[EFM] Re: בעניין: Revisiting EFM vs ELM Names
An alternate view (defending EFM):
"The problem we are addressing is industry-wide known as THE FIRST MILE
PROBLEM. It has certain inner logic, too: it is the FIRST fortress
blocking wideband access from today's homes/businesses.
At 11:06 PM 3/30/01 +0200, Victor Vaisleib wrote:
>Bruce,
>
>I'm glad you brought that up.
>
>Personally, I never liked the "first mile" twist. Imagine 802.11 would
>become worried about the negative implications of the word "wireless", and
>named itself something like: the WG for Untangled LAN Standards...
>
>The problem we are addressing is industry-wide known as THE LAST MILE
>PROBLEM. It has certain inner logic, too: it is the LAST fortess of a
>century-old infrastructure in today's network.
>
>ELM sounds great to me.
>
>Victor Vaisleib
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Bruce Tolley <btolley@xxxxxxxxx>
>To: <stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org>
>Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 7:23 PM
>Subject: Revisiting EFM vs ELM Names
>
>
> >
> > Colleagues:
> >
> > I am having difficulty explaining to customers and financial analysts and
> > market analysts the name of our study group.
> >
> > The customers we will be selling EFM solutions to are telcos, SPs, RBOCs,
> > and other access providers like power companies and PUDs. All these folks
> > would use EFM techologies to build out the distribution network from the
>CO
> > or POP to the single family residences, to MXUs, to the curb, to the
> > business, etc. They all think in terms of "last mile."
> >
> > I cannot see much upside to the "first mile" name. When I do briefings I'd
> > prefer to get to the work of the SG and the merits of Ethernet in the last
> > mile over copper and fiber and not waste time explaining a name that is
> > confusing to the audience.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Bruce