Paul,
Thank you for the email. Let me try
and cover the different options and paths that this may go.
In regards to your question regarding
schedule, first let me say that I was pleasantly surprised by the tremendous
progress that the Task Force made during the Munich meeting, as demonstrated by the number
of base proposals adopted. With that said, the explanation that I have
provided in regards to the timeline is that baseline decisions would start in
July, and I did not think that we would be able to resolve everything in one
meeting cycle, and would need the September meeting cycle to finalize the
baseline proposal adoption process. With the progress made by the Task
Force in May, it is my hope that the Task Force will resolve the remaining baseline
proposals in July. This would enable the Task Force to focus in September
in getting a baseline draft adopted.
Given that the ad hoc is considering various
options, I will need to provide answers for the different scenarios. As I
outlined in http://www.ieee802.org/3/ba/public/AdHoc/MMF-Reach/dambrosia_xr_01_0508.pdf,
it appears that there are three general routes that the ad hoc might choose in
forming a proposal:
1) handle extended reach in some sort of informative manner
2) modify the existing solution in some manner
3) propose a new objective that enables a second solution
Based on the Munich meeting and subsequent ad hoc calls,
it is my opinion that at this time that no one is proposing that a new
objective be added. Instead, my understanding of the proposals given to the
ad hoc is that they have focused on handling the issue in some sort of
informative manner (jewell_xr_01_0508 – proposes “modest tightening
of Tx specs” for extended reach beyond the 100m reach specifications) or
by adding some feature, such as optional CDR’s, EDC, or FEC. If the
issue were handled by Jack’s proposal in an informative manner, it would
seem that could be handled in the September time frame by adding notes to
proposed text related to Petar’s baseline proposal (though final #’s
might be left as TBD at that time to allow further work into what the actual
values should be). Optional CDR’s, EDC, or FEC could be a new
feature, which could be added as late as Jan 2009 per the schedule. The
September timeframe brings an interesting challenge. As I pointed out, it
is my hope that we will resolve the remaining baseline proposals in July, which
would give a meeting cycle for generation of proposed text, which gives us the
September meeting to go through the proposed text and adopt our baseline draft.
If an informative annex were proposed by the ad hoc as the way to address
this problem in September, it would be useful to have accompanying proposed
text to go along with it, as some might want to see proposed text (as opposed
to a blank section with just a heading on it) before adopting the baseline
draft.
Hopefully I have covered all of the
different options and paths that this may go. If you have any further
questions, please feel free to follow-up.
Regards,
John
From:
PKOLESAR@systimax.com [mailto:PKOLESAR@systimax.com]
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 10:32
AM
To: John DAmbrosia
Cc: STDS-802-3-HSSG@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
Subject: [802.3BA] baseline
selection deadline
Hi John,
As
you know the extended reach ad-hoc formed at the May interim meeting has been
holding teleconferences with the objective of examining options for enhancing
reach over multimode fiber. The ad-hoc has received contributions that
examine the technologies, interoperability and system vendor preferences. We
are presently compiling a matrix that will allow a side-by-side assessment of
the options to help with selection. To that end the ad-hoc could use more
input from system vendors.
It
is likely that by the July meeting we will have a well vetted comparison
matrix, but not have distilled a recommendation. Some ideas were floated
that would subject these options to polls of the attendees in July. The
outcome of these polls could either indicate the task force is ready to make a
decision, or that more work is needed.
In
case the latter is the result, I request your guidance on timing. I see
from the May meeting agenda that baseline selection is slated to continue thru
the September meeting. From this I would conclude that selection of an
extended reach solution is not required at the July meeting, but must be
competed by the September meeting in order to stay on schedule. Is this
also your interpretation and intent? Do you foresee or prefer other paths
to completion?
Regards,
Paul Kolesar
CommScope Inc.
Enterprise
Solutions
1300 East Lookout Drive
Richardson, TX 75082
Phone: 972.792.3155
Fax: 972.792.3111
eMail: pkolesar@commscope.com