Hi Tingting,
Thanks for clarifying.
This is a very clever way to not just to suppress DC but guarantee a bound on the PAM4 disparity.
There is one issue I see with this and that is if one PAM4 symbol
gets damaged, both 8/10 symbols can potentially be corrupted
meaning two RS-symbols are corrupted instead of just 1.
This severely weakens the FEC protection given that there are
only 6 parity symbols in most of the proposals (I agree that 6 RS symbols is
a good number). If 2 PAM4 symbols are corrupted in the same
RS frame and it propagates to 4 RS symbol errors then the frame
is uncorrectable.
If there is a way to contain the PAM4 symbol corruption to only one RS symbol error
then it would be good.
Thanks,
William
From: zhangtingting (O) <zhangtingting59@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 19:10
To: William Lo <will@xxxxxxxxxx>; STDS-802-3-SPEP2P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: 答复: Question on 8b10b to PAM4
Hi William,
Each PAM4 symbol has two bits (LSB and MSB), which are separately encoded by 8B/10B before the
binary symbol mapper instead of the commonly used Gray mapper. In this way, DC components should be well suppressed. Let me know if you have any further questions.
Best wishes,
Tingting
发件人: William Lo [mailto:will@xxxxxxxxxx]
发送时间: 2024年1月12日 2:17
收件人:
STDS-802-3-SPEP2P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
主题: [802.3_SPEP2P] Question on 8b10b to PAM4
Hi Tingting,
You mentioned in the ad hoc that my assumptions on doing the
8b/10b to PAM4 conversion was incorrect. I tried using that method
and the PSD near DC didn’t look very good. Can you show me the
right way to do the conversion.
Thanks,
William
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-SPEP2P list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-SPEP2P&A=1
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-SPEP2P list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-SPEP2P&A=1