| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
James and all, The particular challenge with specifying distances in EPON is the heavy dependence on how the optical distribution network is laid out, i.e. how many network splits occur in the point-to-multipoint topology. In general, more splits means
less distance, and vice versa (up to a point). Therefore 802.3 standard provides nominal reach and split ratios that ultimately translate to optical power budgets. In NG-EPON we are striving to meet the same nominal reach and split ratios already defined
in the 802.3 standard. To accommodate your request, the Study Group revisited the comment this afternoon and agreed to augment the Scope statement with the following (see bold-red text relevant to your comment): The scope of this project is to amend IEEE Std 802.3 to add physical layer specifications and management parameters for symmetric and/or asymmetric operation at 25 Gb/s, 50 Gb/s, and 100 Gb/s MAC data rates on point-to-multipoint passive
optical networks with distance and split ratios consistent with those defined in IEEE Std 802.3-2015. Please let me know if this resolves your comment in a satisfactory manner. Curtis -----Original Message----- 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. > |