Re: [802SEC] Comments on 802.3ca and 802.3cb PARs and CSD
James:
While 802.11 likes this in the scope (I assume for this the project scope is what you meant as we certainly wouldn’t want to list the probably 100+ different reaches for Ethernet in the base standard scope). For decades, 802.3 has been doing this through project objectives which are approved by 802.3 (and published on the SG/TF web page).
Objectives are often revised during project development without the need to bother NesCom and the SASB with a modified PAR. Objectives cover other items of similar importance to other people as reach is to you (half/full duplex, BER, supported media, etc.) Sometimes, we start a project with an “if possible” in the objective, occasionally we have increased the reach objective during development, sometimes we add additional reach objectives. Basically, the market specified for the project implies the range of reach required, and this certainly is the case for EPON being an access technology. A backplane project implies a reach of about a meter.
You will see projects that start work not sure of what media they will use, or if operation will be specified over different grades of media (each grade having a different reach or set of topology constraints). Number of connectors and other options may similarly produce more than one topology objective for a single PHY. As Curtis mentioned, the project will include more than one split ratio, with corresponding different reaches.
—Bob
On Nov 11, 2015, at 9:15 AM, James P. K. Gilb <gilb@ieee.org> wrote:
> Chris
>
> Your response says: "Please see the objectives". I don't recall seeing a "project objectives" subsection in the PAR. Am I missing something?
>
> James Gilb
>
> On 11/11/2015 08:53 AM, Curtis Knittle wrote:
>> Colleagues,
>>
>>
>>
>> After Study Group discussion, please find below the resolution of comments received on P802.3ca PAR/Objectives/CSD. If you have additional questions or comments, please let me know.
>>
>>
>>
>> Curtis
>>
>>
>>
>> From Paul Nikolich:
>>
>> Regarding the 802.3ca draft PAR 5.4 Purpose:
>>
>> The 1st sentence uses the qualitative term 'significantly increase performance..'. It should be replaced with 'increase by 2.5 to 10 times the performance..." to be in line with the Scope.
>>
>> Response: Since having a Purpose clause in the P802.3ca PAR is an error and will be deleted, this comment is overtaken by events
>>
>>
>>
>> From James Gilb:
>>
>> General question: With wireless standards, we often specify a target operating range. Is there a reason why a target distance is not specified for NG EPON? It seems that the stakeholders would have some expectation of the length of fiber over which this standard can reliably deliver the advertised data rate. This distance should be stated in the scope.
>>
>> Response: 802.3 typically does not specify reach requirements in PAR Scope statements, but instead places these in the project objectives. Please see the objectives for information related to target distances and split ratios.
>>
>>
>>
>> From David Law:
>>
>> The issue with the Purpose clause is, as indicated by the question related to item 5.4 'Will the completed document (base + amendment) contain a purpose clause?:', that if the answer is yes, the text in the box will be the purpose clause for the entire (base + amendment) IEEE 802.3 standard. I suspect that there will be significant push back from the IEEE 802.3 Working Group to have a purpose statement in IEEE Std 802.3 for the first time, and to have it only be related to EPON, regardless of how successful a part of IEEE 802.3 that EPON undoubtedly is
>>
>> Response: The Purpose clause will be deleted
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ***** IEEE 802 Executive Committee List ***** [mailto:STDS-802-SEC@ieee.org] On Behalf Of James P. K. Gilb
>> Sent: Monday, November 09, 2015 2:34 PM
>> To: STDS-802-SEC@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>> Subject: [802SEC] Comments on 802.3ca and 802.3cb PARs and CSD
>>
>>
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>>
>> My comments on the PARs are as follows:
>>
>>
>>
>> 802.3ca
>>
>>
>>
>> -General question: With wireless standards, we often specify a target
>>
>> operating range. Is there a reason why a target distance is not
>>
>> specified for NG EPON? It seems that the stakeholders would have
>>
>> some expectation of the length of fiber over which this standard can
>>
>> reliably deliver the advertised data rate. This distance should be stated in the scope
>>
>>
>>
>> 802.3b
>>
>>
>>
>> -General question: With wireless standards, we often specify a target
>>
>> operating range. Is there a reason why a target distance is not
>>
>> specified for this standard? It seems that the stakeholders would
>>
>> have some expectation of the backplane distance or copper twinax
>>
>> length over which this standard can reliably deliver the advertised
>>
>> data rate. This distance should be stated in the scope.
>>
>>
>>
>> CSD
>>
>>
>>
>> Compatibility: This 5C states that "shall be compatible with 2.5 Gb/s and 5 Gb/s MAC operation being defined in IEEE P802.3bz". If so, then the PAR (5.3) should reflect that this standard depends on the completion of IEEE P802.3bz.
>>
>>
>>
>> James Gilb
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------
>>
>> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
>>
>
> ----------
> This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.
----------
This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.