RE: [EFM] Ethernet Subscriber Access (ESA)
Again, a bit late on the thread:
The Ethernet Subscriber Access (ESA) terminology, suggested by Geoff, is
both simple and easily distinguished from EFM.
Geoff - can you confirm that you are donating this terminology to the
industry without a trade mark associated with it please?
Thanks
Bob
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-3-efm@majordomo.ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-efm@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Geoff
> Thompson
> Sent: 05 September 2001 00:17
> To: carlosal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [EFM] EFM x 802.3ah - broad picture x narrow scope
>
>
>
> Carlos-
>
> I agree with your concepts but not your terminology.
>
> EFM and P802.3ah belong to each other and go together. EFM as a term was
> created by the EFM Study Group. This group will become the P802.3ah Task
> Force later this month and I fully expect them to hang onto the EFM label.
>
> The larger concept of the network, new standards (802.1, IETF and
> ???) and
> hardware (ruggedized switches, reliable power...) needed to provide high
> speed Ethernet connections from subscribers into service provider
> networks
> needs a label of its own.
>
> Ethernet Subscriber Access (ESA) would be my choice.
>
> Geoff Thompson
>
> At 07:27 PM 9/4/01 -0300, carlosal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >Ryan,
> >
> >I'm posting this to everyone in the group, as it sums up my
> opinion in the
> >recent discussion about EFM scope.
> >
> >There are several seemingly incompatible requirements to meet.
> We have to
> >maintain compatibility with other Ethernet related standards such as
> >802.1d, 802.1q, and so on; at the same time, working with public access
> >networks is not the same as working with corporate customers. Some
> >potential customers require long reach, others can work with
> short reach.
> >Some of the discussions are still at a somewhat 'intuitive' stage, where
> >we have few actual data to make a informed decision.
> >
> >For me, the fundamental point is that 802.3ah is not the same as
> "Ethernet
> >First Mile". Given the name, EFM is more of a concept: it covers
> all that
> >is needed to bring Ethernet to the access network. 802.3ah is just this
> >standard group, which has to keep a narrow scope. It's fair to say that
> >there are good reasons for the narrow focus. The question now is, how to
> >map all the requirements of the broad picture of "Ethernet First Mile"
> >into the narrow scope of 802.3ah.
> >
> >Give this scenario, the trick is to find the key points that need to
> >included into the 802.3ah standard in order to support the complete EFM
> >proposition, without going way out of the scope. That's a huge quest for
> >the group to solve.
> >
> >Carlos Ribeiro
> >CTBC Telecom
> >
>