Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: [RPRWG] 802.17 Follow On Projects - Results of 7/22 Ad Hoc Meeting




Raj, thank you for your inputs.

My present focus is from now until Thursday when we discuss follow-on work.  
I recommend that your bring your thoughts forward to the WG during that 
discussion.  My request for a champion was to get the ideas fleshed out 
adequately for us to be able to draft a request to open a study group, and 
be able to do that in the space of a couple of hours on Thursday.  I am in 
agreement with you that having a single "champion" is ultimately, not nearly 
as important as having numerous companies willing to go forward and 
standardize and develop the resulting products.

Best regards.

Robert D. Love
rdlove@xxxxxxxx


>From: "Raj Sharma" <raj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: "Robert Love" <rd_love@xxxxxxxxxxx>,<stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: [RPRWG] 802.17 Follow On Projects - Results of 7/22 Ad Hoc 
>Meeting
>Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 09:12:23 -0700
>
>Bob,
>
>The process of figuring out what the next set of addition to
>dot17 must be rationalized with two crucial issues.
>
>First, additions/enhancements must be such that these are not major
>modifications to the current draft proposal. A.k.a., this should
>not be a Trojan horse to bring back ideas that failed to gain traction
>during the process of putting together the current draft. So, having
>*a* champion is less desirable than having a large group of companies
>coalesce behind a few of these based on the business and market place
>potential. This requires the champions to work together in putting
>the collective reasoning and justification for the next phase by
>getting wide spread support. As suggested by you the one pager may
>be a singular view for now.
>
>Second, I suggest that we limit the number of concurrent threads moving
>forward to avoid infant mortality of ideas and negative press. This may
>require us to focus on one or two distinct set of ideas. Also, given
>the diminishing membership in the working group, this will assure a
>diverse and well represented working group.
>
>Thanks for taking the leadership in getting things started for the next
>phase.
>
>raj
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Love [mailto:rd_love@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2003 7:30 PM
> > To: stds-802-17@xxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [RPRWG] 802.17 Follow On Projects - Results of 7/22 Ad Hoc
> > Meeting
> >
> >
> >
> > All,
> > We have just finished our Ad Hoc meeting to determine what
> > the potential
> > follow-on projects may be.  The session began with
> > brainstorming for ideas,
> > followed by a vote of those that were strongly in support of
> > or strongly
> > against the ideas(First number is FOR, second number is
> > AGAINST).  The
> > following list is the result of the brain-storming session
> > and the voting:
> > Where there is a name next to an item it means that person
> > has volunteered
> > to "champion" it and will bring a one or two slide
> > presentation to the WG on
> > Thursday, outlining what the project should include and why
> > we should do it.
> >   Ideas without champions cannot progress.  Note that some of
> > the ideas will
> > be combined by the "champion" for presentation on Thursday.
> >
> > The objective of this exercise is to initiate one or more
> > study groups that
> > will run from the close of this meeting until the close of
> > the November
> > plenary.
> >
> > If anyone reading this note wants to champion any of the
> > ideas not presently
> > supported, they are requested to develop a short (one or two
> > slides, or more
> > if desired) presentation, fleshing out the idea and
> > supporting it.  They
> > will then have the opportunity to make their presentation to
> > the working
> > group on Thursday.
> >
> > Best regards.
> >
> > Robert D. Love
> > rdlove@xxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> > 1.	Mixed speeds on one ring		14	1	Nader
> > 2.	Different PHY layers			10	0
> > 3.	Trunking (Link Aggregation	7	1
> > 4.	Enhanced bridging			7	1
> > 5.	Enhanced OAM Support - 			8	2 Leon
> > 6.	RPR on a single ringlet			7	1
> > 7.	Incorporate ideas from X.msr into RPR	5	1
> > 8.	Wireless PHY for RPR 	9	2
> > 9.	Hetrogeneous rings (not limited to speed change alone)
> > 8	5	Nader (tied to
> > Mixed Speeds on one ring)
> > 10.	Smooth migration for increased bandwidth	7	1
> > 11.	Virtual RPR Rings 	5	2
> > 12.	Pure Class Based transit path (more than 2 queues)
> > 7	5
> > 13.	N+ ringlets, N not necessarily even.	6	6
> > 14.	Simplified RPR		6	4
> > 15.	Alternative Fairness schemes	9	7 Li Mo
> > 16.	Fractional protection	6	3
> > 17.	Multicast Spatial Reuse	4	4
> > 18.	Spatial Aware Classes A and B allocations	8
> > 6 David James (Including
> > Alternative Fairness Schemes, Spatially aware source destination and
> > multi-choke support in the MAC
> > 19.	*Spatially aware or source destination based fairness 5	7
> > 20.	Increased number of stations per ring.	3	9
> > 21.	*Resilient Packet Networks (Topologies not limited to
> > rings)		3	6
> > 22.	Lossy MAC 	3	7
> > 23.	Protection mixed protection technique.	3	7
> > 24.	Security		4	7
> > 25.	*Multi-Choke support in the MAC		3	4
> > 26.	Multi Choke Support in the MAC Client	1	6
> > 27.	*Link Protection		3	4
> > 28.	Adaptive MAC Layer for different communication data
> > 1	7
> >
> >
> > * The ideas with asterics were ones that had poor support,
> > but at least one
> > person that strongly believed we should move forward with them.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
> >
> >

_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963