Re: PMD discussion
Walter,
I like the second better, but for clarity, I have a question .... for the
serial solution, my understanding is the thought is to use 64b66b on the
fiber. What is the general thought for wdm? Is it just 8b10b or is the
thinking in general that the line interface is 64b66b?
Take care
Joel
-----------------------------
Walter Thirion wrote:
> First of all, thanks to everybody that presented PMD proposals at the last
> meeting. I've sent my presentation to David Law, so it should be available
> on the web site in the next couple of days.
>
> In listening to the discussion after my presentation and then going around
> and talking to people, it feels to me like we're starting to converge. Not
> there, yet, but making progress.
>
> The equipment manufacturers made it pretty clear they would like to see no
> more than 3 PMDs in the standard. The PMD vendors have some concern that
> using only 3 PMDs may sub-optimize certain objectives, however, they could
> support the 3 PMD position if it is made clear which 3 PMDs the equipment
> oems want.
>
> Based on an informal straw poll and anecdotal evidence, my opinion is the
> first choice would be the set:
> ________________
> 850 nm WWDM
> 1310 nm WWDM
> 1550 nm Serial
> ________________
>
> If that set isn't feasible, then the 2nd most popular choice is:
> ________________
> 850 nm WWDM
> 1310 nm Serial
> 1550 nm Serial
> ________________
>
> Thoughts, feedback?
>
> Walt
> ___________________
> Walter Thirion
> Chair, IEEE 802.3ae PMD Sub-Task Force
> 301 Congress Ave.
> Suite 2050
> Austin, Texas 78701
> Voice: 512-236-6951
> Fax: 512-236-6959
> wthirion@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> ___________________
--
Joel Goergen
Force10 Networks
1440 McCarthy blvd
Milpitas, Ca, 95035
Email: joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Direct: (408) 571-3694
Cell: (612) 670-5930
Fax: (408) 571-3550