| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Chad,
I have a few of comments on your presentation:
1. I understand your approach. You want to use as many of the new codes above 15.4W as possible, but you have to use one of them for 2W because the task force mandated we go down to 2W. I guess that's a reasonable approach except for two concerns:
a. Your max power level is only 30W. I don't think that's future-proof enough.
b. There is still that huge gap in between 7W and 15.4W. For example, a PD that needs 8W must still request 15.4W, thus wasting 7.4W, or 48% of the allocated power. I think a lot of PDs might fall in this gap, and I'm pretty sure we need at least one new code in there.
2. I don't like the fact that a "31" code requests only 2W. An AF-PSE will only see the "3" and will allocate 15.4W when the PD is only requesting 2W. That's extremely wasteful. Why not use "13" instead? Then an AF-PSE would allocate only 4W.
3. The "44" code is basically wasted. Any code that starts with a 4 will be interpreted by and AF-PSE as Class 0, and it will allocate 15.4W. So there's no reason to define both 33 and 44 as 15.4W. You should use it for some other power level, like you did with 41, 42, and 43.
4. You don't say what we should do with the other 6 codes that aren't in your table. If we leave them undefined, then someone will try to use them for proprietary purposes.
I don't understand your comment about "false detection of legacy PDs" using the codes I proposed. I can't see the problem, but I guess we'll discuss it tomorrow. Thanks to taking the time to read my proposal at least.
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-stds-802-3-poep@xxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-poep@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Clay Stanford (LTC)
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 3:43 PM
To: STDS-802-3-POEP@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [8023-POEP] 2-Finger Ping Pong Presentation
Attached is a presentation from Chad for the group.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around