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

Re: [8023-POEP] Changes to draft 2.0 - Updated



Hi Anoop,

In respect to Item 3 in draft D2.1 the entry to the "LOSS OF 
COMMUNICATION" state causes the variable removePower to be set to TRUE 
which will remove power. 

If you would like to provide the option that a PSE doesn't remove power on 
communication failure, but instead stays in its current state, you will 
need to prevent entry to the "LOSS OF COMMUNICATION" state. I would 
suggest to implement that a variable is added that indicates what the 
implementation choice is with respect to loss of communications, if power 
is to be removed it is set true, otherwise it is set false. The entry to 
the "LOSS OF COMMUNICATION" state would then have to be dependant on both 
the loss_of_comms variable and this new variable both being true.

Best regards,
  David



owner-stds-802-3-poep@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG wrote on 19/03/2008 13:26:05:

> Colleagues,

> Here are some changes to Draft 2.0 that I feel are absolutely necessary
> before we proceed to adopt it as an official WG draft.

> 1) Clause 33.8, Page 101, Line 12-14
> The PSE is presently mandated to remove the power if the PD does not
> send the first LLDP frame after power-on within 1.25 seconds.
> Proposal: Increase 1.25 seconds to  5  minutes. The PSE has three
> options
> - Do nothing and budget Max Power to PD
> - Revert to AF power level
> - Remove power
> None of these should be mandated.

> 2) Clause 33.8, Page 101, Line 21
> The PSE shall remove power if loss of communication persists beyond
> 2xTTL.
> Proposal: Make the PSE behavior optional.
> Proposed Text: Change "PSE shall remove power" to "PSE may optionally
> remove power"

> 3) Figure 33-27, Page 97
> The only exit path from the state "LOSS OF COMMUNICATION" is to remove
> power.
> Proposal: PSE may optionally remove power or wait in that state until
> communication is re-established

> Thanks
> Anoop
> [attachment "C.htm" deleted by David Law/GB/3Com]