| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Dear P802.3bs Task Force Members, I wanted to explain why I am an author of competing proposals for the 2-km reach objective, namely, 4x100G-lambda (50GBAUD) PAM-4 and 8x50G-lambda (25GBAUD) PAM-4. I began with 4x100G-lambda (50GBAUD) PAM-4 because
it aligned with what I believe is best from an architectural point of view, which I had reviewed in my Norfolk presentation
http://www.ieee802.org/3/bs/public/14_05/maki_3bs_01a_0514.pdf. I also considered in that presentation that technical feasibility in concert with
time-to-market considerations might dictate something different than architectural optimization. Here are some things I also know to be true:
1.
The market needs a durable (good longevity) interoperable standard for 10 km reach. This reach is where the market demands zero issues for interconnecting systems from different system vendors and implicitly
module vendors.
2.
The market will ask for a reduced performance, 2 km reach, version and thus more importantly a reduced cost option that preserves interoperation with (1) up to 2 km.
3.
IEEE 802.3 standardization enabling higher-density solutions and/or lower cost solutions for 2-km applications will not stop (1) and (2) from continuing to be demanded and procured. Only a compelling
new 10-km standard would change things for (1) and (2). Thus, at this time, my priority has become
8x50G-lambda (25GBAUD) PAM-4 for the 2-km reach proposal since it aligns with the what I see as the winning 10-km reach proposal, which is 8x50G-lambda (25GBAUD) PAM-4. Jeff From: John DAmbrosia [mailto:John_DAmbrosia@xxxxxxxx]
All, The webpage has been updated with all files I have received as of now.
Please see -
http://www.ieee802.org/3/bs/public/15_05/index.shtml. We will start promptly at 8:30am tomorrow (Monday) morning. Regards, John D’Ambrosia Chair, IEEE P802.3bs 400GbE Task Force |