To: "David Freeman" <David.Freeman@finisar.com>
Cc: owner-t10@t10.org, "Robert Watson" <Robert_Watson@pmc-sierra.com>,
   t10@t10.org
Subject: RE: SAS 2 - scrambler operation
From: Andrew.Roy@lecroy.com
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:42:52 -0600
X-Message-Number: 7934
Formatted message: HTML-formatted message

David,
Your proposal makes me unhappy for one reason:	it is conceivable that
somebody's receiver design will depend on receiving a certain bit pattern
in order to train itself.  Therefore, I think it's important to have all 
the transmitters
out there doing the same thing.
Andy Roy
LeCroy
PS: Just my own opinion, not an official position of LeCroy.
Robert,
Thank you for your reply. 
I agree that it is important to keep with the rest of the standard. 
Section 7.4 defines the idle dwords that are sent when a link is idle. 
“Idle dwords are vendor-specific data dwords which are scrambled (see 
7.6).”
It would seem to me that a precedents has been set for allowing 
“vendor-specific” implementation of the “scrambled training data”
dwords 
between the train primitives.
if this is agreeable with the parties concerned I would be willing to 
draft a proposal. 
Regards,
David Freeman
Finisar Corp