Hi Med,
I am in support of your proposal to move the HSSG efforts forward. The
40G and 100G markets are indeed distinct from each other and thus have
differing requirements. The attempt to lump these differing
requirements into a single project has been futile and they should
therefore be individually justified on their own merits. I think that
each contingent has justified their respective markets and that the
work going forward to generate a PAR and 5 criteria for each proposal
individually should be minimal.
Trey Malpass - Consultant for Huawei
--
*********************************
Trey
Malpass
Principal
Consultant
Malpass
Technology, LLC
29863
Canterbury Circle
Evergreen, CO 80439
Phone:
303-670-1577
Fax: 303-670-4501
Cell: 303-588-1422
*********************************
Med Belhadj wrote:
Folks,
I agree that we need to find a way to move
forward.
In the spirit of trying to find a common
ground I attached
the following proposal.
Comments constructive (or otherwise) are
welcome ;).
Cheers
Med
On 1-Jun-07, at 6:40 AM, Marcus Duelk wrote:
Hi Chris,
thanks for your email. I agree that only a constructive discussion
will move us forward.
I personally find it a pity that the HSSG could not agree on accepting
Howard's motion since the *technical concerns* that many of us had
regarding transport compatibility would have been addressed.
My personal impression is that those who voted 'NO' on that motion
still have other types of concerns such as investment costs into both
40G
and 100G, or the possible negative impact of 40G on 100G. I hope that
these can be somehow addressed at the July meeting.
Again, my impression is that the technical concerns regarding 40 GbE
have been taken care of.
Marcus
..--
___________________________
Marcus Duelk
Bell Labs / Alcatel-Lucent
Crawford Hill HOH R-237
791 Holmdel-Keyport Road
Holmdel, NJ 07733, USA
fon +1 (732) 888-7086
fax +1 (732) 888-7074
|