Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week

["Dedic, Ian" <Ian.Dedic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Is there really much point spending all the time and effort needed to define a new 800G standard which is only a 2x speed increment? Why not just use 2 400G interfaces?

Just because we *can* define another standard doesn't mean we *should*...

Ian
----------------------
Ian Dedic
Chief Engineer
Fujitsu Semiconductor Europe
3 Concorde Park, Concorde Road, Maidenhead, Berkshire SL6 4FJ, UK
Email : Ian.Dedic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Tel : +44(1628)50-4711
www : http://emea.fujitsu.com/semiconductor
 

From: Fred Rabouw (frabouw) [mailto:frabouw@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 04:30 AM
To: STDS-802-3-400G@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <STDS-802-3-400G@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week
 

I presume 1.6T and 800G for switches and 800G for servers, for 800G on servers and no 800G on switches would be challenging to connect….

Regards

Fred

From: Chris Cole <chris.cole@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Chris Cole <chris.cole@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday 14 July 2014 23:24
To: "STDS-802-3-400G@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <STDS-802-3-400G@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week

2)      My view of the right next rate steps after 400Gb/s Ethernet are 1.6T for switches and 800G for servers, but not 1T.

________________________________________
Geschaeftsfuehrer/Managing Directors: Brendan Mc Kearney, Kagemasa Magaribuchi, Amane Inoue, Shinichi Machida
Sitz/Seat: Langen, Hessen; Registergericht/Commercial Register: Offenbach/Main HRB 32725
________________________________________
This e-mail and any attachment contains information
which is private and confidential and is intended
for the addressee only. If you are not an addressee,
you are not authorised to read, copy or use the e-mail
or any attachment. If you have received this e-mail
in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail
and then delete it.
________________________________________