Open niloda opened 8 months ago
According to this morning's discussion, the clockDirectionDrivenBySssm parameter (boolean with default set to true) is fine for us if only added to the fcPort augmentation.
Decision during the LF ONMI x-haul call on 3rd of April 2024: Two attributes to be added to the FcPort::SyncFcPortSpec class:
1000BaseT electrical Ethernet interfaces implicitly create a clock loop. In accordance with the IEEE 802.3-2018 standard (§1.4.456 slave Physical Layer (PHY)), when they are configured as slaves (see rx-sync-preference of wire-interface-configuration), the transmission clock is equal to the reception clock. This feature could create problems in a ring controlled by the SSM protocol.
As shown in the following figure, the clock runs counterclockwise giving LAN-1 a higher priority than LAN-2.
In case of failure between Ne-2 and Ne-3, Ne-3 is synchronized by changing the clock direction between Ne-1, Ne-2 and Ne-3. The role of the LAN-2 port of Ne-2 and Ne-3 must be forced to slave so that the clock direction can be reversed.
Of course, for the clock direction to be consistent in the ring, the master/slave roles of the 1000BaseT Ethernet interfaces should be driven by the SSM protocol. For this purpose, some devices provide a parameter to choose whether the role of the Ethernet interface is static and defined by the interface configuration (rx-sync-preference of wire-interface-configuration) or whether it must be driven by the SSM protocol.
The current model doesn't seem to provide a parameter like that.