Re: Issues concerning 10GbE speed standards
- To: Colin Mick--The Mick Group <ckm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Issues concerning 10GbE speed standards
- From: Bruce LaVigne <bruce@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 16:21:02 -0700
- CC: BRIAN_LEMOFF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Bruce_Tolley@xxxxxxxx, nuss@xxxxxxxxxx, drew.perkins@xxxxxxxxxxxx, pbottorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Peter_Wang@xxxxxxxx, rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxx, stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
- References: <8825679E.006135D0.00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <199906282141.QAA26258@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I agree with Colin. It may be tough, it may be strained at times, but in the
end, you (and your customers) will be MUCH happier that a single solution is
standardized. For an example of where we (IEEE) wimped out, look at 100T and
100VG. Let the market decide... and it did. Yes, I worked on 100VG, and yes,
I still think it is a technically better solution, but I would have rather
worked to make 100T better than have two solutions in the market, which just
confuses customers. You can't plug one into another, the cable specs are
different, etc. etc. etc. In the end, both solutions were hurt because of the
split. For an example of where the IEEE didn't wimp out, look at 1000Base-T.
There was plenty of strain, but in the end, one solution was picked. Bravo!
Let's learn from our mistakes and work this thing out here, not in the market.
Colin Mick--The Mick Group wrote:
> I think multiuple competing solutions and a "let the market decide" is a
> sure recipe for disaster.
> It guarantees inoperable solutions and promotes market confusion.
> Making decisions among competing techincal solutions is a tough but
> necessary part of the standards process.
> Colin K. Mick
> The Mick Group
> 2130 Hanover St,
> Palo Alto, CA 94306
> voice: (650) 856-3666
> FAX: (650) 494-3737
> email: ckm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> URL: www.mickgroup.com