| Yong-
I have not missed your point. I support this view.
Geoff
Hi Theo (and Geoff),
I think my point is being missed WRT to THE MDI.
It's not a matter of how many connector test head you are using.
Hypothetically, what would you do if your test fails with one connector head but passes with another connector head on what seems to be equivalent units (or the same unit with different connector).
Perhaps -- later -- someone could explain away some parasitic XYZ (crosstalk, capacitance, etc whatever) or previously not known factors.
Having what we have had in 802.3 -- THE MDI spec -- helps to avoid issues while increasing the probably of interoperability that for which we do standards.
best regards,
Yong Kim, affiliation: NIO Theo-
Thanks for your input and experience.
Anecdotally, it is obvious that you never worked for Bud Blitz as I did. He was the tool Czar at the leasing company that I worked for many years ago. Designing tools was part of my job. Bud's position was that the tools suitcase was already too heavy, so you didn't get to add a tool unless you took one out.
His "guidance" (far too soft a word) drives my thinking here.
Geoff
Geoff, Yong, All great rants. Thank you. Speaking as one who has had the good fortune to produce more than a few portable field testers, I find agreement with at least one point. A single test interface is always preferable. However, when multiple connection interfaces present themselves, (and they always do), there are numerous techniques to offer users an efficient and cost effective means to adapt. So far, at least in my 20+ years of experience this has not presented a barrier to broad market adoption. Best, -Theo Yong- I would like to add one comment in particular that you didn't cover. That is test equipment, in particular field test equipment, even more so portable field test equipment. Field test equipment is built in far, far smaller quantity than DTE ports. Therefore, having a single port type (i.e. single MDI connector type) has a far larger impact on field test equipment development cost, device cost, device portability and of course device broad applicability in the field. Cheap, light, portable test equipment is a key element in broad market adoption. My addition to your excellent points.
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
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
|