -8.4 dBm) which enables longer
reach. The
unused letters on the list in booth_01_0709.pdf are A, H, J, N, V,
Y Assuming
that the Task Force were to agree to change the nomenclature, I think that you
would need something like 100GBASE-HR4
– long wavelength with high sensitivity 100GBASE-VR4
– long wavelength with very long reach Regards, Pete
Anslow Nortel Networks UK Limited, London
Rd, Harlow, Essex CM17 9NA, UK External +44 1279 402540
ESN 742 2540 Fax +44 1279 402543
From: Brad Booth
[mailto:bbooth@xxxxxxxx] Folks, I wanted to call to your
attention that I’ve submitted a comment against the definition of SR and LR, and
against the use of ER in P802.3ba. 802.3 has been very
consistent over the last 10 years in trying to maintain nomenclature
definitions. While people in the industry may have used S for short-reach,
L for long-reach and E for extended-reach, the real use of them in IEEE Std.
802.3-2008 is for short wavelength, long wavelength and extra long
wavelength. I believe that it would be
good for the Task Force to maintain consistency with the base standard so that
there is no confusion when the P802.3ba amendment is merged into the base
document. I’ve attached a document
that highlights how 802.3 has been using its nomenclature. The original
document was created in 2000 (during 802.3ae) and has been updated and followed
since that time. The proposals in my
comments are to maintain consistency for SR and LR. For ER, I am proposing
a new nomenclature: HR. The “H” in my comment refers to higher-power
1310nm wavelength optics. Upon further thought, I
have realized that the term “higher-power” may carry some baggage. I also
realized that there may be a desire for other optical PMDs to have greater
optical power. The term “higher-intensity” may be better. And it may
be more appropriate to follow what LRM did and create a 3 letter acronym: LRH or
HLR (I prefer the latter). I would be interested in
hearing any feedback and thoughts you may have. Thank
you, Brad <<booth_01_0709.pdf>>
|