Re: Nomenclature poll...
Brad,
I have been giving this much thought. I would like to come in with support of a modified version of your option #2. I would like
to see:
< wavelength >< # of wavelengths >< coding scheme >< # of conductors/fibers >.
This keeps the wavelength designators next to each other as stated by Paul Kolesar (6/1/00). Putting the number of conductors or
fibers at the very end is consistent with previous versions of 802.3 such as 100BaseT4.
Thank you,
Roy Bynum
----- Original Message -----
From: "Booth, Bradley" <bradley.booth@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 3:47 PM
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
>
>