100GbE Electrical Backplane / Cu Cabling100GbE Electrical Backplane / Cu Cabling Call-For-Interest
IEEE 802.3 Working Groupg pDallas, TX
November 9, 2010
Objectives for this meetingTo measure the interest in starting a study group for 100GbE Electrical Backplane and Cu Cabling
We don’t need toFully explore the problemDebate strengths and weaknesses of solutionsChoose any one solutionCreate project documentation (i e PAR 5 Criteria Project Objectives)(i.e. PAR, 5 Criteria, Project Objectives)Create a standard or specification
Anyone in the room may speak / voteAnyone in the room may speak / vote
RESPECT… give it, get it
November 9, 20102 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010
Agenda
PresentationsPresentations“The Need”, Howard Frazier, Broadcom.“Technical Viability”, Adam Healey, LSI.“Why Now?”, John D’Ambrosia, Force10 Networks.
Q&AStraw PollsFuture Work
3 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
The Need
Presented by Howard FrazierHoward Frazier
Broadcom
IEEE 802 3 Working GroupIEEE 802.3 Working GroupDallas, TX
November 9, 2010
Historical perspective
10GBASE-KR: 10Gb/s serial backplane operationBlade servers justified the effortBlade servers justified the effortDefined a backplane channel model
During IEEE P802.3ba project10GBASE-KR: basis for 40 / 100GbE PMDs
40GBASE-KR440GBASE-CR4100GBASE-CR10
No solution for 100GbE backplane
5 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Speed and capacities
Higher speed electrical signalingOther industry bodies exploring 20 to 28Gb/s per laneEthernet has a historical preference for x4 interfaces Note – using 4 x 25Gb/s as an example interface for this presentation
Front panel I/OsFront panel I/Os10GbE, 40GbE, 100GbE OptionsHigher density offerings at all speeds
Front panel can provide 100’s of Gigabits of I/OFront panel can provide 100 s of Gigabits of I/O
6 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Front panel I/O driving backplane capacities
Line card illustrationsa.48 ports SFP+ @ 10GbE = 480Gb/sp @b.44 ports QSFP @ 40GbE = 1.76 Tb/sc.4 ports CFP @ 100GbE= 400 Gb/sd 32 ports CXP@ 100GbE= 3 2 Tb/sd.32 ports CXP@ 100GbE= 3.2 Tb/s
Potential backplane bandwidth pcapacities
• 8 Line Cards: 3.2 Tb/s to 25.6 Tb/s• 14 Line Cards: 5 6 Tb/s to 44 8 Tb/s
b d
• 14 Line Cards: 5.6 Tb/s to 44.8 Tb/s
ca
7
b dca
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Front panel I/O driving backplane capacities
4000
Required Traces for Varied Effective BandwidthTypical configurations for A+B and N+1 Topologies
# of signals will impact
3000
3500
TX
& R
X)
10G - Typ. A+B
10G - Typ. N+1 Max
10G - Typ. N+1 Min
25G - Typ. A+B
25G T N+1 M Based on
# of signals will impact
• Feasibility• Support target
backplane bandwidth?Achievable
i ?
2000
2500
Diff
eren
tial P
airs
(T 25G - Typ. N+1 Max
25G - Typ. N+1 Min
Based on 10 Gb/s
backplane bandwidth?• Connector density
(Pair / inch)?• Can it be built?
Capacity?
500
1000
1500
# H
igh
Spee
d D
Based on 25 Gb/s
• Cost• # of connector pins• # of PCB layers
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
Effective Switch Capacity (Gb/s)
Feasibility?
Effective Switch Capacity (Tb/s)
5 10 15 20
N t D h d bl k li t l f id ti
8
Note – Dashed black lines represent examples for consideration
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Server I/O BW drivers
Higher system processing capability Multi-core processorsHi h d t b d t t h l iHigher speed memory, systems bus, and next gen. process technologies
Server virtualizationConsolidation of multiple logical servers in a single physical server
Converged networking and storageMultiple I/O connections converging to single connection with fabric virtualization
Clustered serversScientific, financial, oil/gas exploration, engineering workloads
Internet applicationsIPTV, Web 2.0
9 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Server bandwidth trends
100,000
1,000,000
100 Gigabit Ethernet
10,000
Rat
e M
b/s
CoreNetworkingDoubling≈18 mos
10 Gigabit Ethernet
g
40 Gigabit Ethernet
1,000
R
ServerI/O
Gigabit Ethernet
1001995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Date
Doubling≈24 mos
Source: An overview: Next Generation of Ethernet ─Nov 2007 IEEE 802 HSSG tutorial
Server I/O bandwidth Doubles ≈ every 24 mos100G Need: 2017
Next Gen blade systemsForward migration path:
10G → 40G → 100GBackplanes supporting 100G will be shipped prior to 100G Servers
Development cyclesStandards: 2-3 yearsSystem and silicon: 2-3 yearsExpect 5 years from start of 802 3 j t t fi t d t
10
shipped prior to 100G Servers Standards for new speeds needed
802.3 project to first products
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
x86 servers by Ethernet connection speed(2010 forecast)
12
( )
For server applications 100Gb/s solution h ld b t ti i d f 2017 t h l
Based on IDC (2010) Server Forecast and hays_01_0407 ratios of Ethernet port speed
8
10 should be cost-optimized for 2017 technology envelope.
er U
nits
4
6
ns o
f Ser
ve
2
4
Mill
ion
0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
100M 1G 10G 40G 100G
11 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Trends in server form factorsSource: IDC (Sep 2010)
Blade ShareExtrapolated at 8% CAGR
100
70
80
90
100
serv
ers
40
50
60
70
%
10
20
30
40
0
10
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
k k bl d
12
non-rack rack blade
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Backplane Ethernet & blade server architectures
• IEEE Std 802.3™-2008 defines GbE and 10GbE operation over a modular platform backplane (1 m objective)
• 1000BASE-KX (GbE)• 10GBASE-KX4 (10 GbE, 4 x 3.125 GBd)• 10GBASE-KR (serial 10 GbE)
• Blade servers: 2nd Gen backplanes• Based on 10GBASE-KX4 architecture...• ...but satisfy 10GBASE-KR channel
requirementsrequirements• IEEE Std 802.3baTM-2010 introduced 40
Gb/s operation on backplanes: 40GBASE-KR4 ( 4 x 10.3125 GBd)
• Blade servers: 3rd Gen backplanes• Backwards compatibility needed• 100GbE must support 4 lane approach
Source: Koenen, “Channel Model Requirements for Ethernet Backplanes in Blade Servers”, May 2004.
13 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Cu Cabling: Why 4x25Gb/s vs 10x10Gb/s? • 8 lanes/pairs versus 20 lanes/pairs
• Smaller form factor enables higher port densities. • Cost factors
- Fewer cable assembly pairs reduces cost.+20-pair assembly ~1.5 times cost of 8-pair assembly.
- Reduction in number of Tx/Rx lanes simplifies host routing. - Reduction in cable assembly pairs enables reduction in cable diameterReduction in cable assembly pairs enables reduction in cable diameter.- Fewer pairs => higher levels of integration => higher port density
• Could define plug compatible port types to enable plug-and-play for 4x10Gb/s and 4x25Gb/s.
8 lanes 8 lanes
8 differential pairs
Transmit or 4x 4x Transmit or
Tx or Rx PCB Tx or Rx
PCB
Transmit or receive function
Tx or Rx PCB
4x
Tx or Rx PCB
4x
Transmit or receive function
Channel 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010
14 November 9, 2010
Media reach
~0.75 m 1.5 m
Intra-rack configurations Inter-rack configurations
2.4 m max 2.4 m max
Cabinet/rack Cabinet/rack Cabinet/rack
• at least 3m addresses • 3 to 7m addresses a meaningfulmajority of configurations
3 to 7m addresses a meaningful portion of configurations
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 201015 November 9, 2010
SummaryBackplane application space
Front panel capacities are challenging backplane capacitiesServer requirements
Cu cablingI t k & i t k li tiIntra-rack & inter-rack applicationsCan leverage backplane solutionsPotential lower cost and wider application usage
Timing ConsiderationsNetwork equipment backplanes and inter / intra-rack connectionsconnectionsBlade servers / backplanes & rack servers
16 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Technical Viability
Presented by Adam Healey
LSI Corporation
IEEE 802.3 Working GroupDallas, TX
November 9, 2010
Potential enablers for more Gb/s/lane
MAC Increase coding gain (trade-off against latency)
RECONCILIATION
CGMII
100GBASE R PCS
latency)
EqualizationCrosstalk cancellation100GBASE-R PCS
FEC
PMA
Crosstalk cancellationModulation (e.g. M-PAM)
Lower loss printed circuit board traces
PMD
AN
pLower loss cablingLow noise connectorsImproved impedance control
Combine (a subset of) technologies to increase the per-lane throughput
MDI
MEDIUM
18 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Number of lanes and signaling rates
Number of lanes
Uncodedrate Gb/s Noteslanes rate, Gb/s
10 10 State of the art, e.g. 100GBASE-CR10
5 20 Lower signaling rate per lane
4 25 Better alignment with existing physical architectures
2 50 Technology not yet available
Spectrally efficient modulation reduces signaling rate per lane
1 100 Technology not yet available
Spectrally efficient modulation reduces signaling rate per laneOpportunities to re-use the 100GBASE-R PCS4 x 25 Gb/s will be used as the basis for subsequent examples
19 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Survey of modular platform topologiesTopology Distance, in.
Dual-star mid-plane 11 to 22p
Torus-like 11 to 22(a) Dual-star mid-plane
Dual-star backplane (switches centered) 12 to 26
Dual-star backplane ( it h t d ) 22 to 39(switches at edges)
Full-mesh 22 to 39
(b) Dual-star backplane, switches centered
Dual-star predominant in the server marketplace10GBASE-KR targeted 1 m
(c) Dual-star backplane, switches at edges
g(~39 in.)
20
Source: Richard Mellitz, Intel
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Backplane channel loss
0 000.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00
Frequency, GHz
0.00
5.00
10.00s, d
B
15.00
20.00
nser
tion
loss
10GBASE-KR attenuation limit23.3 dB over 1 m of “improved
FR 4” t 5 156 GH [1]
19.1 dB over 0.78 m at 12.891 GHz [2]
25.00
30.00
I
A max Tyco (fit)
FR-4” at 5.156 GHz [1]
A_max Tyco (fit)
[1] IEEE Std 802.3TM-2008, 69B.4.2[2] Source: Tyco Electronics, 0.51 m backplane, two 0.10 m line cards, two 0.035 m ideal connectors, 6-8-6
mil differential stripline, Nelco 4000-13SI dielectric, 1 oz copper
21 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Backplane connector evolution
19.1 dB over 0.78 m at 12.891 GHz
Impro ements in impedanceImprovements in impedance and noise control
22
Source: Tyco Electronics
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Passive cable assembly topologyTP4TP1
X = Y – 2 × (H – F)
Medium
Transmit function
Receive function
TP2 TP3 TP5TP0
H
Y = X + 2 × (H – F)
H
TP2 TP3 TP5TP0
TP2 (TP3)TP1 (TP4)Mated Test Fixtures
Module Compliance Board (MCB) and Host Compliance Board (HCB)
TP2 (TP3)TP1 (TP4)
23
F
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Measured bulk cable loss, 3 mFrequency, GHz
26 AWG 10.82 dB @ 12.89 GHz including ≈ 1 dB cable text fixture = 9.82 dB24 AWG ≈ 17% less loss = 8.98 dB @ 12.89 GHz
on lo
ss, d
BIn
sert
io
Source: Chris DiMinico Leoni
24
Source: Chris DiMinico, Leoni
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Twinaxial bulk cable insertion loss
0 000.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00
Frequency, GHz
0.00
5.00
10.00, dB
10.8 dB at 12.891 GHz (3.6 dB/m over 3 m) [2]
15.00
20.00
nser
tion
loss
25.00
30.00
In
40GBASE CR4 1 40GBASE CR4 2 DiMi i (fit)
40GBASE-CR4 bulk cable allocation13.3 dB at 5.156 GHz (1.9 dB/m over 7 m) [1]
40GBASE-CR4 - 1 40GBASE-CR4 - 2 DiMinico (fit)
[1] Derived from IEEE Std 802.3baTM-2010 Equations 85-19 (ILfitted) and 85-34 (ILcatf) assuming that the insertion loss of connector, paddle card, and wire termination is 1.2 × sqrt( f/5.1563 ) where the units of f are GHz.
[2] Chris DiMinico (Leoni) 26AWG includes test fixture loss (approximately 1 dB at 12 89 GHz)
25
[2] Chris DiMinico (Leoni), 26AWG, includes test fixture loss (approximately 1 dB at 12.89 GHz)
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Host PCB insertion loss
0 000.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00 14.00 16.00
Frequency, GHz
0.00
1.00
2.00, dB
40GBASE-KR4 PCB allocation3.5 dB at 5.156 GHz over 4 inches of “FR-4” [1]
3.00
4.00
nser
tion
loss
4.7 dB at 12.891 GHz over 4 inches of Megtron 4 [2]
5.00
6.00
In
IL PCB 4" M t 4 ( )
over 4 inches of Megtron 4 [2]
IL_PCBmax 4" Megtron 4 (max.)
[1] IEEE Std 802.3baTM-2010, 85A.4.[2] Marco Mazzini and Gary Nicholl (Cisco), “CEI-28G-VSR -Channel Distance and Loss Budget Requirements”
Formulae for maximum insertion loss per inch extracted from channel measurements, W = 4 mils Megtron 4: IL = 0 0838 f + 0 0944
26
IL = 0.0838 f + 0.0944.
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Front-panel connector evolutionParameter 40GBASE-CR4 Supplier A [2] Supplier B [3]
Signaling rate, GBd 10.3125 25.0 25.0
M t d t t fi t l [1] dB 2 80 6 4 7 0Mated test fixture loss [1], dB 2.80 ~6.4 ~7.0
MCB PCB loss, dB 0.67 1.8 2.1
HCB PCB loss, dB 1.26 3.5 4.0
Extracted connector loss, dB 0.87 ~1.1 ~0.9
MDFEXT[4] ICN[5], mV 3.5 1.3 1.5
MDNEXT[4] ICN, mV 1.0 0.5 0.5MDNEXT[4] ICN, mV 1.0 0.5 0.5[1] Losses are defined at the fundamental frequency for the cited signaling rate.[2] Source: Amphenol (http://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/OIF_VSR_liaison/public/AMPHENOL%20QSFP%20data.pdf)[3] Source: Molex/Tyco Electronics (http://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/OIF_VSR_liaison/public/fromm_01_0610.pdf)[4] MDFEXT = Multi-Disturber Far-End Crosstalk, MDNEXT = Multi-Disturber Near-End Crosstalk[5] ICN = Integrated Crosstalk Noise refer to IEEE Std 802 3baTM 2010 85 10 7
Data in this table represents solutions that are compatible with the QSFP mating interface
TP2 (TP3)TP1 (TP4)[5] ICN = Integrated Crosstalk Noise, refer to IEEE Std 802.3baTM-2010 85.10.7.
p g
27 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Loss budget examples40GBASE-CR4 signal integrity
“Next generation” signal integrity
Uncoded rate, Gb/s 10.0 25.0 25.0 25.0Li d NRZ 4 PAM 4 PAM NRZLine code NRZ 4-PAM 4-PAM NRZSignaling rate, GBd 10.3125 12.8913 12.8913 25.7813SNR for BER < 10−12, dB [1] 17.0 26.6 26.6 17.0Cable length, m 7 7 7 3Host TX PCB (4”) [2], dB 3.50 4.33 2.54 4.70TX Connector, dB 2.07 2.31 [3] 1.41 [4] 2.00Bulk cable, dB 13.30 16.42 13.68 [5] 10.82RX Connector, dB 2.07 2.31 [3] 1.41 [4] 2.00Host RX PCB (4”), dB 3.50 4.33 2.54 4.70Total insertion loss, dB 24.44 29.70 21.58 24.22[1] Assumes fixed transmitter peak-to-peak differential output voltage.[2] Losses are defined at the fundamental frequency for the cited signaling rate.[3] Derived as 2.07 × sqrt( 6.4453/5.1563 )[4] Derived as 2 00 × sqrt( 6 4453/12 8913 )
28
[4] Derived as 2.00 × sqrt( 6.4453/12.8913 )[5] Derived as (7/3) × 7.06 × 0.83 where 0.83 is the reduction in loss for 24AWG cabling relative to 26AWG
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Other industry efforts
Organization Project Notes
Optical InternetworkingForum (OIF) [1]
CEI-28G-(V)SR • 19.9 to 28.05 GBaud/lane• Chip-to-chip, chip-to-module
CEI 25G LR • 19.9 to 25.8 GBaud/laneCEI-25G-LR • Backplane
Infiniband Trade Association (IBTA) EDR • 25.78125 GBaud/lane
• Passive copper, active cables( ) pp ,
INCITS T11 Fibre Channel 32GFC• 28.05 GBaud (single lane)• Chip-to-module, multimode and
single-mode fiber
Broader industry movement towards higher throughput per lane
g[1] Refer to the proceedings of the IEEE 802.3 Ethernet Working Group OIF CEI-28G-VSR liaison response ad hoc
(http://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/OIF_VSR_liaison/index.html).
y g g p p
29 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
SummaryRich selection of technologies for a Study Group to exploreRepresentative of a broader industry movement
30 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Why Now?Why Now?
Presented byJohn D’Ambrosia, Force10 Networks,
IEEE 802.3 Working GroupDallas, Tx
November 9 2010November 9, 2010
Why Now?There is no 100GbE backplane solution, but…..
Networking equipment - faceplate capacities are challenging current backplane solutionscurrent backplane solutions
o 10G I/O (SFP+, 10GBASE-T) densities are growingo Introduction of 40GbE / 100GbE & related MSAs
Blade Serverso 40GbE Backplanes need to support 100GbE
• 40GbE backwards compatibility needs40GbE backwards compatibility needs• 100GbE backplane design requirements
100GbE Cu Interfaces narrower than 100GBASE-CR10May leverage a 100GbE backplane solutionCould enable multiple benefits – backwards compatibility with 40GbE, higher port density, and lower cost
32 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
SupportersRick Rabinovich, Alcatel-Lucent
Steve Trowbridge Alcatel Lucent
Chris DiMinico, MC Communications/LEONI
O S l M ll
Chris Cole, Finisar
John D’Ambrosia Force10 NetworksSteve Trowbridge, Alcatel-Lucent
Mike Li, Altera
Shawn Searles, AMD
Brian Kirk, Amphenol TCS
Greg McSorley , Amphenol
Oren Sela, Mellanox
Howard Baumer, Mobius
Galen Fromm, Molex
Jay Neer, Molex
Paul Vanderlaan, Nexans
John D Ambrosia, Force10 Networks
Kapil Shrikhande, Force10 Networks
Uri Cummings, Fulcrum Microsystems
Ryan Latchman, Gennum
Francois Tremblay, Gennum
Brad Booth, Applied Micro
Matt Brown, Applied Micro
Rita Horner, Avago
Brian Misek, Avago
Charles Moore Avago
Fanny Minarsky, Octoscope
Shimon Muller, Oracle
Ron Nordin, Panduit
Pat Diamond, Semtech
George Eaton Semtech
Dave Koenen, HP
Steve Carlson, High Speed Design
Orlindo Savi, Hitachi
Hidehiro Toyoda, Hitachi
Jeff Lynch IBMCharles Moore, Avago
Jeff Slavick, Avago
Yakov Belopolsky, Bel Stewart
Paul Kish, Belden
Wael Diab, Broadcom
George Eaton, Semtech
Ed Cady, Siemon Company
Valerie Maguire, Siemon Company
George Zimmerman, Solarflare
Sanjay Kasturia, Teranetics
Jeff Lynch, IBM
Pravin Patel, IBM
Andy Moorwood, Infinera
Andre Szczepanek, Inphi
Dave Chalupsky, Intel
Howard Frazier, Broadcom
Ali Ghiasi, Broadcom
Arthur Marris, Cadence
Hecham Elkhatib, Cinch
Beth Donnay, Cisco
Karl Muth, Texas Instruments
Iain Robertson, Texas Instruments
Mike Fogg, Tyco Electronics
Nathan Tracy, Tyco Electronics
Jeff Lapak, UNH-IOL
Ilango Ganga, Intel
Rich Mellitz, Intel
Thananya Baldwin, IXIA
Jerry Pepper, IXIA
Jeff Maki, Juniper
Joel Goergen, Cisco
Mark Nowell, Cisco
Bhavesh A. Patel, Dell
Ghani Abbas, Ericsson
Vitt l B l b i FCI
p ,
Frank Chang, Vitesse
Ziad Hatab, Vitesse
George Noh, Vitesse
Atul Sharma, Volex
T k hi Ni hi Y i hi
p
David Ofelt, Juniper
Alan Flatman, LAN Technologies, UK
Mike Bennett, LBNL
Adam Healey, LSI
C th Li LSI
33
Vittal Balasubramanian, FCI
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Takeshi Nishimura, Yamaichi
Marek Hajduczenia, ZTE
Cathy Liu, LSI
Marc Dupuis, Madison Cable
Q&AQ&A
S P llStraw Polls
Call-For-Interest
Should a Study Group be formed for “100GbE Electrical Backplanes and Cu Cable Interface”?
Y: 95 N: 0 A: 8
36 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
ParticipationI would participate in the “100GbE Electrical Backplane and Cu Cable Interface” Study Group in IEEE 802.3.
Tally: 64
My company would support participation in the “100GbE Electrical Backplane and Cu Cable100GbE Electrical Backplane and Cu Cable Interface” Study Group in IEEE 802.3
Tally: 43y
37 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Future WorkAsk 802.3 to form 100GbE Electrical Backplane and Cu Cable SG on ThursdayBackplane and Cu Cable SG on Thursday
If approvedIf approved802 EC informed of 100GbE Electrical Backplane and Cu Cable Interface SG on FridayEmail reflector / web page to be createdEmail reflector / web page to be createdFirst 100GbE BP / Cu SG meeting, week of January 12 2011 IEEE 802.3 Interim.
38 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
Thank You!Thank You!
39 100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010
ContributorsHoward Frazier, BroadcomElizabeth Donnay, CiscoDave Chalupsky IntelDave Chalupsky, IntelJohn D’Ambrosia, Force10 NetworksAlan Flatman, LAN Technologies, UKJeff Lynch IBMJeff Lynch, IBMPravin Patel, IBMIlango Ganga, IntelRich Mellitz, IntelRich Mellitz, IntelAdam Healey, LSIMarc Dupuis, Madison Cable Chris DiMinico, MC Communications/LEONIC s co, C Co u cat o s/ OJay Neer, MolexMike Fogg, Tyco ElectronicsNathan Tracy, Tyco Electronics
40
y, y
100GbE Electrical Backplane/Cu Cable CFI IEEE 802 Plenary, Dallas, TX, Nov 2010 November 9, 2010