A local area network operating under the Gigabit Ethernet standard includes transceiver nodes communicating with each other in a full-duplex mode; that is, transmitting in both directions simultaneously at full bandwidth within a particular frequency band. The transceivers typically have a transformer at their output, with a communication cable electrically connecting the transformers of the two transceivers.
Within the transceiver, both a transmitter section and a receiver section are coupled to the transformer and, necessarily, to each other. Without additional circuitry, the signal at the input to the receiver will include both a received signal from the communication cable and a signal from the transmitter section. The received signal, having been attenuated in the cable, will typically be at a lower signal strength than the signal from the transmitter section within the transceiver.
Signal isolation between the transmitter and receiver sections of a transceiver may be obtained with a costly, transformer-based, hybrid electrical bridge circuit. However, the degree of isolation provided by such bridge circuits is dependent upon how closely the terminating impedance of the bridge matches the impedance of the communication cable. Because the impedance of the communication cable is dynamic, over time more or less of the transmitter signal is present at the input of the receiver to interfere with detection of the received signal.
An alternative technique for reducing the signal strength of the signal from the transmitter section involves generating within the transceiver a signal to cancel the transmitter signal. A signal that is identical to the transmitter signal, but having inverse polarity, is mixed with the combination of transmitter and received signal in order to cancel some portion of the transmitter signal. As a result, the signal-to-noise ratio of the received signal is improved.
However, the efficacy of this technique depends upon the degree to which the cancellation signal matches the transmitter signal. Differences between the two signals will result not only in some portion of the transmitter signal not being cancelled out, but may also inject additional noise into the signal at the input of the receiver. Merely matching the transmitter input signal is not enough, the non-linearities of the transmitter circuitry must also be matched in order for the technique to be fully effective.
Other challenges in implementing a Gigabit Ethernet network arise from the transformer coupling of the transceiver nodes. A transformer presents the transmitter circuitry with a characteristic impedance load. Because transmitters are typically implemented as current source/sink circuits, and the communication standards require that signal levels of a certain voltage be produced in the network, the power-handling requirement of transmitters is directly related to the impedance load presented by the transformers. As the impedance load is reduced, the transmitter must source/sink proportionately more current to produce the required signal voltages.
Since the communication cable is double terminated (i.e., is transformer coupled at both ends of the cable), the two transformers are in parallel and together present to the transmitter half the impedance of a single transformer. This requires a transmitter design that provides twice the power. Furthermore, where a transmitter is implemented with circuitry that only sinks current, the transformer is typically provided with a center tap connected to a voltage source. Because the transmitter is only driving half the transformer, the load impedance is halved again, requiring another doubling of the power handled by the transmitter circuitry.
Circuit designs typically used in Ethernet transmitters may not successfully scale up to the power levels required in such networks. The amplifiers and circuit sources used may become non-linear at these increased power levels, resulting in degraded functionality or failure to meet communications standards.
Before undertaking the DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION below, it may be advantageous to set forth definitions of certain words and phrases used throughout this patent document: the terms “include” and “comprise,” as well as derivatives thereof, mean inclusion without limitation; the term “or,” is inclusive, meaning and/or; “each” means every one of at least a subset of the identified items; the phrases “associated with” and “associated therewith,” as well as derivatives thereof, may mean to include, be included within, interconnect with, contain, be contained within, connect to or with, couple to or with, be communicable with, cooperate with, interleave, juxtapose, be proximate to, be bound to or with, have, have a property of, or the like; and the term “controller” means any device, system or part thereof that controls at least one operation, such a device may be implemented in hardware, firmware or software, or some combination of at least two of the same. It should be noted that the functionality associated with any particular controller may be centralized or distributed, whether locally or remotely. Definitions for certain words and phrases are provided throughout this patent document, those of ordinary skill in the art should understand that in many, if not most instances, such definitions apply to prior, as well as future, uses of such defined words and phrases.