Bruce,
I support the
change. The current scope is too wide open with respect to the type of PHY
being defined. Almost anything, e.g. a 100 MHz PHY for coaxial cable,
would fit within "to add a copper Physical Layer (PHY) specification."
Tweaking the text to make the intended direction more clear is very
appropriate. If there is a specific point in Howard's suggestion that you feel
is too limiting, then suggest an alternative.
Regards,
Pat
Bradley
I do not
support this change. I think the PAR and objectives already make it
perfectly clear that we are only defining a PHY.
Bruce
At
08:58 AM 9/24/2003 -0700, Booth, Bradley wrote:
Greetings,
Howard Frazier has proposed the following
modification to the scope of the 10GBASE-T PAR to help narrow the focus
and prevent the interpretation that the Study Group is planning to make
modifications to the MAC, and to make sure the Study Group is focused on
the horizontal structured copper cabling environment:
Specify a Physical Layer
(PHY) for operation at 10 Gb/s
on horizontal structured
copper cabling, using the existing
Media Access Controller,
and with extensions to the appropriate
physical layer management
parameters, of IEEE Std 802.3.
Is there any
feedback on this proposed modification?
Thanks,
Brad Booth
Chair, 10GBASE-T Study Group
Bruce Tolley
Senior Manager, Emerging Technologies
Gigabit Systems Business Unit
Cisco Systems
170 West Tasman Drive
MS SJ B2
San Jose, CA 95134-1706
internet: btolley@cisco.com
ip phone: 408-526-4534
"Don't put your hiking boots in the oven unless you plan on eating
them."
Colin Fletcher, The Complete
Walker