Re: Issues concerning 10GbE speed standards
- To: Curt Berg <cberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, HSSG <stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Issues concerning 10GbE speed standards
- From: Rich Taborek <rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jun 1999 16:40:40 -0700
- Organization: Transcendata, Inc.
- References: <D0805D3B448BD211A7990008C7B18130171037@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-To: rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In addition, to really allow several competing physical layer implementations,
I suggest discussing a common transceiver interface, similar in nature to the
TBI of GbE.
Curt Berg wrote:
> >I think multiuple competing solutions and a "let the market decide" is a
> >sure recipe for disaster.
> Well Colin,
> Just to refresh your mind:
> It was not that long ago since VG-Anylan was competing with 100Base-TX,
> and TX, T2 and T4 were competing physical standard.
> Personally I don't consider that a disaster in the market place!
> If you don't give freedom to people to design what they believe they
> need in their market segment, I'm convinced standardization will
> take longer.
> So I would prefer one 10GMII, and have several competing physical
> implementation. Then you will really see who follows the KISS principal.
> -Curt Berg-
> Extreme Networks
> >It guarantees inoperable solutions and promotes market confusion.
> >Making decisions among competing techincal solutions is a tough but
> >necessary part of the standards process.
> >At 01:42 PM 6/28/99 -0700, BRIAN_LEMOFF@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Richard Taborek Sr. Tel: 650 210 8800 x101 or 408 370 9233
Principal Architect Fax: 650 940 1898 or 408 374 3645
Transcendata, Inc. Email: rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
1029 Corporation Way http://www.transcendata.com
Palo Alto, CA 94303-4305 Alt email: rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx