| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
I am OK with 4P PSE or 4P PD and delete "New". Yair From: Chad Jones (cmjones) [mailto:cmjones@xxxxxxxxx] Let me assure everyone that this is a place holder term that I don't expect to make it into the standard. This is what we are using before we have the discussion on what this new type will be called. Type 3 is the obvious choice but I have heard some objections. So that we don't assume the results of the coming TF discussion I proposed the term 'new type' in Victoria. I don't care what we call it now, but I also agree that less typing is better. Chad From: <Abramson>, David <david.abramson@xxxxxx> I agree. David Abramson From: Fred Schindler [mailto:grog06@xxxxxxxxx] Hello, During the June 20 IEEE 802.3 4P Study Group, ad-hoc the team okayed “new 4P PSE/PD,” for the proposed PD and PSE additions. I would prefer to use “4P PSE/PD.” This is partially because I do not like typing the extra word and because there will be many new terms that we do not want to preface with “new.” The IEEE 802.3-xxx standards have no reference to 4P—i.e., no old 4P PD/PSE. If you have a concern with using “4P PD/PSE” for the proposed PD and PSE additions, please explain why. Thanks, Fred |