From IEEE Std 1394 Serial Bus experiences, as well as the telecom industry as a whole, the value of synchronous transfers is greatly increased if time-of-day clocks can also be synchronized.

Something simpler than this would probably suit our needs and am working with some others on a proposal, but since 1394 has been discussed I figured I'd put out the references.

. > Examples: > IEEE Std 802(R)-2002 or IEEE 802(R)-2002 > IEEE 802(R) Working Group > IEEE Std 802.11b(TM)-1999 > IEEE 1394(TM) > IEEE P1232(TM) >If you have any questions, CONTACT Claudio Stanziola - IEEE Standards >Activities - telephone +1 732 562 3804; " MailTo:c.stanziola@ieee.org" ;.

From : Jon Rosdahl < jrosdahl@xxxxxxxx > Date : Tue, 15 Jan 2013 01:02:41 -0700 --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Working Group Reflector --- Hello, I have uploaded the GEN AdHoc file that shows all the comments in the Gen AdHoc: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-04-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx   There are several comments that are still open, as we try to complete prep for closing comments this week, we could use your help.

Replaced by 1394-2008 Revision PAR active a.

[STDS-802-11-TGM] Update to Gen AdHoc comments posted -- 11-12/1394r8 Thread Links Date Links Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index [STDS-802-11-TGM] Update to Gen AdHoc comments posted -- 11-12/1394r8 To : STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject : [STDS-802-11-TGM] Update to Gen AdHoc comments posted -- 11-12/1394r8 From : Jon Rosdahl < jrosdahl@xxxxxxxx > Date : Thu, 17 Jan 2013 16:42:19 -0700 --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector --- https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-08-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx Covers comment resolutions added through PM1 Thursday Jan 17th.  

https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-06-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx   Please let me know if you can take one or more comments.

This would be similar to the case of IEEE 1394 vendor dependent command where the Company_id of the RAC is utilized.

I need to request a 1394 Global Unique ID (GUID) for this port. 

From : Jon Rosdahl < jrosdahl@xxxxxxxx > Date : Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:30:53 -0700 --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector --- https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-09-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx   That is the last update planned for the week.

Inouye, The IEEE RAC has assigned an Individual Address to the Bluetooth SIG for use as a Bluetooth-specific extension to the 1394 Trade Association's "AV/C Digital Interface Command set General Specification."

Johas Teener" < Mike@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject : The 1394c bits in message code #5 From : "David V James" < dvj@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Date : Mon, 9 Aug 2004 21:33:37 -0700 Cc : "IEEE RAC" < stds-rac@xxxxxxxx >, < les@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >, < colinws@xxxxxxxxx >, < kbrown@xxxxxxxxxxxx >, < mike@xxxxxxxxxx >, < whurwitz@xxxxxxxxxxxx >, < don.harwood@xxxxxxxxxx >, < pascal.lagrange@xxxxxxxxxxxx >, "David Law" < David_Law@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Importance : Normal In-Reply-To : Sender : owner-stds-rac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Michael, As per my action item in: http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1394/c/20040726/minutes20040726.pdf Specifically: 45 Dave James Review OUI mapping in section 14.11.2.6 (Still open) 4/27/2004 I have provided FrameMaker and pdf files (attached).

[STDS-802-11-TGM] update to Gen AdHoc Spreadsheet posted -- 11-12/1394r5 Thread Links Date Links Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index [STDS-802-11-TGM] update to Gen AdHoc Spreadsheet posted -- 11-12/1394r5 To : STDS-802-11-TGM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject : [STDS-802-11-TGM] update to Gen AdHoc Spreadsheet posted -- 11-12/1394r5 From : Jon Rosdahl < jrosdahl@xxxxxxxx > Date : Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:46:03 -0700 --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector --- After reviewing the file, there were some minor errors that have been corrected here: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-05-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx   note that Eldad's 5 Comments all now show up on Tab GEN 1431 correctly.

For example, see IEEE Std 1394-1995.

When it 24 did this it listed the existing PHY speeds, thinking new PHYs would be 25 added as they came available. 802.3ch-2020 already failed to add itself. 26 Making this general change will fix the problem that clause 149 27 (2.5G/5G/10GBASE-T1) are not included, as well as smooth the path for 28 IEEE P802.3cy, without impacting existing networks, or closing 29 possibilities for 100BASE-T1L and any possible future 1000BASE-T1L. 30 Additionally, contributions in the Greater than 10 Mb/s long-reach SPE 31 study group have shown that long-reach 1 Gb/s is challenging, leaving 32 greater than 1 Gb/s unlikely - hence 1 Gb/s is a good threshold to pass 33 autonegotiation off to the shorter-reach HSM. 34 35 IMPACT ON EXISTING NETWORKS: None. 36 37 38 +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ 39 |Please attach supporting material, if any | 40 |Submit to:- David Law, Chair IEEE 802.3 | 41 |and copy:- Adam Healey, Vice-Chair IEEE 802.3 | 42 | | 43 |At:- E-Mail: stds-802-3-maint-req@ieee.org | 44 | | 45 | +------- For official 802.3 use -----------+ | 46 | | REV REQ NUMBER: 1394 | | 47 | | DATE RECEIVED: 18 February, 2022 | | 48 | | EDITORIAL/TECHNICAL | | 49 | | ACCEPTED/DENIED | | 50 | | BALLOT REQ'D YES/NO | | 51 | | COMMENTS: | | 52 +-------------+------------------------------------------+-------------+ 53 | For information about this Revision Request see - | 54 |http://www.ieee802.org/3/maint/requests/revision_history.html#REQ1394 | 55 +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ 56

From : Jon Rosdahl < jrosdahl@xxxxxxxx > Date : Fri, 16 Nov 2012 02:05:36 -0700 --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector --- Hello TG REVmc, I have updated the GEN Adhoc Comments: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-02-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx   note that as motions are passed, comments are moved to the Editor for incorporation into the Draft.  

For example, >see IEEE Std 1394-1995.

. > - 802.15 representative to 802 Architecture committee > - 802 EC Attendance software point of contact, July 2006-present > - Sponsor ballot participant in a variety of groups (802.1, 802.16, > 802.11, 802.15, 802.20, 287, 1394, 260.3) > > James Gilb > ---------- This email is sent from the 802 Executive Committee email reflector.

Will the RAC make the request that IEEE Standard 1394 be modified to use EUI-48?

There are 10 CIDs that are ready now for a motion   https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-07-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx   28 CIDs have an owner -- 27 still open for help.   

From : Jon Rosdahl < jrosdahl@xxxxxxxx > Date : Tue, 15 Jan 2013 01:02:41 -0700 --- This message came from the IEEE 802.11 Task Group M Technical Reflector --- Hello, I have uploaded the GEN AdHoc file that shows all the comments in the Gen AdHoc: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-04-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx   There are several comments that are still open, as we try to complete prep for closing comments this week, we could use your help.

Johas Teener - Mike@Teener.com PGP ID 0x3179D202 23 Acacia Way, Santa Cruz, CA 95062-1313 +1-831-247-9666, fax +1-831-480-5845 ------------------- www.teener.com ------------------------ Prev by Date: Re: [RE] Network topology requirements (was: [RE] CE applications ) Next by Date: Re: [RE] Requirement: Bridging to 1394 Prev by thread: Re: [RE] Overprovisioning (was Re: [RE] CE applications) Next by thread: Re: [RE] Technical Feasibility & Current Work Index(es): Date Thread

I have updated the GEN Comment Spreadsheet: https://mentor.ieee.org/802.11/dcn/12/11-12-1394-01-000m-gen-adhoc-preballot-comment-collection-resolutions.xlsx   The Tab for Vinko's set of comments is now labeled GEN-1297 Dorothy will have a motion prepared for this morning that accepts the resolution for GEN Motion A (Comments from Sept), and GEN-1297 (Vinko's Comments).  

1/ FireWire does not like to go further than 4.5m 2/ FireWire does not scale well - fixed amount of bandwidth is shared amongst all devices on the network. 3/ FireWire is not Ethernet Items 1 and 2 have been addressed by enhancements to the IEEE-1394 specification (FireWore over CAT5 and bridging).

However, 1394 acquired global channels and this had some problems.