Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: Nomenclature poll...




Paul,

Yes, that is the intent.  I've also received feedback from a few people that
they would like to maintain a two letter suffix.

Cheers,
Brad

		-----Original Message-----
		From:	Kolesar, Paul F (Paul) [mailto:pkolesar@xxxxxxxxxx]
		Sent:	Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:50 PM
		To:	stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
		Subject:	RE: Nomenclature poll...


		Brad,
		I prefer option 2. Keeping the wavelength designators next
to each other is
		a logical progression. Inherent in your example is the rule
that no <# of
		wavelengths> designator is needed for single wavelength
solutions. Is this
		your intent? 

		Paul Kolesar

			----------
			From:  Booth, Bradley [SMTP:bradley.booth@xxxxxxxxx]
			Sent:  Wednesday, May 31, 2000 4:47 PM
			To:  stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
			Subject:  Nomenclature poll...


			Assuming that we go with 10GBASE- instead of
10kBASE-, which suffix
			structure does everyone prefer:
			1)	<wavelength> <coding scheme> <# of
wavelengths>, or
			2)	<wavelength> <# of wavelengths> <coding
scheme>

			An example of #1 would be: 10GBASE-SX for 850nm
64b/66b Serial, and
			10GBASE-LW4 for 1310nm SONET compatible WDM.

			An example of #2 would be: 10GBASE-SX for 850nm
64b/66b Serial, and
			10GBASE-L4W for 1310nm SONET compatible WDM.


			As a note, no matter which one we choose, we are
still dealing with
		a large
			list of port types.

			Thanks,
			Brad