Re: Distance Ad Hoc Summary from 6-28-99 Conference Call

[Peter_Wang@xxxxxxxx]

Jonathan's original proposed process is as you re-iterated, at least that's how
I understood it.  However, I thought Jonathan actually described the reverse
process for the short reach distance options this morning, i.e. start with the
least likely option and move toward the most likely.  It may facilitate ad hoc
group meeting next Monday evening if we can agree on the process to over the
reflector?
-Peter




"HANSON,DEL (HP-SanJose,ex1)" <del_hanson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on 06/28/99 02:14:35
PM

Sent by:  "HANSON,DEL (HP-SanJose,ex1)" <del_hanson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


To:   "'HSSG Distance Ad Hoc'" <stds-802-3-hssg-distance@xxxxxxxx>
cc:    (Peter Wang/HQ/3Com)
Subject:  Distance Ad Hoc Summary from 6-28-99 Conference Call




HSSG Distance Ad Hoc

This is a brief summary of our conference call at 8 AM PST today (6-28-99)
for those who did not participate. Listed below are the two levels of issues
we discussed, as distributed previously by Jonathan. We need to frame
motions around these issues which can pass the 7-5-99 Plenary by >75% vote.
We agreed to implement Jonathan's strategy of making a sequence of motions;
the top level of which should be eminently passable so that is a subsequent
item fails, we are not left with nothing.
   As expected, we did not reach unanimous conclusions on any of the line
items. Based on reflector comments and our discussions today, I would
recommend that in the interim that we each think about a proposal for a
motion on these issues that has a likelihood of gaining >75% consensus
rather than what might be our particular hot button.
   Jonathan announced that the HSSG Distance Ad Hoc will have a meeting
running from 8 PM to ? on Monday, 7-5-99, to review and frame these motions
which we will present at the HSSG Wednesday AM meeting. See you there.

Regards,
Del
---------------------------------------------------------------
Top Level Motion/Applications:

1. Support the traditional LAN environment.

2. Support the extended Ethernet environment as specified by 1000BASE-LX
link lengths and point-to-point links used in common practice to reach into
the MAN environment.

3. Support direct attachment to the WAN infrastructure.

---------------------------------------------------------------
Second Level Motion/Link Lenfth Cases:

Possible link length alternatives:

1. 100 meters over MMF (850 and 1300)
2. 300 meters over MMF (850? and 1300?)
3. 500 (550) meters over MMF (850? and 1300?)
4. 3 km over SMF (1300)
5. 5 km over SMF (1300)
6. 10 km over SMF (1300)
7. 20-40 km over SMF (1300)
8. 80-120 km over SMF (1500)

To sort through these, I think we need to consider some of the "traditional"
assumptions/arguments/positions that were used in Gigabit Ethernet when
making decisions about fiber, wavelength, and distance:

a. We should support the existing infrastructure (meaning the existing cable
plants)
b. We should minimize the number of PHY choices
c. We should minimize the cost of implementation

Jonathan

att1.unk