[EFM] Re: [EFM-Copper] Copper schedule in LAX (and beyond...)
Behrooz,
I think it is definitely a good idea to make a complete investigation for
the loop plants, crosstalk coupling models and noise sources all over the world.
However, it seems to me that we couldn't complete this huge work not even to Nov
02, but even to Nov 03 on one hand, and, on the other hand, even Nov 02 sounds
too late. It actually targets us for a decisions regarding duplexing and
modulation technique to the middle of 2003 and for equipment, accordingly, to
the middle 2004! I am not sure many people are looking for this long process.
My view is, we can start right now from public networks, which are rather
well known and specified, add all the available data on loops inside big
buildings and take this package as a primary environment to target EFM. Later
on, as different new environments will show a good business case, we just add
them to the existing models and improve the spec.
Vladimir
Behrooz Rezvani wrote:
> Hugh and Howard, All,
>
> Sorry that I have to leave Thurs afternoon for Stanford Conference on
> Copper, but here are some thoughts:
>
> one of the areas that I am interested to focus on is first and for most the
> simulation environment. We have had couple of conference call on this
> subject in the past two months and we have made good progress.
>
> Here is the summary of what is needed (from everybody) and I certainly like
> to see good contributions as I am trying to put EFM data rate analysis
> document together:
>
> We agreed we need to break copper loops in to two areas:
> Public Plant/Network and MxU Network
> We are collecting input right now and two groups are working together to put
> this in to play:
>
> The first Item that we like to address is public loop plants. We hope to
> have an early draft document in Austin to discuss this. Hopefully by January
> interim meeting we can close this! OK may be.
>
> Next we like to have an early draft of MxU loop plants in the presence or
> absence of public loops. This is a new area to everybody. It include issues
> such as cable models, interaction of different cable types, etc. Based the
> early work that we are reviewing we like to close this by March or May time
> frame (:))
>
> Next topic is modeling of all noise sources interferences and inclusion of
> all noise sources. A lot of Next and Fext models don't work very well. This
> is important because we need more upstream bandwidth. Spectral compatibility
> and Dynamic spectral Compatibility, stationary noise and non-stationary
> noise models are mostly new work that needs to be taken in to account. I
> really wish that we might get a handle of that and get some sense of it by
> May 02, may be even Nov 02.
>
> This is the ground work that we need to do allow simulation to be evaluated
> fairly. The plan is to use as much work that is done by ANSI, ETSI and
> ITU-T. I have been in touch with various group in these organization to get
> their participation here at EFM and we could all benefit from that.
>
> Thanks
> Behrooz
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hugh Barrass [mailto:hbarrass@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2001 11:12 AM
> To: stds-802-3-efm-copper@ieee.org
> Cc: stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org
> Subject: [EFM-Copper] Copper schedule in LAX (and beyond...)
>
> All,
>
> First of all, I would like to apologize to all those who received two copies
> of this
> e-mail. If you are interested in the copper track and didn't receive two
> copies then
> you need to register for the copper mailing list.
>
> If you are not interested in the copper track then stop reading here...
>
> Follow this link to read instructions for the mailing lists.
>
> http://www.ieee802.org/3/efm/reflector.html
>
> Finally, the payload data....
>
> In LAX we will have 1.5 days of meetings to ourselves. The EPON people will
> leave us
> alone and we can concentrate on Resistance, Inductance, Current Density and
> other
> concepts which would otherwise upset the optical folk. Currently we have 15
> presentations submitted covering rate and reach; theoretical analysis; PMD
> proposals;
> general requirements and 1 new objective. My estimate is that we will
> comfortably
> cover these presentations on Wednesday afternoon and Thursday morning -
> leaving
> Thursday afternoon for free-range discussions before we rejoin the group on
> Friday
> morning.
>
> I would like to use this "spare time" to (pre) discuss the new objective and
> the
> simulation / test ad hoc. I would also like to allow some time for a
> breakout to
> discuss rate mechanism / operation (as I mention in my recap presentation)
> and any
> other (copper) business.
>
> Time is very short, so it will be hard to prepare for the Austin Plenary. I
> suggest
> that we use the spare time and gaps to work towards the baseline
> presentations that
> will be needed in November. This means that you should all be trying to seek
> out like
> minded people and sharing your ideas for November presentations.
>
> I will send a copy of my recap presentation on the copper reflector - it
> will also go
> onto the website.
>
> Hugh.