Re: [802.3_10SPE] Proposed Comment 443 response change

[George Zimmerman <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks, Natalie – I think that’s a good change (especially if it’s the truth, and I’ll take your word for it that ISO 26262 isn’t for ALL automotive applications)

-george

 

From: NATALIE WIENCKOWSKI <NWIENCKOWSKI@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 9:55 AM
To: STDS-802-3-10SPE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.3_10SPE] Proposed Comment 443 response change

 

All,

 

I would suggest the following change to the response to Comment 443, add the word some.  Not all Automotive applications require compliance with ISO26262.  This needs to be clear in the specification.

 

PROPOSED ACCEPT IN PRINCIPLE.

Change "All equipment subject to this clause and intended for motor vehicle applications shall conform to ISO 26262. All equipment subject to this clause may be additionally required to conform to any applicable local, state, or national motor vehicle standards or as agreed to between the customer and supplier. " to "All equipment subject to this clause shall conform to all applicable local, state, national standards, as well as relevant application specific standards (e.g., ISO 26262 for some automotive applications)."

Note: mind the non-breaking white-spaces

 

Natalie Wienckowski

General Motors

---

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-10SPE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-10SPE&A=1

---

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-10SPE list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-10SPE&A=1