Re: [802.3_EPOC] Continuing work on EPOC objectives - OBJECTIVE 4
Marek,
As I've stated before on this reflector, I think the DOCSIS "expected plant conditions" are a great starting point (even ending point perhaps) for what 'baseline plant conditions' are. (Prior to our Newport Beach meeting I sent the DOCSIS relevant specifications to the reflector). Split count and distance are less critical in defining the PMD since active coax differs from the PON in that the distance and split ratio do not dictate the RF conditions in the same way as the PON does for optical conditions.
I heard no objections to starting with the DOCIS expected plant conditions the last time we discussed this, but the discussion died out as other topics heated up and there was no decision one way or another.
Thanks,
Hal
-----Original Message-----
From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 7:31 AM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Continuing work on EPOC objectives - OBJECTIVE 4
Kevin,
The wording "baseline plant conditions" is still there.
I believe if we specify what these " baseline plant conditions" are, we do not need to change the wording in Objective 4 at all.
Typically, we define some parameters of the said baseline plant, even if the parameters include distance, split count and just generic plant type (single mode fiber for EPON). For EPoC, it might be enough to define e.g. maximum loss at specific frequency component or cable type to be used as baseline.
We need some performance markers to measure the future proposals for PMDs, setting the expectation of EPoC performance.
Marek
-----Original Message-----
From: Noll, Kevin [mailto:kevin.noll@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 30 April 2012 12:41
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Continuing work on EPOC objectives - OBJECTIVE 4
Another important topic is OBJECTIVE 4.
We have general agreement on the data rate and bandwidth and concept of scalability (up and down). However, the discussions so far have not settled on how to set this objective without specifying the specific channel characteristics, leaving that open for further work in the TF.
My concern with the text, as currently written, is that it requires some explanation for those that haven't been in the conversation. This held true during the last conference call and in most every discussion I've had about this. I would like to make the objective a little more obvious in its meaning.
Consider this a solicitation for a better statement of the objective.
4. Provide at least one physical layer specification that is capable of operating at :
A baseline data rate of at least 1 Gbps at the PHY service interface when transmitting in 120 MHz, or less, of assigned spectrum under baseline plant conditions; data rates lower than the baseline rate when transmitting in less than
120 MHz of assigned spectrum or when plant conditions prevent a higher data rate; data rates higher than the baseline rate and up to 10 Gbps when transmitting in more than 120 MHz of assigned spectrum or when plant conditions support a higher data rate;
--kan--
--
Kevin A. Noll
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1