RE: [10GBASE-T] RE: EMI Discussion
I know I don't have the depth of experience that Dan and Geoff have with
802, but I thought it is of interest that ISO/IEC 11801 1st edition was
published in 1995, which was the same year as 100BASE-TX was published
as a standard. While I agree that there is a lot of data to be
collected, I believe that a large volume of data has been collected and
placed on the following web site:
What I'd like to find out from you (Dan and Geoff) is if you believe
that all that more data needs to be gathered before the Study Group
moves to Task Force or can this be covered if the Study Group creates an
objective to meet specific FCC compliance requirements?
From: DOVE,DANIEL J (HP-Roseville,ex1) [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 2:02 PM
To: 'Geoff Thompson'
Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] RE: EMI Discussion
Good point of clarification.
I was not directly involved in that effort. At the time I was working on
802.4 (rf modems,CATV,etc) but I know a number of the folks who worked
and actually have an original copy of the massive binder full of work
by Bob Conte et al. It was an impressive effort and I think we are
at something similar here.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Thompson [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 10:49 AM
> To: DOVE,DANIEL J (HP-Roseville,ex1)
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: RE: [10GBASE-T] RE: EMI Discussion
> At 12:03 PM 8/13/2003 -0400, DOVE,DANIEL J (HP-Roseville,ex1) wrote:
> >In the case of 10BASE-T, where we were
> >applying high speed (10MHz?) signals to CAT3 wiring which
> had been installed
> >for phone support, a *huge* quantity of testing was done to
> verify signal
> >integrity, EMI compatibility, and noise immunity.
> Actually it was not CAT3, The installed base was AT&T DIW (or worse).
> We considered DIW as the baseline.
> The TIA CAT3 spec was not approved until after the approval
> of 10BASE-T.