Re: Unified PMD vs. Unified PHY
Well said! This was also my interpretation of the survey results. If there were
only one question on the survey, UniPHY vs. separate LAN and WAN PHY, I believe
that the survey results would be the same (i.e. strongly in favor of a UniPHY).
Bruce Tolley wrote:
> At 08:33 AM 3/14/00 -0600, Roy Bynum wrote:
> > I think that the original compromise and
> >the objectives as stated are correct, there needs to be seperate LAN and WAN
> I think in the first part of your statement you hit the nail on the head. Goal #9 (Define two families of PHYs) was a compromise that came out of several meetings that was aided by the bridge diagram originally proposed by Howard Frazier.
> Many folks have since expressed displeasure with the idea of a bridge but the picture gave the members of the study group a way to understand and bound the problem.
> The goal of two PHYs agreed upon in York was as much political statement as it was a technical statement. There was a strong feeling up to the meeting in York of the need to limit the problem, define the goals, and get on with the work.
> It was always clearly stated that the goals were not written in stone and we might come back to revise them.
> Given the basis of the findings from survey conducted by Jonathan, I conclude that there is strong support among the members of the task force to seriously investigate the concept of the UniPHY.
Richard Taborek Sr. Phone: 408-845-6102
Chief Technology Officer Cell: 408-832-3957
nSerial Corporation Fax: 408-845-6114
2500-5 Augustine Dr. mailto:rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxx
Santa Clara, CA 95054 http://www.nSerial.com