| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Glen, That’s actually a good point. I noticed that note on item 44 but it was not clear to me if aMauTye would replace the function of aPhyType. It seemed like a simple task to update the aPhyType so I figured I’d
populate it and see where it took us. I’ll defer to you veterans if it makes sense to keep only MAU and not reference the other layers. Ryan From: stds-1904-4-tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <stds-1904-4-tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Glen Kramer Ryan, Is this action item different from item #44 already in the list?
I see a later discussion on the reflector about whether to use aPhyType or aMauType.
I think we need to clarify what is the distinction and how/why both attributes are needed.
I looked at the definitions in 802.3. Here is what I found: 1)
For speeds above 10Mb/s, MAU is equivalent to a combination or PMD and PMA sublayers. 2)
aPhyType is said to represent the type of the Physical Layer, but in the actual description of enumerated values, it just refers to clause 142, which is PMA + PCS. At least as far as PON port concerns, MAU enumerations are more specific and provide information about the optics power class and coexistence options. From MAU type we can unambiguously deduce the PHY type. But
not the other way around. I wonder if there are any port types (maybe on UNI side) where MAU type does not also determine the aPhyType. But if it always does, do we need both attributes?
Glen From: Tucker, Ryan R <Ryan.Tucker@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Curtis Can you add another for the updating the attribute: aPhyType (0x07/0x00-20) and assign it to me? Thanks Ryan From:
stds-1904-4-tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <stds-1904-4-tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Marek Hajduczenia CAUTION: The e-mail below is from an external source.
Please exercise caution before opening attachments, clicking links, or following guidance.
Thank you, Curtis, I will work on #44 and share a proposal shortly Marek From: Curtis Knittle <C.Knittle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Marek, Here’s the master spreadsheet. Items 43 and 44 were added yesterday.
Curtis From:
stds-1904-4-tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <stds-1904-4-tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Behalf Of Marek Hajduczenia A quick question – do we have a record of the Action Items from the call yesterday? I tried to find them, but to no avail
Thanks Marek To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-4-TF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-4-TF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-4-TF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-4-TF&A=1 The contents of this e-mail message and
To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-4-TF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-4-TF&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-4-TF list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-4-TF&A=1 any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, copying, or storage of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. To unsubscribe from the STDS-1904-4-TF list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-1904-4-TF&A=1 |