Re: [10GMMF] FW: [10GMMF] call details for task2 & task4 launch study meeting (weds 9.30 am, Jan 19th, )
I am sorry I can not be on the call today due to travel.
I do not support the inclusion of Primary, Alternative and Universal Launch in one table in the standard. This will not resolve my comments. I believe the choice is between:
1) A table with a Primary Launch (Offset Launch), and an Alternative Centre launch.
2) A table with Primary Launch (Offset Launch) - re-use of MCP's from GbE.
3) A table with a Universal Launch.
Choices 1 and 2 enable the same use model of the MCP and transceivers for LRM as is currently implemented for GbE. I have had feedback that this is acceptable to my customers. Therefore it is acceptable to me.
1) or 2) with the current use model of MCP's reduces PIE_D to values that are likely to be equalized on all fibres we have in our laboratory and easily reaches the 99 percentile requirement of 802.3. With this choice I do not have to worry about failures on PIE_D in customer testing.
I am still willing to consider 3 but I have not been able to convince myself that 99% coverage is possible. I was very happy with 3) for 220 m to 250 m. But we voted for 300 m and that makes a big difference. Please help me understand how 3 reaches 99% coverage and is made successful on all laboratory fibres that are likely to be used by my customers in testing.
I thought I should make this clear ahead of next weeks meeting.
[mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of Jonathan King
Sent: 19 January 2005 04:26
Subject: [10GMMF] FW: [10GMMF] call details for task2 & task4 launch
study meeting (weds 9.30 am, Jan 19th, )
launch recommendations table rev 0.3 (attached) for discussion
tel: 1 408 524 5110
fax: 1 408 739 0568
Director, Optical Systems
345 Potrero Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94085