Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Jodi Haasz Senior Manager Operational Program Management O: +1 732 562 6367 M: +1 732 439 9144 | standards.ieee.org | |
First, I wanted to let everyone know I will be deleting the current meeting series and starting a fresh series. I received multiple emails with accepts for meeting updates even though I have not changed the invite, meaning the calendar invite has been corrupted. So expect a full cancellation and a new series invite.
The main topic is the work that needs done before our next meeting. Here is message I sent back on June 11, we have not met since then and this is the stuff still to close:
I intended to give a report on the Q2/5 meeting last week. Of the 5 documents the PDCC reviewed last Wednesday (4th of June), they had already reviewed two before I joined ((doc 108 and 133). Our only comments against those two documents were that one recommended 1kV and the other 1.5kV. The rapporteur informed me that these were competing submissions from different entities to explain the discrepancy. Doc 154 and 158 were also related to the same topic. I put replies to the PDCC review in the documents and they are posted in the private area: https://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/PDCC/private/Kseries/T25-SG05-C-0154!!MSW-E-PDCC-ITU.docx, https://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/PDCC/private/Kseries/T25-SG05-C-0158!!MSW-E-PDCC-ITU.docx. All four documents were deferred until the next meeting to allow time for the ITU group to discuss. They heard the response from the PDCC that the changes result in an Ethernet implementation that does not comply to 802.3, and this is one of the things they plan to discuss. They did accept the change to the text “perfectly matched” in doc 158.
They reviewed K.147 and I walked them through the PDCC review. I took notes (posted): https://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/PDCC/private/Kseries/T25-SG05-C-0062!R1!MSW-E-PDCC-ITU.docx. They accepted most of our comments. Nothing left would concern me. The document is moving to the Working Party for consent and I have posted the final version for review: https://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/PDCC/private/Kseries/T25-SG05-250603-TD-GEN-0348!!MSW-E.docx. [THIS IS A NEW ITEM THAT NEEDS ATTENTION]
Lastly, there was one other document that 802.3 was supposed to review, but I missed the email and therefore neglected to inform the group. This is a revision of K.Supple.25 “ITU-T K.117 - Long reach single twisted-pair Ethernet resistibility testing”. They also deferred any action on this document to allow 802.3 time to review and comment (they were ready to send this to the Working Party, so they are being VERY accommodating to 802.3). I would request that you review this document and filter any comments back to me: https://www.ieee802.org/3/ad_hoc/PDCC/private/Kseries/T25-SG05-C-0063!R1!MSW-E.docx. [ALSO, A NEW ITEM (TO US) THAT NEEDS ATTENTION]
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