Re: [8023-10GEPON] [FEC superating] - Draft two of the presentation.
Dear Frank and all,
I am Fumio Daido of Sumitomo Electric and am person in charge of
collecting opinion of Japanese vendor regarding rate increase analysis.
Basically most of people agree to your draft (FECsuperatingV2.ppt).
I would like to inform you of opinion of Japanese system vendors for
your draft.
<assumption>
Supper rated speed are 11.049Gbps for RS(255,239) and 11.417Gbps for
RS(255,231).
< cost comparison between Super-rating and Sub-rating(10.3125Gbps) >
There are two different opinion regarding cost increase. One opinion is
that the rate increase affects the cost. The other opinion is that the
rate increase does not affect the cost. So I will show you two opinion
below.
- opinion A
It is difficult to estimate cost increase of Super-rating, because the
cost increase depends on the minimum sensitivity of receiver
specification. If the margin between the minimum sensitivity of the
specification and the average sensitivity of actual transceiver is
small, that results in increasing cost due to yield loss. Especially,
the margin would be small in case of ClassB++.
- opinion B
The cost increase of Super-rating up to 11.417Gpbs will be nothing in
three years. If the Super-rating is 12.5Gbps, the increased cost ratio
is from 1.3 to 1.4 compared with 10.3125Gbps.
What information is required more for rate increase analysis?
Best Regards,
----
Fumio Daido
Sumitomo Electric Industries, LTD.
On 2007/02/14 1:57, Frank Effenberger wrote:
> Everybody,
>
>
>
> I have prepared a new draft. This incorporates several comments
> received, and develops a conclusion piece that drives a result.
>
>
>
> Just to review the idea of this effort: This presentation was designed
> to lay out all the arguments, pro and con, for super- and sub-rating.
>
> This way, an audience can be quickly brought up to speed, to facilitate
> their knowledgeable advice and consent.
>
> I can say that this decision is basically a “judgment call,” with good
> reasons for both sides, and really will only be solved democratically.
>
> As you will see in the final slide, the smaller 802.3av group has
> already indicated via straw poll that the sub-rating is preferred,
> unanimously, in fact.
>
> So, I think the next step is to take this presentation to the wider
> 802.3 group, perhaps in the opening plenary of the next meeting.
>
> Then, we can take their temperature with a straw poll, and see where we
> stand.
>
> If they indicate general agreement, then the deal is done.
>
> If there is trouble, then we will burn that bridge when we come to it.
>
>
>
> Please comment.
>
>
>
> Dr. Frank J. Effenberger
>
> Huawei Technologies USA
>
> 1700 Alma Drive, Plano TX 75075
>
> Office (732) 625 3002
>
> Cell (908) 670 3889
>
>
>
> p.s. Personal disclaimer: I perceive that folks might wonder about my
> personal position on this matter (that is, if you care!) Originally, I
> was for super-rating, because of the stylistic ‘cleanliness is closer to
> Godliness’ argument. But, in discussing this with various industrial
> sources, I get the feeling that the optics people are turned off by
> super-rating, and so the market cost argument will end up favoring the
> sub-rating, and cost is everything in access. So, I changed my mind,
> and now favor sub-rating.
>
>
>
>
>