Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Colleagues,
I have received valuable comments on the proposed response and motion wording, in addition to Ramana's proposal to change the Straw Poll.
Regarding the latter, I prefer to stick to the comment resolution with a Straw Poll linked to the comments we are trying to resolve. Fortunately, we have previously agreed upon text within the TF on wavelength, and having an Straw Poll with two options to fill a gap that does not exist in the draft simply does not reflects the current situation.
In my opinion our focus should be to complete the comment
resolution.
My updated proposal is the following (modifications explained in italic):
Colleagues,
Last week we were discussing in depth to change the current 802.3cz/D3.01 draft.Arguments on the technical and on the cost impact of the system and testing tools were given, and we had very interesting presentations by Ramana and Rubén (See https://www.ieee802.org/3/cz/public/oct_2022/murty_3cz_01_1022.pdf and https://www.ieee802.org/3/cz/public/oct_2022/perezaranda_3cz_02_1022_vcsel_rel.pdf).
In my opinion, tomorrow we should measure whether there is consensus to change the current draft text, and also resolve the rest of the comments that remain to be resolved.
So, my proposal is the following:
- Add to Proposed Response of comments #i-107 and #i-108 the following sentence, acknowledging the discussions we had last week:
- [Two presentations on the VCSEL reliability were made during comment resolution discussion (see https://www.ieee802.org/3/cz/public/oct_2022/murty_3cz_01_1022.pdf and https://www.ieee802.org/3/cz/public/oct_2022/perezaranda_3cz_02_1022_vcsel_rel.pdf), in addition to an in-depth discussion on the cost impact on system technology and testing when the wavelength range is extended as proposed in #i-107 and #i-108.]
- Conduct an Straw Poll on the two modified Proposed Responses to measure the consensus around them with the following text:
- Straw Poll #TBD
Approve the proposed response to comments #i-107 and #i-108 as drafted by the editor.
(Technical >= 75%)
Yes
No
Abstain
- In case that no consensus on the Proposed Responses is reached, add to both Proposed Responses the following sentence:
- [There is no consensus to make a change to the draft.]
- I intend to move the same motion that I tabled last week, with the following text:
Motion #TBD
Move to approve the proposed response to comments #i-107 and #i-108 as drafted by the editor.
(Technical >= 75%)Yes
No
Abstain
I think this is the best way to move forward, try to complete the remaining comments, and generate the next version of the draft for comment at our Bangkok meeting.
Kind Regards,
Luisma Torres
IEEE 802.3cz Chief Editor
Luisma Torres Principal Engineer at KDPOF |
|
Knowledge Development for POF, S.L. | |
A: Ronda de Poniente 14 2º CD, 28760, Tres Cantos (Madrid), Spain | |
P: + 34 91 804 33 87 Ext:110 | |
M: +34 681 29 11 53 | |
E: luismanuel.torres@xxxxxxxxx | |
W: https://www.kdpof.com | |
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-OMEGA list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-OMEGA&A=1