| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Dear Study Group Participants; The latest versions of all presentations have been uploaded to the website for November. Per our discussions, its very important for us to work together to develop clear objectives and build supporting presentation for them. In the meeting I indicated I would send this list out to the reflector for consideration and discussion as to what we need. •Multi-Mode 1.Identify all potential “tools” for implementing a 4x25G SR link 2.Establish the relative power, cost, size, time components for various reaches 3.Map this against market data for reach requirements 4.Obtain the balance point for a technically feasible, economically feasible, low-cost, low-power MMF solution that meets sufficient customer needs. •Single-Mode 1.Identify all potential “tools” for implementing a lower cost longwave link 2.Establish the relative power, cost, size, time components for various reaches 3.Map this against market data for reach requirements 4.Obtain the balance point for a technically feasible, economically feasible, low-cost, low-power SMF solution that meets sufficient customer needs. •Relative Cost 1.Identify the cost sensitivity for short reach MM optical links (Server/Switch) 2.Identify the cost sensitivity for longer reach MM optical links (Switch/Switch) 3.Identify the cost sensitivity for mid-range SM optical links (MDC/campus) 4.Identify relative cost of termination, fiber by length, for duplex and MTP connections, SMF and MMF 5.Identify the cost sensitivity for switches/servers to PMD cost, power, space variations •Market Need for Timed/Retimed 1.Identify impacts upon a 4x25G SR link 2.Establish the relative power, cost, size, time components w/wo retimer 3.Map this against market data for reach requirements 4.Obtain the balance point for a technically feasible, economically feasible, low-cost, low-power SR solution that meets the optimum customer needs. •Time To Market 1.Identify technology feasibility, market adoption of 100G 2.Establish the TTM priority for various approaches 3.Map this against market requirements for each approach 4.Obtain the balance point •Distinct Identity 1.Validate all objectives provide a distinct identity •Compatibility 1.Validate that all objectives can be met while maintaining compatibility with existing 802.3 standards 2.Study compatibility with CR4 and assess priority within SG As I indicated in the meeting, this list is not comprehensive, but it should be a good start. Jonathan King has offered to chair a "MMF Ad hoc" that will identify key content required for a comprehensive MMF objective and will be setting up teleconferences to help drive that forward. I request that you contact Jonathan as soon as possible and let him know if you are interested in joining that ad hoc. (Thanks Jonathan!) Thanks to everyone who contributed and participated in the November Plenary. I was very happy with the way it went and anticipate that we are moving toward a clarification of our objectives and a demonstration of their ability to meet the 5 criteria. Regards, Dan |