| Change Request 1000 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 28A, 30 - Additional Selector field allocated to 802.5 | 05-Nov-98 |
| IEEE P802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes New status Ballot - (B) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.0 Working Group Ballot Comment resolution | 08-Nov-00 | |
| Comment #: 1 CommentType: Editorial Comment: My comment is editorial or at least a question as to the wisdom of putting a temporary thing like a URL into the body of a Standard as is being suggested for Table 28A-1. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: RemedyEnd: Response: Reject: The revisions of the standard itself have a limited life and the Standard has been through two revisions (IEEE Std 802.3-1998 and IEEE Std 802.3-2000), and has had multiple supplements, since the web site was launched. I therefore still believe this is something we should do and has the benefit of pointing the user to the latest information. ResponseEnd: Comment #: 2 CommentType: Editorial Comment: In addition to the suggested URL, also add the newer and shorter URL: http://www.ieee802.org/3/ CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Add above text. RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This request is included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1001 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Withdrawn | 3.5 - MAC Control frames and QTag Type field | 21-Apr-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Tom Mathey noted that Mick Seaman said that 802.1 were planning to put a similar statement in 802.1D. We should co-ordinate this change with them. Revision request returned to submitter to change text of note. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - No New status Incomplete - (I) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| It was noted that the text ‘shall’ in the request should be corrected to read ‘shall’. The proposed new wording should match that of 802.1D. Once checked we should the go to ballot. Until then status should remain “I”. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| The change request has already been implemented in the Y2K edition even thought it is current on hold. Add to Y2K errata list with the statement that "This change has been proposed (URL) and is on hold by the maintenance committee. It was add due to editorial error." | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| As noted in March 2001 this change had already been implemented in IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 even thought it was on hold. The following text is now included in the May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 to rectify this. Page 43: subclause 3.5.4, last sentence. Delete the text “MAC Control frames shall not bear QTag Type field.” NOTE - The text published in IEEE Std 802.3,2000 Edition, removed by the above, has been proposed by an IEEE P802.3 Revision Request, (URL -http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/maint_1001.pdf) but is currently on hold in the IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Committee. This was published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition in error. Need to review 802.1D and its maintenance update to see if a similar statement has been added. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Awaiting further input from the submitter. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Still awaiting further input from the submitter. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-02 | |
| Still awaiting further input from the submitter. | ||
| IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Interim meeting | 04-Oct-02 | |
| Still awaiting further input from the submitter. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Nov-02 | |
| Still awaiting further input from the submitter. There was a suggestion to just reject this request based on lack of feedback from the requester however Bob Noseworthy agreed to have a look at the request and see if it can be progressed. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Mar-03 | |
| Still awaiting further input from the submitter. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 17-Mar-04 | |
| The submitter withdrew this request. | ||
| Change Request 1002 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 31 - MAC Control sublayer functions and frames | 18-Jan-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes New status Ballot - (B) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.0 Working Group Ballot Comment resolution | 08-Nov-00 | |
| Comment #: 10 Change #: 1002 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) T Comment: RE #1002 This change has already been put into 802.3-2000. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Don't make any change. But I voted approve because the change is okay. It is just that it already has been made. RemedyEnd: Response: Accept: Thanks for pointing this out and we are currently investigating why this happened. ResponseEnd: Comment #: 18 (Observer comment) Change #: 1002 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) TR Comment: I agree with the intent of the revision, but there is no need to introduce any additional conformance requirement ("shall statement"). The "shall statement" in 31.5.3 is adequate. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Change the proposed change to read: "The MAC Control sublayer sinks all MAC Control frames." RemedyEnd: Response: Reject: This shall statement enforces the need to sink MAC Control frames at the MAC Control sublayer and as the request states this is already mandatory as the state machine shows this. We however note that a PICS entry is missing due to this additional shall statement. We will add the missing PICS entry. ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| The change request has already been implemented in the Y2K edition even thought it has yet to complete balloting. Add to Y2K errata list with the statement that "This proposed change is currently being balloted (URL) and was add due to editorial error." | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| As noted in March 2001 this change had already been implemented in IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 even thought it was still in ballot. The following text is now included in the May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 to rectify this. NOTE - The text published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition, replaced by the above, has been proposed by an IEEE P802.3 Revision Request, (URL -http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/maint_1002.pdf) which is currently being balloted as part of IEEE P802.3ag Maintenance Ballot #6.This was published in IEEE Std 802.3,2000 Edition in error. This request is included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1003 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Withdrawn | 4.2.7.4 - List of physical layer signals | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| More rationale was need for this request and it has been returned to the submitter for him to provide this text. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - No New status Incomplete - (I) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| No action. Still awaiting more rationale for this request from submitter. Action: Tom Mathey to contact Rich Seifert to help him draft further text for the ‘Rationale for revision’ section of the change request. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| The change request has already been implemented in the Y2K edition even thought it has yet to complete balloting. Add to Y2K errata list with the statement that "This proposed change is currently being balloted (URL) and was add due to editorial error." | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| As noted in March 2001 this change had already been implemented in IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 even thought it was on hold. The following text is now included in the May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 to rectify this. Page 64: subclause 4.2.7.4, item b). In the var list add the text “wasTransmitting: Boolean; {Indicates transmission in progress or just completed}” between the variable “transmitting ” and “collisionDetect.” NOTE - The deletion of the text, restored by the above, has been proposed by an IEEE P802.3 Revision Request, (URL -http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/maint_1003.pdf) which is currently on hold in the IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Committee. This was published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition in error. The request is a duplicate of material now covered in request 1021. The request is being Withdrawn by the maintenance committee. New status Withdrawn - (W) | ||
| Change Request 1004 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 5.2.4.1 - Missing footnote | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| While it is accepted that the note referred to is missing, it is not known what it said so more research is required into what the exact revision should be. The request is therefore returned to the submitter for investigation into what the note used to say. Geoff Thompson will provide assistance with previous copies of the standard. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - No New status Incomplete - (I) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| No action. Still awaiting clarification if the note was ever there and if so what it said. Action: Tom Mathey to contact Geoff Thompson to help him review earlier versions and drafts of the standard to clarify if the note was ever present and if so what it said. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Action: Tom Mathey to contact Geoff Thompson, after 27th March, to help him review earlier versions and drafts of the standard to clarify if the note was ever present and if so what it said. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Awaiting Tom to contact Geoff in reference to this change. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Geoff Thompson has reviewed the previous editions of IEEE Std 802.3. What he reported is as follows - The footnote is (from bottom of page 77 of the 1993 Edition) (8) 32 bit counter size specification is not a part of this ISO/IEC standard. Resolution of 32 vs. 64 bit counter size will be addressed during the further work required to develop this section into a specification sufficient for ISO/IEC interoperability requirements. As closely as I can tell there was a dual reference to this footnote. The first which was numbered in the old text of 5.2.3.1.1 which said: (1) Number of SQETestErrors: Recommended, ReadOnly, 32(8) bit counter In this line in a triumph of vagueness in style the "8" looks like an exponent to the 32. The send reference which I think is to the same thing (but it is a little vague) is the famous line we are looking at: CounterLarge=0..maxLarge--See footnote There is no Clause 5 in the 92 Edition In the first printed edition of Layer Management IEEE Std 802.3h-1990... There is no footnote nor mention of 64 bit counters at all that I can find. Based on the above the proposed revision text will be changed to read - Add a footnote that reads "Example counter size; for information on how to size counters see 30.3". The rationale for revision should be changed to read "The sentence 'counterLarge = 0..maxLarge -- See footnote.;' refers to a footnote which does not exist, this change restore the footnote. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes Ballot - (B) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Will be included in next ballot package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-02 | |
| Awaiting ballot. To be included in IEEE P802.3aj ballot. | ||
| IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Interim meeting | 04-Oct-02 | |
| Include in IEEE P802.3aj ballot package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Nov-02 | |
| Included in IEEE P802.3aj ballot package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3aj Maintenance #7 Interim meeting | 09-Jan-03 | |
| D2.0 Comments: CR 1004 Comment Type TR Page 1004-2 line 54: The footnote does not provide useful information - 30.3 doesn't giveinformation on how to size counters unless you consider the increment rate to be suchinformation. If that is what is meant, make the footnote state that 30.3 gives counter incrementrates. Also, why does the note start "Example counter size" as there is no example? SuggestedRemedy Either make the footnote more informative or delete "See footnote" If See footnote is retained, itshould probably be put in the brackets used for comments in text as it isn't currently properpseudo-Pascal. Response ACCEPT IN PRINCIPLE. Change the footnote to read 'The CounterLarge declaration is an example of how to declare acounter. This particular example produces a 32 bit counter.The current footnote reference will also be formatted to be a comment. Include in D2.1 Working Group recirculation ballot package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Mar-03 | |
| No D2.1 Working Group recirculation ballot comments received. Include in IEEE P802.3aj Sponsor Ballot package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3aj Maintenance #7 Interim meeting | 24-Jun-03 | |
| No D3.0 Sponsor ballot comments received. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 23-Jul-03 | |
| Expected to be published as part of IEEE P802.3aj which will be forwarded for approval at September standard board meeting. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Nov-03 | |
| Published in IEEE Std 802.3aj-2003. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1005 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 8.2.3 - Messages sent on CI Circuit | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: Tom Mathey to consult technical experts Alan Flatman and Pat Thaler. Why is the Clause 10 parallel text not the same. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| No action. Still awaiting submitter to contact technical experts. Action: Tom Mathey to consult technical experts Alan Flatman and Pat Thaler. Why is the Clause 10 parallel text not the same. Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.0 Working Group Ballot Comment resolution | 08-Nov-00 | |
| Comment #: 3 Change #: 1005 CommentType: Technical Comment: Due to lack of attention to detail, the recommended text provided by Pat Thaler at the July 2000 La Jolla Plenary meeting was not fowarded to the comment database. Text is provided below. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Replace sentence ‘When no state is asserted the messages signal_quality_error, MAU_available are sent.’ with‘ When no state is asserting message signal_quality_error, the message MAU_available is sent.’ RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: Comment #: 11 Change #: 1005 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) TR Comment: RE: 1035 The text here is not the revision that was approved in maintenance. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Replace with the agreed upon text. RemedyEnd: Response: Accept: The agreed text is contained in comment #3. (Note that while this comment lists Revision Request 1035 it is believed that this comment refers to Revision Request 1005 as that is the comments that addresses subclause 8.2.3). ResponseEnd: Comment #: 19 (Observer comment) Change #: 1005 Clause: 8 Subclause: 8.2.3 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) T Comment: 10BASE5 networks are of historical interest only. We should consider deprecating the entire clause, rather than looking for inconsistencies in some abstract architectural description of an obsolete transceiver. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Forego the revision request, and consider deprecating Clauses 8 (10BASE5), 11 (10BROAD36), 12 (1BASE5), and 16 (10BASE-FP). RemedyEnd: Response: Accept in Principle: While we will continue progressing this Revision Request, in addition we will add a request to place the text ‘This PHY/MAU is not recommended for new installations’ in Clauses 8 (10BASE5), 11 (10BROAD36), 12 (1BASE5), 16 (10BASE-FP), 23 (100BASE-T4) and 32 (100BASE-T2). The text “PHY” and “MAU” will be used as appropriate for the clause it appears in. ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| The change request has already been implemented in the Y2K edition even thought it has yet to complete balloting. Add to Y2K errata list with the statement that "This proposed change is currently being balloted (URL) and was add due to editorial error." | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| As noted in March 2001 this change had already been implemented in IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 even thought it was still in ballot. The following text is now included in the May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 to rectify this. Page 143: subclause 8.2.3, last paragraph. “When no state is asserted the messages signal_quality_error, MAU_input_idle are sent.” should read “When no state is asserted the messages signal_quality_error, MAU_available are sent.” NOTE - The text published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition, replaced by the above, has been proposed by an IEEE P802.3 Revision Request, (URL - http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/maint_1005.pdf) which is currently on hold in the IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Committee. This was published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition in error. This request is included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1006 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Annex D.5 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1007 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 4.2.3.1.2 - Incorrect reference | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1008 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 7.2.1.1.5 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: IEEE Editor: This one is a style issue. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1009 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 7.2.2.2 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| It was noted that this change request related to 7.2.2.2.2 rather than 7.2.2.2 as stated in the change request at present. The request will be updated to reflect the correct subclause. Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1010 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 9.7.1, 9.7.2 - Duplicate clauses | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: Tom Mathey to check previous revisions of 802.3 to determine when the duplication of these clauses first occurred and to ensure the duplication did not also cause some other text to be removed. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| No action. Still awaiting confirmation when the duplication of these clauses first occurred and to assurance that when the duplication occurred it did not also cause some other text to be removed Action: Tom Mathey to contact Geoff Thompson to help him review earlier editions and drafts of the standard to clarify if the note was ever present and if so what it said. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Technical Expert consulted - Geoff Thompson. The repeats of the two subclauses are indeed simply duplicates, this is an errata. The repeats have been removed from the Y2K edition. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1011 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.4.2 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1012 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 12.4.2 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1013 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 12.5.3.1.1 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: Tom Mathey to check earlier editions to see when this was correct. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Technical Expert consulted - Geoff Thompson: See previous page for technical verification. The Peak Output Voltage does not exceed 3.65. Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1014 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 14.3.1.2 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1015 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 20.2.2.2.2 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to correct typo in change request. Then to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Action: David Law Add to Y2K errata list under 'Minor editorial errata'. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Action: David Law to include in an update to Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000 under 'Minor editorial errata'. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| To be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1016 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Annex H.4.1 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Change competed correctly in Y2K edition. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1017 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Fig 32-1 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: David Law to do Graphics work for IEEE Editor. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Awaiting additional change text Errata - (CE) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to do Graphics work for IEEE Editor. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 14-Mar-01 | |
| Action: David Law Provide revised Figure to IEEE Editor. Add to Y2K errata list under 'Minor editorial errata'. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Action: David Law to redraw Figures 23-1, 24-1, 27-1, 28-2 and 32-1 as they all have this error. These redraws will be included in an update to Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. New status Errata - (E). | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| To be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1018 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 23.2.1.1 & 23.4.1.1 - Incorrect symbol in diagram | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Assignment symbol problem. A constancy check is required. Style issue (should be put in the style manual) “Assignments” in state diagrams are equals in text. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1019 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Withdrawn | 28.3.1 - State diagram variables error | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| As per the e-mail from Bob Noseworthy this change request is incorrect and the text as it stands is correct. The requestor withdrew the request. Editorial/Technical - N/A Ballot Required - N/A Ready for ballot - N/A New status Withdrawn - (W) | ||
| Change Request 1019a Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Errata | 28.3.1 - State diagram variables error | 20-May-01 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This correction is published in the May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| To be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1020 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Annex 22A - Incorrect reference | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1021 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Fig 2-1b - Incorrect physical layer signal | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes New status Ballot - (B) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.0 Working Group Ballot Comment resolution | 08-Nov-00 | |
| Comment #: 12 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) E Comment: RE: 1021 Figure is now 2-2 and change is already in 2K. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: No change needed. RemedyEnd: Response: Accept: Thanks for pointing this out and we are currently investigating why this happened. ResponseEnd: Comment #: 12 Change #: 1021 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) E Comment: RE: 1021 Figure is now 2-2 and change is already in 2K. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: No change needed. RemedyEnd: Response: Accept: Thanks for pointing this out and we are currently investigating why this happened. ResponseEnd: Comment #: 20 (Observer comment) Change #: 1021 CommentTye: (E, T, ER, or TR) TR Comment: Contrary to the assertion of the requester, "wasTransmitting" is indeed defined in the interface to the Physical Layer. See 802.3, subclause 4.2.7.4 (b), which lists the components of this interface. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Do not implement the proposed revision. RemedyEnd: Response: Reject: “wasTransmitting” is not in 4.2.7.4 (b), only “transmitting”. “wasTransmitting” is used within the MAC only and is generated in Process Deference, not an input from the PHY. ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.1 Working Group Recirculation Ballot Comment resolution | 12-Jan-01 | |
| CommentID: 1 Clause: Comment 1021 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) TR Comment: Either I am seeing words that aren't there, or something has changed since my copy of 802.3 was printed. Looking at 802.3-1998, subclause 4.2.7.4 (Summary of Interlayer Interfaces), page 61, fourth and fifth lines from the bottom of the page: transmitting: Boolean; {Indicates outgoing bits} wasTransmitting: Boolean; {Indicates transmission in progress or just completed} These entries are present under "The interface to the Physical Layer, defined in ...". The resolution to my comment said, ""wasTransmitting" is not in 4.2.7.4 (b), only "transmitting". I reiterate that "wasTransmitting" is there, and that the original commenters request should not be implemented. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Do not implement the proposed revision, or show me that this section no longer contains the indicated line of Pascal. RemedyEnd: Response: Reject. The commenter is indeed correct that “wasTransmitting” is in subclause 4.2.7.4, item b). It appears the response to the comment in the previous ballot (D1.0) was incorrect. What the change is stating is that wasTransmitting is not an input from the Physical Layer and therefore should not be shown as such in Figure 2-1b. This is indeed true, in the Pascal on Page 66 of 802.3-1998, in process deference, wasTransmitting is assigned a value (wasTransmitting = transmitting) hence it cannot be an input from the Physical Layer and a search of 802.3-1998 shows that wasTransmitting only appears in process deference. Further, while subclause 4.2.7.4 item b) lists wasTransmitting, it states it is summarising the interface defined in 4.3.3, yet 4.3.3 does not include wasTransmitting. Due to this the change request is still valid and should in fact be augmented to add an additional change that the variable definition for wasTransmitting should be removed from subclause 4.2.7.4 item b) and placed in the deference process. ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This request is Included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. The following text is included in May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. Page 34: Figure 2-2. Replace Figure 2-2 with the following gore. NOTE - The deletion of the wasTransmitting arrow, restored by the above, has been proposed by an IEEE P802.3 Revision Request, (URL -http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/maint_1021.pdf) which is currently being balloted as part of IEEE P802.3ag Maintenance Ballot #6. This was published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition in error. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1022 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 32.1 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| The correction should read 10**10, not 10**-10. The change request will be corrected. Once corrected the request should go forward as an errata. Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1023 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Withdrawn | Annex 31B.3.4.4 - Incorrect equation | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: Tom Mathey to contact Rich Seifert to confirm that this is indeed a Errata. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: Tom Mathey to contact Rich Seifert to confirm that this is indeed a Errata. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This change was incorrectly published in IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. The following text is included in May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. Page 1477: Figure 31B-2. “(DA ?reserved_multicast_address +phys_Address)” should read “DA ?(reserved_multicast_address +phys_Address)” NOTE - The text published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition removed by the above has been proposed by an IEEE P802.3 Revision Request, (URL -http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/maint_1023.pdf) which is currently on hold in the IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Committee. This was published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition in error. Awaiting response from Tom Mathey. Action - David Law to contact Tom Mathey for an update. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Action: Geoff Thompson to review earlier versions and drafts of the standard to clarify if there has been any change to the format of this equation. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| E-mail from Geoff Thompson in response to action item. I have looked on the balloted draft, the figure matches what is published (no surprise since it is unlikely that FIGs get edited during prep for publication. I have examined the equations. I find that the current text is technically adequate. There is no ambiguity in the term: transmission_in_progress = false * DA = reserved_multicast_address + phys_Address There is, however, a stylistic inconsistency between this expression and the term on the right hand side of the diagram. I have checked with Rich Seifert. He agrees. Bottom line, it is OK (i.e to support editorial consistency within the same diagram) for the parens to go in. It is an editorial change. The new would appropriately be: transmission_in_progress = false * (DA = reserved_multicast_address + phys_Address) New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-02 | |
| No update. | ||
| IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Interim meeting | 04-Oct-02 | |
| Market as an Errata however this same equation is subject to change in request 1089 which also performs an number of other changes to Figure 31B-2. Due to this duplication the requester has withdrawn this request. New status: Withdrawn - (W) | ||
| Change Request 1024 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Withdrawn | Fig 6-1 - Scope of figure | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| After a short discussion of this request Tom Mathey, the originator of this request, withdrew it. Editorial/Technical - N/A Ballot Required - N/A Ready for ballot - N/A New status Withdrawn - (W) | ||
| Change Request 1025 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 22.7.3.4 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1026 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 1.2.1 - Typo | 08-Nov-99 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| The sentence is correct when the word ‘required’ is changed to ‘require’. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Update errata sheet with this under the 'minor editorial'. E-mail from Geoff Thompson dated 26th July 2001 This paragraph does not exist in the initial edition of 802.3 (1985). The typo "required" does show up in the 1990 ISO edition. In the first supplement to 802.3 (ANSI/IEEE Std 802.3a,b,c and e-1988) ...the text was added to 1.2.1 It says "required" So, the error has been in place since the first time it was published. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| To be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1027 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 36.2.5.1.4 - Equation typo | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact Rich Taborek to confirm that if the PI symbol should be an equal or not-equal symbol. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Bob Noseworthy acted as the technical expert for this change. He stated that the symbol should be a not equal symbol. Action: David Law to update change request then contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This change was published incorrectly in IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. The following text is included in May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. Page 984: subclause 36.2.5.1.4, definition of the function VOID(x)should read VOID(x) x Π/D/, /T/, /R/, /K28.5/. Substitutes /V/ on a per code-group basis as requested by the GMII. If [TX_EN = FALSE * TX_ER = TRUE * TXD != (0000 1111)], then return /V/; Else if [TX_EN = TRUE * TX_ER = TRUE ], then return /V/; Else return x. NOTE: The single character Not Equals symbol is used in place of the two symbols != above in the published errata sheet. The revision is still open as the errata has yet to be corrected. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| To be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1028 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 40.4.2.2 - Incorrect reference | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: David Law to identify and contact a technical expert involved in the 1000BASE-T TX block and have them confirm that this indeed is a errata. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| E-mail from Larry Rennie (23-Apr-2001) - Yes, I agree with the recommended change. In addition, I recommend that the specific paragraph number for "PMA Transmit function" be inserted into the last sentence of 40.4.2.6. This would change the last sentence of 40.4.2.6 to read: " The received clock signal is supplied to the PMA Transmit function (40.4.2.2) by received_clock.". E-mail from Bob Noseworthy (23-Apr-2001) - I agree with the comment and consider it errata. 40.4.2.2 should point to 40.4.2.6 not 40.4.2.5. Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1029 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 40.3.4, Fig 40-9 - PCS Transmit state diagram | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| This appears to be a errata however this needs to be confirmed by multiple technical experts involved in writing 1000BASE-T. Action: David Law to identify and contact those involved in the 1000BASE-T TX State Machine and have them confirm that this indeed this is an errata. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| It appears that this is an error between the Sponsor Ballot approved draft (D6.0) and the published document. The state machine should be as balloted. Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1030 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 40.3.1.3.3 - Error in Sc _n [7:4] equation | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| This also appears to be a errata however again this needs to be confirmed by multiple technical experts involved in writing 1000BASE-T. Action: David Law to identify and contact those involved in the 1000BASE-T side-stream scrambler and have them confirm that this is a errata. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: Bob Noseworthy to contact Sailesh Rao for comment on this proposed change. Action: David Law to include comment from Sailesh in the request then forward the request for ballot. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - N/A New status Ballot - (B) Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This request is included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. This change was published incorrectly in IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. The following text is included in May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. Page 1095: subclause 40.3.1.3.3, rest line of rest equation. Sxn [3:0 ] if (tx_enablen – 2 == 1) should read Sxn [3:0 ] if (tx_enablen = 1) NOTE - The text published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition, replaced by the above, has been proposed by an IEEE P802.3 Revision Request, (URL -http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/maint_1030.pdf) which is currently being balloted as part of IEEE P802.3ag Maintenance Ballot #6.This was published in IEEE Std 802.3,2000 Edition in error. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1031 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 40.12.9 - Error in formula in PICS | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| While this is probably editorial this needs to be confirmed and until then will be characterised a technical and passed to a technical expert for review. Action: David Law to identify and contact those involved in the 1000BASE-T and have them confirm that this is a errata. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Consult with Technical Experts - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1032 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 22.2.4.3.2 to 22.3.4.2.6 - Incorrect subclause cross reference | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1033 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Fig 32-17a & 32-17b - Typo | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: David Law to do Graphics work for IEEE Editor. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Awaiting additional change text Errata - (CE) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| We believe that this is a cross platform problem, refer to voted test pdf printed from a PC. Warning for all future annotated scanned drawings to for this type of error. Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1034 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Table 30-1d & 30-1e - Typo | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata 0 (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to contact IEEE Editor to ensure that this errata is included in the 2000 edition and is also place on the web site. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| Change published in 802.3-2000. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1035 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Fig 7-5 - Variable typo | 05-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| Action: David Law to check earlier editions. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Awaiting Technical expert - (T) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Action: David Law to check earlier editions. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This change was published incorrectly in IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. The following text is included in May 2001 Corrections Sheet for IEEE Std. 802.3-2000. Page 110: Figure 7-5, “START ” state [set output_in_progress ] should read [set output_in_process ] NOTE - The text published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition, replaced by the above, has been proposed by an IEEE P802.3 Revision Request, (URL -http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/maint_1035.pdf) which is currently on hold in the IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Committee. This was published in IEEE Std 802.3, 2000 Edition in error. Action: David Law to check earlier editions. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| A review of Figure 7-5 in the current and previous editions of IEEE Std. 802.3 showed - 1996 Edition - output_in_process 1998 Edition - output_in_process 2000 Edition - output_in_progress and output_in_process This showed that in fact that footnote, and one state in Figure 7-5, was in error. Due to this the following items of the change request will be modified to read as follows. Clause Number: 7.2.4.6 and Figure 7-5 Clause Title: Carrier Sense function Proposed revision text: In the footnote associated with subclause 7.2.4.6 and Figure 7-5 change all occurrences of 'output_in_progress' to 'output_in_process'. Rationale for revision: The variable is defined as output_in_process, see Figure 7-5 in IEEE Std. 802.3-1998 and IEEE Std. 802.3-1996. Editorial/Technical - Editorial Ballot Required - No Ready for ballot - N/A New status Errata - (E) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| This change request has been partially completed. The figure 7-5 'output_in_progress' has been changed to 'output_in_process' however this still have not been corrected in subclause 7.2.4.6. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-02 | |
| No update. | ||
| IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Interim meeting | 04-Oct-02 | |
| Due to IEEE Process requirements this will have to be balloted. Include in IEEE P802.3aj ballot package. New status: Ballot - (B) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Nov-02 | |
| Included in IEEE P802.3aj ballot package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3aj Maintenance #7 Interim meeting | 09-Jan-03 | |
| Passed Working Group ballot with no comments. Move to Sponsor ballot with IEEE P802.3aj. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Mar-03 | |
| Include in IEEE P802.3aj Sponsor Ballot package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3aj Maintenance #7 Interim meeting | 24-Jun-03 | |
| No D3.0 Sponsor ballot comments received. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 23-Jul-03 | |
| Expected to be published as part of IEEE P802.3aj which will be forwarded for approval at September standard board meeting. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Nov-03 | |
| Published in IEEE Std 802.3aj-2003. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1036 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 25.3 & 25.4 - Update 100BASE-T to reference Cat-5 | 14-Mar-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance conference call | 12-May-00 | |
| The change request needs to have the changes to the PICS it requires added. Once these have been provided the change is ready to go to ballot. Action: Terry Cobb to provide the addition change text for this request in relation to the PICS. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - N/A New status Awaiting additional change text Ballot - (CB) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| New PICS text has been supplied by Terry. Action: David Law to add new text to change request, after that ready for ballot. Editorial/Technical - Technical Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - N/A New status Ballot - (B) Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.0 Working Group Ballot Comment resolution | 08-Nov-00 | |
| Comment #: 4 Change #: 1036 CommentType: Technical Comment: This addition contains 6 shall statements without a corresponding entry in the PICS CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: For the following shall statements, add an entry in the PICS 25.4.6.2.1 two places 25.4.6.2.3 two places 25.4.6.2.4 25.4.6.3.1 RemedyEnd: Response: Accept in Principal: Other changes have been made to this Revision Request due to comment resolution, and these changes have removed some ‘shall’ statements. The update of the PICS in response to this comment will take into account these changes. ResponseEnd: Comment #: 8 Change #: 1036 CommentType: E Comment: No units with equation CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Add "dB" at the end of equation RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: Comment #: 13 Change #: 1036 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) E Comment: RE: 1036 - use "...specifications...are..." or "...specification...is..." CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: CommenterName: Rich Seifert CommenterEmail: rich@richseifert.com CommenterPhone: (408) 395-5700 CommenterCompany: Networks & Communications Comment #: 21 (Observer comment) Change #: 1036 Clause: 25 Subclause: 25.3, 25.4 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) TR Comment: The proposed changes cause a number of problems, both for existing cable plants and existing transceivers. A change to the cable specification can make existing (conformant) cable plants now non-conformant. As many end users contractually bind installers and/or maintenance personnel to meet a published standard, this change can open the door for considerable confusion as to whether a given site conforms to the standard. Second, the BER requirement is stated backwards from the way a BER is normally presented. Usually, the requirement is on the electronics (i.e., the transceiver) to deliver data with a BER not exceeding some level, under specified noise conditions. This change would place a requirement on the *cable system* to present noise such that a transceiver will not deliver data exceeding the given BER. Unfortunately, this is both untestable (i.e., there is no way to test a cable plant to see if the BER will exceed 10^-9 when a worst-case transceiver is put into the system), and can cause existing, conformant cable plants to now become non-conformant. One cannot, years after a standard is approved and tens-of-millions of transceivers installed in the field, suddenly add a requirement that the cable plant and transceiver must meet some minimum BER requirement. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Do not implement the proposed revision. RemedyEnd: Response: The response is in two parts, the first part addresses the first paragraph of you comment, the second part addresses the second part of your comment. Reject: The cable plant in ANSI TP_PMD and IEEE 802.3 Clause 25 specify Category 5 UTP as the compliant channel or link segment. When ANSI TP_PMD was published EIA/TIA or ISO 11801 had not completed their work on Category 5 or Class D links. Since then a compliant Category 5 UTP channel is now specified in the Standard EIA/TIA 568 TSB-67 and TSB-70 and are the same requirements as the proposed change. The requirements in EIA/TIA are the only published specifications for a compliant Category 5 UTP channel and are the only requirements that have been used to certify a cable plant as Category 5. Accept: The requirements for BER and cable systems will be removed. In 25.4.6.3 the text ‘... a 100BASE-TX PHY shall meet a 10^-9 BER in the ...’ will be changed to read ‘... a 100BASE-TX PHY should operate in the ...’. In 25.4.6.3.1 the text ‘... link segment shall not exceed ...’ will be changed to read text ‘... link segment should not exceed ...’. ResponseEnd: Comment #: 24 Change #: 1036 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) Comment: insert "(Class D)" after ISO/IEC 11801:1995. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: See above RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: Comment #: 24 Change #: 1036 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) Comment: Delete "at least" (don't think you can or should exceed 100m). CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: See above RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This request is included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1037 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 1, 26 - Replace LCF-PMD normative references | 17-Apr-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Tech Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes New status Ballot - (B) Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.1 Working Group Recirculation Ballot Comment resolution | 12-Jan-01 | |
| RevisionNumber: Line: Page: CommentType: (E) Comment: IEC 61754-4, Interface 4-2 is for simplex SC connectors not duplex SC connectors CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: Replace 'Interface 4.2' with 'Interface 4.3' RemedyEnd: Response: Accept in principle We accept that it is correct that interface 4-2 is not the duplex SC plug, but incorrect that interface 4-2 is the simplex SC plug. Rather, interface 4-2 is the simplex SC adapter. Interface 4-1 is the simplex plug. For duplex SC plugs the correct reference is interface 4-3. For duplex SC adapters the correct reference is interface 4-4. Since clause 26 specifies the MDI, it is appropriate to refer to the adapter specification. This means reference interface 4-4. Here is a summary of the interface designations: 4-1 = simplex SC plug 4-2 = simplex SC adapter 4-3 = duplex SC plug 4-4 = duplex SC adapter. So reference should be IEC 61754-4 Interface 4-4. In addition, subclause 38.11.3 ‘Medium Dependent Interface (MDI)’ references IEC 61754-4 Interface 4-2 in relation to a Duplex SC MDI connector so is also incorrect. The change request will therefore be modified to include the correction of this subclause. ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| The following comment was received on Change Request #1037 during the D1.2 Working Group re-circulation ballot. CommentID: 1 CommenterName: Mike Dudek CommenterEmail: mdudek@cieloinc.com CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) T Comment: The Duplex SC referenced in the IEC standard is a solidly connected plug which requires tighter tolerances between the two SC receptacles than are contained in the Fiber Channel description. (Which assumes the two individual SC's are "yoked" together with some compliance in the connector plug). I believe the change suggested will cause problems to some existing transceivers ie there will be an impact on existing networks. Much discussion took place on this topic in Fiber Channel in their FC-PI revision with the decision that the reference could not be called out as is, but needed to include a modification to the tolerance between the two SC receptacles. Response: Accept in principle. A number of e-mail discussion took place over the connector specification referenced by FDDI and the 1Gb/s specification within IEEE Std 802.2-2000. During these discussions an additional IEC connector specification, IEC 60874, has been identified. These discussion however were taking time and to ensure timely resolution of the remaining Change Request in the P802.3ag package Change Request #1037 will be removed from the package and the remaining request will move forward to sponsor ballot. Change Request #1037, or its successor, will be placed in the next maintenance ballot package. As this request seem to have some technical issues within it status has been set to incomplete. Action - David Law and Geoff Thompson to contact Tad and Mike Dudak about this change request. (Tom Lindsay also volunteered later on in the meeting week). New status Incomplete - (I) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| During discussion of the 1000BASE-X specification it was found that the specification was indeed intended to be a 'duplex SC' meeting the dimension and interface specifications IEC 61754-4, Interface 4-4. This aligns with Mike Dudek's comment. Due to this the changes within the request related to Clause 38 are incorrect and should be removed. It was also agreed that the new specification for 100BASE-FX should be the same as that for 1000BASE-X hence the change request returns to its original form. New status Ballot - (B) | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| The spelling of Mike Dudek's name was corrected in the July action item. Awaiting ballot. To be included in IEEE P802.3aj ballot. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-02 | |
| Awaiting ballot. To be included in IEEE P802.3aj ballot. | ||
| IEEE P802.3 Maintenance Interim meeting | 04-Oct-02 | |
| Include in IEEE P802.3aj ballot package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Nov-02 | |
| Included in IEEE P802.3aj ballot package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3aj Maintenance #7 Interim meeting | 09-Jan-03 | |
| Passed Working Group ballot with no comments. Move to Sponsor ballot with IEEE P802.3aj. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Mar-03 | |
| Include in IEEE P802.3aj Sponsor Ballot package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3aj Maintenance #7 Interim meeting | 24-Jun-03 | |
| D3.0 Comment: This revision creates a problem: 26.4.1 Medium Dependent Interface (MDI) Change subclause 26.4.1 as follows: [Maintenance request 1037 - http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/request/maint_1037.pdf] The 100BASE-FX medium dependent interface (MDI) shall conform to one of the following connectors. The recommended alternative is the Low Cost Fibre Optical Interface Connector. a) The duplex SC connector as specified in IEC 61754-4 [B25] and IEC 61754-4, Interface 4-2. (See 38.11.3). b) Media Interface Connector (MIC) as specified in fiber-PMD 7 and Annex F. When the MIC is used, the receptacle shall be keyed as "M". c) Optical Medium Connector Plug and Socket (commonly called ST connector) as specified in 15.3.2. The problem is that we have deleted the words "Low Cost Fibre Optical Interface Connector" which is preferred! (except in the PICS). SuggestedRemedy Response ACCEPT IN PRINCIPLE. See comment #12. Comment #12 response reads: Change the first paragraph of 26.5.4 to read: "The 100BASE-FX medium dependent interface (MDI) shall conform to one of the following connectors. The recommended alternative is the duplex SC Connector." Change the Feature column text of item FSC in subclause 26.5.4 to read: "Supports duplex SC Connector" | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 23-Jul-03 | |
| Expected to be published as part of IEEE P802.3aj which will be forwarded for approval at September standard board meeting. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Nov-03 | |
| Published in IEEE Std 802.3aj-2003. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1038 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 1, 25 - Correct bad references | 17-Apr-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Tech Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes New status Ballot - (B) Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This request is included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1039 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 28.3.1 & 28.3.4 - Next Page Exchange State Machine | 28-Jun-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Tech Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes New status Ballot - (B) Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.0 Working Group Ballot Comment resolution | 08-Nov-00 | |
| Comment #: 14 Change #: 1039, 1040, 1041 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) E Comment: RE: 1039, 1040, and 1041 - Clause 28.3.4 contains a number of large state machines over several pages. Checking these changes was made burdensome because the text of the proposed revision does not identify the Figure number or name but only the state name. This also introduces potential ambiguity. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: In the future, identify the state machine by name and figure number. RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This request is included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1040 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 28.3.1 & 28.3.4 - Next Page Exchange State Machine | 28-Jun-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Tech Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes New status Ballot - (B) Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.0 Working Group Ballot Comment resolution | 08-Nov-00 | |
| Comment #: 14 Change #: 1039, 1040, 1041 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) E Comment: RE: 1039, 1040, and 1041 - Clause 28.3.4 contains a number of large state machines over several pages. Checking these changes was made burdensome because the text of the proposed revision does not identify the Figure number or name but only the state name. This also introduces potential ambiguity. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: In the future, identify the state machine by name and figure number. RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 10-Jul-01 | |
| This request is included in IEEE P802.3ag LMSC Sponsor Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 11-Nov-01 | |
| Assuming approval of IEEE P802.3ag at the December Standards Board meeting this request should be included in the 2002 edition of IEEE Std. 802.3. | ||
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 13-Mar-02 | |
| Change published in IEEE Std 802.3-2002. New status Published - (P) | ||
| Change Request 1041 Revision History | ||
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 28.3.1 & 28.3.4 - Next Page Exchange State Machine | 28-Jun-00 |
| IEEE 802.3 Maintenance plenary week meeting | 12-Jul-00 | |
| Editorial/Technical - Tech Ballot Required - Yes Ready for ballot - Yes New status Ballot - (B) Included in IEEE P802.3ag Ballot Package. | ||
| IEEE P802.3ag/D1.0 Working Group Ballot Comment resolution | 08-Nov-00 | |
| Comment #: 14 Change #: 1039, 1040, 1041 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) E Comment: RE: 1039, 1040, and 1041 - Clause 28.3.4 contains a number of large state machines over several pages. Checking these changes was made burdensome because the text of the proposed revision does not identify the Figure number or name but only the state name. This also introduces potential ambiguity. CommentEnd: SuggestedRemedy: In the future, identify the state machine by name and figure number. RemedyEnd: Response: Accept ResponseEnd: Comment #: 15 Change #: 1041 CommentType: (E, T, ER, or TR) T | ||