Re: What is 802.3ae WAN-PHY?
Let's all stick to technical discussion on this reflector. If there is anything
you can't divulge to IEEE P802.3ae for any reason including politics,
non-disclosure, etc. then keep it to yourself. I believe the Task Force is only
interested in open proposals. Patented proposals are OK. However, those patents
must be disclosed to the committee according to the IEEE patent policy.
Yes, I often run into the "politics of technology". Once I identify the
political aspect, I tend to go around it, over it, under it or through it :-)
Roy Bynum wrote:
> One of the advantages, or disadvantages, of working within a large service
> provider is close access to the work going on in the other standards
> organizations. It sometimes gets a little beyond "bleeding edge",
> particularly when it comes to attempting to integrate all of it within a
> cohesive view of the directions that communications technology is going.
> Some of it is very "threatening" to people that are imbedded in legacy
> technologies. I often refer to this as the "politics of technology". I am
> sure that you have run into this yourself.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rich Taborek <rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: HSSG <stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, April 09, 2000 7:49 PM
> Subject: Re: What is 802.3ae WAN-PHY?
> > Roy,
> > Wow! I can hardly wait! Do you mean to tell me that there are some secret
> > methods of performing clock tolerance compensation under development for
> > SONET that will soon be released to benefit all mankind!
> > Sorry. I couldn't hold that one back ;-)
> > On a serious note, I agree wholeheartedly with your statement in the last
> > paragraph of your response to Mr. Osamu Ishida:
> > "Any Ethernet data switch and router interfaces that are at SONET/SDH
> > multiplexed subrate speeds will continue to be expensive compared to the
> > proposed P802.3ae WAN compatible PHY interface."
> > I'll add to this: It is a unanimously agreed upon objective of IEEE
> > P820.3ae to define a WAN PHY, operating at a data rate compatible with
> > the payload rate of OC-192c/SDH VC-4-64c. The definition of this PHY is
> > well underway, with multiple proposals aired to the Task Force.
> > A low-cost 10 GbE alternative to SONET/SDH multirate interfaces or
> > switch and router interfaces is imminent.
> > Best Regards,
> > Rich
> > --
> > Roy Bynum wrote:
> > >
> > > Osamu,
> > >
> > > Please understand that I am under certain levels of Non-Disclosure for
> > > some of your issues. The real consideration for P802.3ae TF is that at
> > > 10Gb, the P802.3ae WAN compatible PHY will have complete occupancy of
> > > any fiber or wavelength that it rides on. Any muxing that is done,
> > > is done at the wavelength level within DWDM, not at the data signal
> > > level. This is recognized as changing the rules for needing common
> > > transmission clocking, also known as "Stratum" clocking. While the
> > > transmission systems themselves are still required to provide for
> > > close clock transfer tolerance, the full wavelength data originating
> > > systems are no longer under that restriction.
> > >
> > > There is, or soon will be, one or more contributions to the other
> > > standards bodies regarding this.
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