Timeline for Does the PHY signal interframe gap to the MAC?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 14, 2019 at 20:23 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you can provide and accept your own answer. | |
| Feb 19, 2019 at 21:04 | comment | added | Zac67♦ | As Ron's pointed out, the IFG isn't data - RX_DV deasserts before IFG starts. | |
| Feb 11, 2019 at 16:03 | answer | added | Zac67♦ | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 11, 2019 at 15:44 | comment | added | Balazs F | According to IEEE 802.3-2012/section 2, point 22.2.2.7. "In order for a received frame to be correctly interpreted by [...] the MAC sublayer, RX_DV must encompass the frame, starting no later than the Start Frame Delimiter (SFD), and excluding any End-of-Frame delimiter." So should this refer to the interframe gap in case of Ethernet II? | |
| Feb 11, 2019 at 15:38 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | It is simply the un-modulated carrier signal for the time it takes to send 96 bits. Both zeroes and ones need to modulate the carrier. | |
| Feb 11, 2019 at 15:36 | comment | added | Balazs F | Does it change the state of RXDV in the MII signaling thus? | |
| Feb 11, 2019 at 15:30 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | The interframe gap is silence on the line, not zeroes, which are not silence. It is also 12 bytes (96 bits) of silence. | |
| Feb 11, 2019 at 15:30 | review | First posts | |||
| Feb 11, 2019 at 18:44 | |||||
| Feb 11, 2019 at 15:27 | history | asked | Balazs F | CC BY-SA 4.0 |