Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

[802.3_100GCU] Suggested practices for reporting simulation results



Adam,
 
Here's my feedback:
 
1) Parameters to be included in addition to your list:
Link: Bit Encoding (e.g. 64B/66B. This is probably the default value)
Transmitter: pre-emphasis technique and levels (e.g. 2-tap FIR or 3-tap FIR)
Receiver: Equalization technique and number of taps (e.g. LMS with fractionally-spaced FFE)
Channel: Number of NEXT and FEXT sources. Package Crosstalk.
 
2) Parameters needing clarification:
Tx and Rx deterministic jitter distribution: are you referring to normal or uniform etc.? If so, is it necessary?
 
Also, I think that having the channel single-ended resistance and capacitance values is a good idea.
 
Please add me to the upcoming teleconference on this topic. Thanks,
 
Ziad Hatab
Vitesse
 

 

From: Healey, Adam B (Adam) [mailto:Adam.Healey@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 5:47 PM
To: STDS-802-3-100GCU@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.3_100GCU] Suggested practices for reporting simulation results

 

Colleagues,

 

At the January 2011 interim meeting of the IEEE 802.3 100 Gb/s Backplane and Copper Cable study group, I accepted an action item to…

 

“Lead discussion (reflector or ad hoc) to establish practices for reporting simulation results by March meeting.”

 

This was assigned in the context of the presentation “Suggested practices for reporting simulation results” which proposed that we foster consistent and complete disclosure of the simulation conditions.

 

The aim is to summarize the essential parameters that influence the result of a simulation and request that the values of those parameters be reported so that simulation results may be understood in their full context. A starting point for such a list was included in the aforementioned presentation.

 

This e-mail is being sent to solicit feedback on that list. I would expect feedback to take any of the following forms.

a) Parameters whose definition needs to be clarified.

b) Parameters to be included

c) Parameters to be omitted

 

I would like to stress that is not an objective to set specific values for any of these parameters at this time, or dictate what must be included in a simulation for it to be considered “valid”. This is simply a list of recommended items to be included in a report, e.g. whether or not they are included and what value was used for those that are included.

 

In addition to your feedback, I would like to earmark time for a teleconference to consolidate thoughts on this matter and prepare an update for the study group meeting scheduled to take place during the March plenary week. I propose that this meeting take place Thursday, March 3 at noon EST (9 am PST). If you would be interested in participating in this meeting, please let me know so that I can allocate teleconference bridge ports accordingly.

 

In the meantime, I look forward to any feedback you might have on this topic. Please utilize the reflector for discussion.

 

Thank you,

 

Adam Healey

LSI Corporation