Hi Natalie,
Please see the observations below from Scott Muma… I propose that we pull these two comments (#135 and #56) from the EZ bucket and adjust the Responses so that the change applies to both Clause 201 and the applicable location in Clause 202.
Thank you (and thanks, Scott, for catching the errors).
Much appreciated – Val
From Scott: I noticed that a few typo/copy-paste comments would be applicable to Clause 202 as well:
135
van Dyck, Peter
Infineon
201
201.4.2.2.3
99
51
E
tx_coded and rx_coded are incorrectly defined in the text.
Replace "tx_coded<31:0>" with "tx_coded<64:0>"
Replace "rx_coded<31:0>" with "rx_coded<64:0>"PROPOSED ACCEPT.
EZ
Same comment, but for Clause 202, subclause 202.3.2.2.3, P178L17. It’s a typo carried over from copy-paste from Clause 149.
56
Jonsson, Ragnar
Infineon
201
201.4.2.2.5
100
8
E
The text incorrectly states that "The XGMII encodes a control character into an octet" which is not correct. This text is unnecessary and is probably best removed.
Remove the sentence "The XGMII encodes a control character into an octet (an eightbit value)."
PROPOSED ACCEPT.
EZ
Same comment for Clause 202, subclause 202.3.2.2.5, P180L5. This is also a copy-paste carryover of an incorrect statement from Clause 149.
Valerie Maguire, BSEE
602-228-7943 mobile
