RE: Nomenclature poll...
Brad,
I prefer your latest naming scheme much better. An opaque set of
2-letter suffixes (SX, LW, etc) seems a lot easier to deal with than an
utterly descriptive string such as 10GBASE-S4A1W (10G Ethernet,
short wavelength, 4 wavelengths, 8B/10B coding, one fiber, WAN
PCS). (I tried out the latter on my sysadmin, and his response was
roughly "Huh? And I'm supposed to write that **** on my purchase
reqs?")
Regards,
- Tom
Brad Booth wrote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------
I've been giving more thought to this too. What I've come up with
is the
following:
* 10GBASE-VX - 850nm serial LAN (V for VSR)
* 10GBASE-MX - 1310nm serial LAN (M for Metro)
* 10GBASE-EX - 1550nm serial LAN
* 10GBASE-SX - 850nm WDM LAN
* 10GBASE-LX - 1310nm WDM LAN
The WAN implementations would substitute "W" for the "X".
If the number of PMDs should drop, we could realign the favorite
suffixes
accordingly.
Cheers,
Brad
-----Original Message-----
From: Roy Bynum [SMTP:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 6:40 PM
To: Booth, Bradley; stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: 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