RE: Nomenclature poll...
Paul,
Yes, that is the intent. I've also received feedback from a few people that
they would like to maintain a two letter suffix.
Cheers,
Brad
-----Original Message-----
From: Kolesar, Paul F (Paul) [mailto:pkolesar@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:50 PM
To: stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Nomenclature poll...
Brad,
I prefer option 2. Keeping the wavelength designators next
to each other is
a logical progression. Inherent in your example is the rule
that no <# of
wavelengths> designator is needed for single wavelength
solutions. Is this
your intent?
Paul Kolesar
----------
From: Booth, Bradley [SMTP:bradley.booth@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:47 PM
To: stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Nomenclature poll...
Assuming that we go with 10GBASE- instead of
10kBASE-, which suffix
structure does everyone prefer:
1) <wavelength> <coding scheme> <# of
wavelengths>, or
2) <wavelength> <# of wavelengths> <coding
scheme>
An example of #1 would be: 10GBASE-SX for 850nm
64b/66b Serial, and
10GBASE-LW4 for 1310nm SONET compatible WDM.
An example of #2 would be: 10GBASE-SX for 850nm
64b/66b Serial, and
10GBASE-L4W for 1310nm SONET compatible WDM.
As a note, no matter which one we choose, we are
still dealing with
a large
list of port types.
Thanks,
Brad