944 results found. results are sorted by relevance
  26-50
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1722/contributions/2007/avbtp-bartky-proposed-stream-data-format-v0-02-2007-03-27.pdf
•Changed acronyms and names based on same from relevant standards (802.1Q, 1394, 61883-1) •Put new AVBTP fields in lower case.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00147.html
2) Bridging to 1394 is pretty stringent and may be re-inventing the 1394 bridge wheel.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00090.html
I *strongly* believe that Ethernet *can* be the backbone for 1394 local clusters.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1722/contributions/2007/avbtp-cgunther-presentation-time-2007-10-18.pdf
• Listener should free-run for several packets (length of time relates to AS settling time) • Eventually GM change will reach both Talker and Listener, and “correctly” time stamped packets will arrive • When PTS is “close enough” to Listener PTP time the Listener can start fine tuning PLL frequency (Listener should not make any assumptions about frequency until this time) • The previous statement implies that Talker cannot change Presentation Time Offset of an existing stream • Missing DBC sequences will signify lost samples and can be handled appropriately without affecting frequency 18 October 2007 21 1394/AVB Gateway 18 October 2007 22 1394/AVB Gateway (1394-to-AVB) • Convert SYT field to AVB Presentation Time • Leave SYT field intact – AVB ignores it • Exchange cross-timestamp packets with other 1394/AVB Gateways • Could strip the 32-bit SPH to save a quadlet – Would introduce jitter on 1394-to-AVB-to-1394 – AVB Listener ignores SYT field 18 October 2007 23 1394/AVB Gateway (AVB-to-1394) • If SID=63 (AVB Talker) – Convert AVB Presentation Time to SYT field – Possible problems with 2ms SYT field on Part 2, 3, 5 & 6 • Exchange cross-timestamp packets with other 1394/AVB Gateways • Possibly recreate SPH – If SID <> 63 – And SPH = 1 • Larger range of AVB Presentation Time Offsets could require buffering in gateway 18 October 2007 24 Unanswered Questions 18 October 2007 25 Unanswered Questions 1.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00089.html
As far as the discussion about Ethernet vs 1394, I think that Ethernet is more of a NETWORKING technology than 1394, although 1394 supports synchronization.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00091.html
As far as the discussion about Ethernet vs 1394, I think that Ethernet is more of a NETWORKING technology than 1394, although 1394 supports synchronization.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1722/contributions/2007/avbtp-cgunther-presentation-time-v2-2007-10-18.pdf
• Listener should free-run for several packets (length of time relates to AS settling time) • Eventually GM change will reach both Talker and Listener, and “correctly” time stamped packets will arrive • When PTS is “close enough” to Listener PTP time the Listener can start fine tuning PLL frequency (Listener should not make any assumptions about frequency until this time) • The previous statement implies that Talker cannot change Presentation Time Offset of an existing stream • Missing DBC sequences will signify lost samples and can be handled appropriately without affecting frequency 18 October 2007 (v2) (with modifications from 18Oct07 meeting) 21 1394/AVB Gateway 18 October 2007 (v2) (with modifications from 18Oct07 meeting) 22 1394/AVB Gateway (1394-to-AVB) • Convert SYT field to AVB Presentation Time • Leave SYT field intact – AVB ignores it • Exchange cross-timestamp packets with other 1394/AVB Gateways • Could strip the 32-bit SPH to save a quadlet – Not really worth while – Would introduce jitter on 1394-to-AVB-to-1394 – AVB Listener ignores SYT field 18 October 2007 (v2) (with modifications from 18Oct07 meeting) 23 1394/AVB Gateway (AVB-to-1394) • If SID=63 (AVB Ta
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00086.html
>> >> >> On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 11:15, David V James wrote: >> > But, if 1394 were to be the household connection of choice, >> > then one would have to deal with: >> > >> > within the room | within the residence | within the room >> > >> > ..<-- IEEE 1394 -->.. >> > <-- IEEE 802.3 -->.. ..<-- IEEE 802.3 --> >> >> 1394 is currently, for the most part, perceived and being >> utilized as a short reach solution.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00083.html
Using 802.3 within the room and 1394 within the residence is opposite to what is currently implemented.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1722/contributions/2007/avbtp-cgunther-presentation-time-with-notes-v2-2007-10-18.pdf
Also, strip the Source Packet Header if it comes in from a 1394-to-AVB gateway/portal.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/public/200409/teener_2_0904.pdf
Therefore, bridging 1394 buses should be one of the requirements for Residential Ethernet Thank you!
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1722/contributions/2007/avbtp-bartky-encapsulation-v0-01-2007-06-24.pdf
–Data Block Count, 8 bits •Sequence number of 1st Data Block in the packet •Same meaning as in 61883 over 1394 June 24, 2007 IEEE P1722 AVBTP Working Group Contribution 13 Encapsulation Assumptions •Approved by Consensus: –CIP header 2nd quadlet indicator, 2 bits •Fixed at 10 binary –Stream Format, 6 bits •Same values as currently defined for 61883 –Format Dependent Field (FDF), 8 bits if SPH=0, 24 Bartky Networks www.bartky.net –Format Dependent Field (FDF), 8 bits if SPH=0, 24 bits if SPH=1 •Same values as currently defined for 61883 –SYT field (1394 cycle time based presentation time for SPH field equals 0) •Mandatory for use by AVBTP end stations •Same as 1394/61883 June 24, 2007 IEEE P1722 AVBTP Working Group Contribution 14 Encapsulation Assumptions •Approved by Consensus: –CIP header 2nd quadlet • Channel ID (0-63) – 0-30 & 32-63: originating channel ID from 1394 network. – 31: originating source is on AVB network (native AVB) • Source ID (0-63) – 0-62 originating Source ID from IEEE 1394 network Bartky Networks www.bartky.net – 0-62 originating Source ID from IEEE 1394 network – 63 originating source is on AVB network • Reserved (2 bits) – Same as 1394/61883 » Set to 0 on transmit » Ignore on receive. • “sy”field (4 bits) (currently used by 1394 for Digital rights management). – Same as 1394/61883 June 24, 2007 IEEE P1722 AVBTP Working Group Contribution 15 Encapsulation Assumptions •Proposals: –For all class 5 traffic, limit maximum transmission unit size in order to limit total transmission time on and 802.3 100 megabit (including preamble and inter-frame gap to 75% of 125µs) Bartky Networks www.bartky.net –For all 61883 type traffic, limit maximum data payload to 256 quadlets (1024 bytes) •>> Editor’s note: Needs work.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/public/200409/minutes_0904.pdf
Group discussion about market size and 1394 vs.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00142.html
2) Bridging to 1394 is pretty stringent and may be re-inventing the 1394 bridge wheel. 
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00052.html
ATM's answer to this is no. 1394 says yes (and yet many of the media > protocols used on 1394 re-implement synchronization). > -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Michael D.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1722/contributions/2007/avbtp-bartky-assumptions-v0-00-2007-06-14.pdf
–Keep it simple and close enough to 61883 that bridging to/from the most common forms of 1394 Bartky Networks www.bartky.net bridging to/from the most common forms of 1394 isochronous streams is a straight-forward problem that can easily be done in hardware.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00096.html
As far as the discussion about Ethernet vs 1394, I think that Ethernet is more of a NETWORKING technology than 1394, although 1394 supports synchronization.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00097.html
As far as the discussion about Ethernet vs 1394, I think that Ethernet is more of a NETWORKING technology than 1394, although 1394 supports synchronization.
https://grouper.ieee.org/rac/private/email/msg02365.html
body=INFO%20STDS-RAC > List-owner : < mailto:STDS-RAC-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > List-subscribe : < mailto:STDS-RAC-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > List-unsubscribe : < mailto:STDS-RAC-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG > References : < 641191.1312535030246.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > < D9DBDA6E6E3A9F438D9F76F0AF9D7AE32EFC68ADE9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sender : stds-rac@xxxxxxxx Gentlemen, The citation for IEEE 1394 should be IEEE 1394-2008 and not IEEE 1394-1995 (the latter as referenced in the slide set).
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/public/200501/ryu_1_0105.pdf
IEEE 1394, UWB, 802.11, USB, etc Backbone applications for Residential Ethernet Wireless PAN coverage - CEs are connected together through the ResE - Wireless APs are connected to the ResE Backbone - WPAN devices are connected - More hybrid connections will be used for convenience Wireless LAN coverage Case for Residential Ethernet Home backbone applications qIEEE 1394 has distance limitation, 4.5 meters per hop § Multi hops can be extended 72 meters but limited capacity by single bus.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/re_study/email/msg00141.html
2) Bridging to 1394 is pretty stringent and may be re-inventing the 1394 bridge wheel. 
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/17/documents/presentations/nov2001/draft_outline_01.doc
Permission is granted to members of the 1394 Trade Association to reproduce this document for their own use or the use of other 1394 Trade Association members only, provided this notice is included.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/pub/2004/15-04-0584-02-003b-berlin-to-san-antonio-conference-call-minutes.pdf
The other use case would be what 1394 or USB requires.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/15/pub/04/15-04-0584-02-003b-berlin-to-san-antonio-conference-call-minutes.pdf
The other use case would be what 1394 or USB requires.
https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1722/contributions/2007/AVB-Transport-par-revision-0.03-2007-02-05.pdf
This will enable better end-to-end interoperability of audio and video streaming protocols by defining more common operations that are less tied to the specifics of IEEE 1394.