RE: WAN PHY name
No offense, guys, but everything anyone has suggested just creates another
set of problems, disputes, etc. - and we will still have to explain to
everyone in the world that we're really referring to the WAN PHY. Doesn't
everyone have more important stuff to do?
At 08:41 AM 4/4/00 -0700, Jonathan Thatcher wrote:
>Mike,
>
>You want to use an acronym for an Ethernet component? What are you
>thinking!? :-)
>
>Actually, this could be kind of fun. Besides SI-PHY, we could also have the
>Ethernet-Sonet-CONection PHY. :-)
>
>As you can tell, I'm in kind of a "Punch and Judy" mood today.
>
>It's a good idea.
>
>EXR PHY doesn't work since again doesn't inherently differentiate between
>the 40 km LAN PHY and the 40 m WAN PHY.
>ECON PHY is pretty cool. I don't know about ECONE. Hey, how about Ethernet
>Going After Distance? Darn, I'm doing it again. :-)
>
>jonathan
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mdelag [mailto:mdelag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 10:00 PM
> > To: Jonathan Thatcher; HSSG_reflector (E-mail)
> > Subject: Re: WAN PHY name
> >
> >
> > Jonathan,
> >
> > How about this - instead of using letters in the name that describe
> > what the PHY-in-question isn't, use letters that describe what
> > it is: Ethernet. Starting with that the first thing that
> > popped in my mind
> > was Ethernet Extension PHY (EX PHY or simply X PHY). Going a
> > little further I came up with Ethernet Distance Extension PHY
> > (EDE PHY).
> > A few others:
> > Ethernet eXtended Range PHY (EXR PHY)
> > Ethernet CONnection PHY (ECON PHY)
> > Ethernet Connection to Other NEtworks (ECONE-PHY)
> >
> > For those that like to keep the short-a vowel sound there's
> > Ethernet Connection to Alternate Networks (ECAN).
> >
> > Anyway, you see my point. There's all sorts of words and acronyms that
> > can be formed around an E for ethernet in front of PHY. We just have
> > to find the right one.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mike de la Garrigue
> >
> >
> >
> > Jonathan Thatcher wrote:
> >
> > > Len,
> > >
> > > If I might take your message and make three minor modifications:
> > >
> > > Having spent over *XX* years in *Datacom*, the *LAN* PHY
> > > nomenclature seems to me to be the most appropriate and least
> > > confusing name that comes to mind. It isn't SONET because it
> > > isn't SONET and it isn't either Telecom because other than telecom
> > > applications would find it useful. (Why start out with a
> > > market limiting handicap?) Its support of link distances over
> > > 2km gives it some claim to wide area networking coverage; its
> > > potential application within the central office, i.e., switch
> > > to switch, gives it some claim to telecommunications
> > > networking; its potential use in the LAN gives it some claim
> > > to data; so....
> > >
> > > Do you see the problem? There are many other minor
> > variations that all
> > > yield equally valid statements. Since there is some desire
> > by the committee
> > > to have common PMDs for the 10.0 and 9.5 Gb/s versions of
> > the PHY, using
> > > distance doesn't differentiate any better than LAN and WAN.
> > >
> > > Let's not give up on this. If it were trivial, we would
> > have solved it long
> > > ago....
> > >
> > > jt
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Young, Leonard G [mailto:YoungLG@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > Sent: Monday, April 03, 2000 6:10 AM
> > > > To: HSSG_reflector (E-mail); 'Jonathan Thatcher'
> > > > Subject: RE: WAN PHY name
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Having spent over 26 years in Telecom, the WAN PHY
> > > > nomenclature seems to me to be the most appropriate and least
> > > > confusing name that comes to mind. It isn't SONET because it
> > > > isn't SONET and it isn't Telecom because other than telecom
> > > > applications would find it useful. (Why start out with a
> > > > market limiting handicap?) Its support of link distances over
> > > > 2km gives it some claim to wide area networking coverage; its
> > > > potential application within the central office, i.e., switch
> > > > to switch, gives it some claim to telecommunications
> > > > networking; its potential use in the LAN gives it some clain
> > > > to data; so....
> > > >
> > > > Len Young
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > ----------
> > > > > From: Jonathan
> > > > Thatcher[SMTP:Jonathan.Thatcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 3:05 AM
> > > > > To: HSSG_reflector (E-mail)
> > > > > Subject: RE: WAN PHY name
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I have been thinking about this a great deal and have yet
> > > > to find what is
> > > > > really loveable.
> > > > >
> > > > > I recommend that we don't want the "word" WAN anywhere in
> > > > the definition. To
> > > > > include it implies that we believe that WAN and SONET are
> > > > in some way
> > > > > equivalent. While some people may in their hearts believe
> > > > this, a number
> > > > > would be quite adverse....
> > > > >
> > > > > If we remove "WAN" as an option, we are pretty much left
> > > > with "SONET" as a
> > > > > key qualifier (or "Telecom"). What I remember seeing so far:
> > > > >
> > > > > SONET Friendly PHY
> > > > > SONET Compatible PHY
> > > > > PHY with SONET framer
> > > > > SONET-compliant PHY
> > > > > Telecom PHY
> > > > >
> > > > > A number of people voiced dislike for use of the words
> > > > "compatible" and
> > > > > "compliant." I remember the arguments being something like:
> > > > how can it be
> > > > > compatible and not compliant and how can it be compliant
> > > > and not SONET.
> > > > > Sigh.
> > > > >
> > > > > This leaves:
> > > > >
> > > > > SONET Friendly PHY
> > > > > PHY with SONET framer
> > > > > Telecom PHY
> > > > >
> > > > > Any more ideas?
> > > > >
> > > > > jonathan
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mike de la Garrigue
> > Alcatel Internetworking Division
> > mdelag@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > 818-878-4740
> >
> >
> >
Fred Weniger
Gigabit Product Marketing Manager
805-388-7571
fax: 805-384-5065
weniger@xxxxxxxxxxx
VITESSE
SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION