[802.3_NGAUTO] AW: [802.3_NGAUTO] Presentations for February Interim

[Stefan Buntz <stefan.buntz@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Title: Default Disclaimer Daimler AG

Hello Geoff,

 

Thanks for your clarification. Yes, still the 5G is a separate PHY and the 5G objective is still in my slides.

That's the most important point.

 

And as you said - if we down the road realize that 5G does not provide what we expect we need to react accordingly.

 

All the other explanation is just about the additional workload the group has to expect due to the 5G PHY - which I would expect to be very low.

 

Stefan

 

Gesendet von meinem Windows 10 Phone

 

Von: Geoff Thompson
Gesendet: Freitag, 17. Februar 2017 22:39
An: Buntz, Stefan (059)
Cc: Geoff Thompson; STDS-802-3-NGAUTO@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: Re: [802.3_NGAUTO] Presentations for February Interim

 

Stefan-

On Feb 17, 2017, at 12:18 PMPST, Stefan Buntz <stefan.buntz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

- Furthermore I kept the 5G objective, hence there is seems fewer support for this.  Here are my reasons for that: From my understanding even if this is an separate objective the 5G PHY could be derived from the 2.5G (e.g. use 2 pairs or upscaling of clock) or 10G (e.g. downscaling of clock, ...) PHY, So it would not necessarily be a completely separate PHY, but only a scaling of another PHY. And if none of these scaling approaches will work to allow an appropriate solution still the objective can be removed in TaskForce phase.

Even if a 5G PHY were derived from the 2.5 or the 10 in the manner you describe, 

even if it were a complete reuse of existing technology,

it would still be a separate PHY specification and a different speed for the MAC,

thus the objective should stay UNLESS there is consensus that 5G will not be done at all.

Best regards,

Geoff

If you are not the addressee, please inform us immediately that you have received this e-mail by mistake, and delete it. We thank you for your support.