All,
I have completed my own review of our presentation material in relation to the updated 5 Criteria, in particular broad market potential, technical feasibility, and economic feasibility, which are shown below.
Broad Market Potential
Each proposed IEEE 802 LMSC standard shall have broad market potential. At a minimum, address the following areas:
- Broad sets of applicability.
- Multiple vendors and numerous users.
- Balanced Costs (LAN versus attached stations) [Removed from IEEE 802 5 Criteria 11/12]
Technical Feasibility
Each proposed IEEE 802 LMSC standard shall provide evidence that the project is technically feasible within the time frame of the project. At a minimum, address the following items to demonstrate technical feasibility:
a) Demonstrated system feasibility.
- Proven similar technology via testing, modeling, simulation, etc.
- Confidence in reliability. [Removed from IEEE 802 5 Criteria 11/13]
Economic Feasibility
Each proposed IEEE 802 LMSC standard shall provide evidence of economic feasibility. Demonstrate, as far as can reasonably be estimated, the economic feasibility of the proposed project for its intended applications. Among the areas that may be addressed
in the cost for performance analysis are the following:
a) Balanced costs (infrastructure versus attached stations).
b) Known cost factors.
c) Consideration of installation costs.
d) Consideration of operational costs (e.g. energy consumption).
Excluding agenda and liaison reports, in my opinion (and that is an important point – it is just my opinion) I observe the following
- There are a lot of technical presentations in relation to architecture
- 20 presentations related to for our objectives BMP: 19 presentations, Technical Feasibility:19 and economic feasibility:6.
- We have a number of presentations on technical feasibility that make reference to existing 100G specs, but the problem with that is these specifications are to 10^-12. We now have an objective to 10^-13. IMO this leaves us open to the question of whether
our supporting material helps us in regards to our new updated BER.
- Not all of our objectives have supporting material regarding economic feasibility. There was supporting information for MMF and PSM, but I found the economic feasibility info on 2km and 10km to be somewhat lacking. Also – need to address economic feasibility
against improved BER
- Technical data has been thrown out there in relation to higher speeds and modulation. We have seen several presentations on modulation in relation to it electrically and optically. Electrically, there are several references to OIF CEI, and I need to point
out that presentations within the OIF are not open to non-members. Therefore, it might be good to see presentations that show technical feasibility of 40 to 50G electrical signaling (NRZ or modulation).
- Personally, I think we have a lot supporting broad market potential, but technical feasibility and economic feasibility needs further work, as I have outlined.
I have attached the spreadsheet, complete with links to the individual presentations, for everyone to review. Please feel free to review and comment on my assessment. Given the number of presentations I reviewed, it is possible that I may have misinterpreted
some data.
Further, I will be reaching out to individuals to assign ad hocs to pull together draft responses to individual criteria. I intend to use the applications ad hoc to deal with broad market potential. Meeting announcements will be made shortly.
I am asking all to make use of the reflector to discuss my assessments. We need to make sure that we address all areas of concern, so that we make sure as we write our responses that we have backing data to support our proposed responses.
Regards,
John D’Ambrosia
Chair, IEEE 802.3 400 Gb/s Ethernet Study Group