|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Dear EC members, Please see below the comments and responses in respect to the IEEE P802.3ch draft PAR and CSD. The updated PAR and CSD can be accessed as follows, files showing the changes made to the PAR and CSD are attached for your reference. Best regards, David Updated IEEE P802.3ch draft PAR: <https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/17/ec-17-0008-03-00EC-ieee-p802-3ch-draft-par.pdf> Updated IEEE P802.3ch draft CSD: <https://mentor.ieee.org/802-ec/dcn/17/ec-17-0009-01-00EC-ieee-p802-3ch-draft-csd.pdf> ---- Section 2.1 - Change 'Automotive' to 'Vehicular' or to be consistent, change all the 'vehicular' to 'automotive' in the PAR. ACCEPTED: All instances of 'vehicular' changed to 'automotive' in the PAR and CSD ----- Section 5.5 - Typo "G/bps" should be "Gb/s" ACCEPTED ----- Section 5.5 - Suggest changing "legacy networks" to "legacy vehicular networks" ACCEPTED: Changed to "legacy automotive networks" ----- CSD Broad Market Potential - First dashed item was initially confusing to naïve readers, may consider adding ''' or ',' ACCEPTED: Changed 'Higher than current Ethernet rates in the automotive market...' to 'Higher than current automotive Ethernet rates will enable replacement of multiple proprietary protocols operating at rates greater than 1 Gb/s with Ethernet, furthering consolidation of legacy in-car networks in a homogeneous architecture.'. ----- PAR: The typical reach is not specified. While for an automobile, 15 m may be appropriate, for a tandem or triple trailer truck, 50 m may be appropriate. I think the scope should list the target connection length for the proposed work. The CSD requirements that this a project is technically feasible and cost effective cannot be evaluated without knowing the target distance. For example, the scope could say 'supporting link distances of at least 15 m' or 'supporting link distances of approximately 50 m'. REJECTED: IEEE 802.3 does not state reach(s) in their PARs. After discussion, the IEEE 802.3 Multi-Gig Automotive Ethernet PHY Study Group rejected the proposed change. With the changes above from 'vehicular' to 'automotive' the reach is sufficiently described. ----- ---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector. This list is maintained by Listserv.