| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Chad – reading this text, I see something further when one talks about eliminating PoE. We must consider the alternative. Can you find a way to include the below?: The alternative for most devices (APs, IP Phones, etc.) is to have an external class 2 power supply that connects to an outlet and then supplies the same class 2 power that would have been delivered over PoE to the access point/ip phone/whatever-device.
The result is a system with 2 connectors, not one (the connector to the AC outlet and the connector for the class 2 power to the device), which is introducing an ‘always hot’ class 2 circuit into the environment (from the outlet to the device), as well as
potentially a source of sparks or shocks both at the outlet and at the device/hot-plug class 2 interface. In contrast, the PoE interface, which by specification will not present a voltage capable of more than a very small current until the load is confirmed
and identified, is less hazardous. George Zimmerman, Ph.D. President & Principal CME Consulting, Inc. Experts in Advanced PHYsical Communications 310-920-3860 From: Chad Jones (cmjones) <00000b60b3f54e8d-dmarc-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
All, I met with Geoff today (as we agreed to take something offline to not slow down the PDCC meeting). As a result, I’ve made some additions to the comment against 716.419.3.3 in the document. The comment doc can be found here:
https://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/PDCC/public/BS7671%20comments.pdf Regards, Chad Jones Principal Engineer, Cisco Systems Executive Secretary, IEEE 802.3 Working Group Chair, IEEE P802.3da Task Force Principal, NFPA 70 CMP3 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-PDCC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-PDCC&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-PDCC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-PDCC&A=1 |