RE: Nomenclature slides...
Jeff et al.,
I am a vendor to the box vendors. We end up supporting whatever box vendors
finally want. However, I would also like to warn about the risk of reducing
the PMDs to the point of serving the short term logistics of box vendors
without best serving the needs of the market (users). I believe our main
goal is to identify solutions that support the proliferation of the
technology. The key (AND ONLY) factor involved in true market acceptance
(assuming economics is a given) is the support of the 'whole product'.
Whole product means:
a. Multiple (viable) vendor support
b. Installation support
c. Maintenance support
The thing we have to consider here is which PMDs offer the best chance of
fulfilling the 'whole product' requirements stated above....and also fit the
objectives. My opinion continues to be that 850nm serial has advantages
over the other short reach solutions based on a & c...as well as economics.
Also, I must add here that the objectives do not seem to be based on real
"application space" data, i.e. surveys that maps link distance vs port
volumes in the CO/POP/Large Data Centers. But more on early 802.3ae member
preferences. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
We believe that there is a substantially large volume of links in the space
supported by 850nm serial over existing MMF. This coupled with the fact
that 850nm serial is less complex & more available [sooner], means it will
be a guaranteed market success.
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeffrey Warren [mailto:jwarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 11:36 AM
To: 'Booth, Bradley'; HSSG (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Nomenclature slides...
Brad,
I vote for choice # 2 (Brad's poll) and PMD Set # 1 (Walt's PMD options).
These votes results in a Port_Type set as follows:
1. 10GBASE-EX (1550nm serial LAN)
2. 10GBASE-EW (1550nm serial WAN)
3. 10GBASE-SX4 (850nm WDM LAN)
4. 10GBASE-SW4 (850nm WDM WAN)
5. 10GBASE-LX4 (1310nm WDM LAN)
6. 10GBASE-LW4 (1310nm WDM WAN)
The PMD sub-group chairman (Walt) stated that neither camp (system
integrators or component suppliers) has sufficient strength to win a 75 %
technical vote in this committee on the issue of three 'vs' five PMDs.
Therefore to avoid deadlock, this group must do some serious sole searching
over the coming weeks leading up to the start of the July plenary. Coming
out of this July plenary the group must have consensus on the minimal PMD
set possible that addresses all 10 GE objectives.
For example this three PMD set solves all 10 GE distance objectives:
1. 850 WWDM Short Reach Market 100m/300m IEEE distance
objective
2. 1300WWDM Medium Reach Market 2km/10km IEEE distance
objective
3. 1500 Serial Long Reach 40km IEEE distance objective
- Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Booth, Bradley [mailto:bradley.booth@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 2:33 PM
To: HSSG (E-mail)
Subject: Nomenclature slides...
<<booth_1_0600.pdf>>
All,
Feel free to take a look and discuss it with your customers, family and
friends. :-)
Comments welcome,
Brad
Brad Booth
IEEE P802.3ae Editor
bradley.booth@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:bradley.booth@xxxxxxxxx>
(512) 407-2135 office
(512) 589-4438 cellular