Re: Augmenting MAU-MIB - was: RE: EFM MIB Internet-Drafts,WG Meetings

Mike,

I do think it is appropriate to open up MAU MIB to add the types for
EFM and for 10GBASE-CX4 and 10GBASE-T.  In addition to the changes
you noted for 10GBASE-CX4, we would need to add a new jack to the
JackType TC = CX4 uses an IB4X connector.  One caution here is that
10GBASE-T is alot less far along than the others, and I would not
want to hold up a rev of this document for a stable 10GBASE-T
specification.

John

"C. M. Heard" wrote:
> 
> Colleagues,
> 
> I forgot to metion this earlier, but it occurs to me that the EFM
> effort is not the only one that will define new standard MAU types.
> 10GBASE-CX4 and 10GBASE-T will also do that.  So if the MAU MIB is
> opened up for modification to add new MAU types the WG may wish to
> consider adding support for 10GBASE-CX4 and 10GBASE-T media types.
> Attached below is an earlier message of mine on this subject.
> 
> Mike
> 
>   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Subject: [Hubmib] 10GBASE-CX4 and 10GBASE-T
> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 12:03:41 -0800 (PST)
> From: "C. M. Heard" <[email protected]>
> To: Hub MIB <[email protected]>
> 
> Hub MIB folks,
> 
> For those who aren't already aware, I'd like to bring your
> attention to the fact that there are two IEEE study groups
> at work on new PMDs for 10 Gb/s Ethernet.  The 10GBASE-CX4
> group is working on a 15 m shielded copper solution that
> will use the same PCS as does 10GBASE-LX4.  The 10GBASE-T
> group is working on a 100 m UTP solution.  Those who are
> interested can find more information on the 802.3 web site
> http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/
> 
> The 10GBASE-CX4 effort has, I believe, the much shorter
> timeline, and it appears that the impact on our documents
> will be minimal.  In fact as far as I can tell, the only
> document that will be affected is the MAU-MIB document,
> and the changes to it will be confined to the following
> additions:
> 
>        [ ... ]
> 
>        dot3MauType10GigBaseCX4 OBJECT-IDENTITY
>            STATUS      current
>            DESCRIPTION "X fiber over copper (per 802.3 section
>                        54)"
>            ::= { dot3MauType XX } -- NOTE: next unassigned value is 41
> 
>        [ ... ]
> 
>        ifMauTypeListBits OBJECT-TYPE
>            SYNTAX      BITS {
>                [ ... ]
>                b10GbaseCX4(XX),   -- 10GBASE-CX4  (see NOTE above)
>                [ ... ]
>            }
>        [ ... ]
> 
> These would mirror the proposed changes to Clause 30, which you can
> find here:
> 
> http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/10GBCX4/public/jan03/WP2p0_cls30_annex30B.pdf
> 
> While it is probably not be appropriate to include this stuff in the
> next MAU-MIB draft that includes the 802.3ae stuff, the changes are
> small enough that they should be able to go into a maintenance update
> without affecting time-in-grade, or else when then the document
> advances Draft Standard.
> 
> The impact of 10GBASE-T is harder to gauge.
> 
> Mike Heard
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Hubmib mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib