Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [10GBT] Number of PAM12 proposals?


My interpretation is that this motion was to give direction to the task
force members to focus on PAM8 and PAM12 proposals as they were
described in your presentation and Scott's presentation.  The motion was
meant as guidance, not exclusion.  So, to answer your question about a
second PAM12 column, I believe that is still within the scope of the


-----Original Message-----
From: stds-802-3-10gbt@IEEE.ORG [mailto:stds-802-3-10gbt@IEEE.ORG] On
Behalf Of sailesh rao
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 6:05 AM
Subject: Re: [10GBT] Number of PAM12 proposals?


What is your interpretation of this motion? Would you rule that it is
to have a second PAM12 column addressing a proposal other than
powell_1_0704.pdf in the spreadsheet?


>From: "Booth, Bradley" <bradley.booth@INTEL.COM>
>Reply-To: "IEEE P802.3an" <>
>Subject: Re: [10GBT] Number of PAM12 proposals?
>Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:43:52 -0700
>The motion was as follows:
>Motion: Task force narrow consideration of 10GBASE-T baseline approach
>to the PAM8 and PAM12 proposals described in rao_1_0704.pdf and
>Moved   K Brown
>Second  J Babanezhad
>Hearing no discussion the chair took a voice vote.
>The motion carried.
>Does that help you with the interpretation?
>-----Original Message-----
>From: stds-802-3-10gbt@IEEE.ORG [mailto:stds-802-3-10gbt@IEEE.ORG] On
>Behalf Of sailesh rao
>Sent: Monday, August 30, 2004 6:12 PM
>Subject: [10GBT] Number of PAM12 proposals?
>Hi All,
>There appear to be two PAM12 columns in the latest Task force
>Does this mean I need to study two different PAM12 proposals to find
>issues with them?
>Didn't we pass a motion to restrict ourselves to one PAM8 proposal
>(rao_1_0704.pdf) and one PAM12 proposal (powell_1_0704.pdf) at the July
>Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!

Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools