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

RE: Nomenclature poll...


I prefer your latest naming scheme much better. An opaque set of
2-letter suffixes (SX, LW, etc) seems a lot easier to deal with than an
utterly descriptive string such as 10GBASE-S4A1W (10G Ethernet,
short wavelength, 4 wavelengths, 8B/10B coding, one fiber, WAN
PCS). (I tried out the latter on my sysadmin, and his response was
roughly "Huh? And I'm supposed to write that **** on my purchase


- Tom

Brad Booth wrote:

	I've been giving more thought to this too.  What I've come up with
is the
	*       10GBASE-VX - 850nm serial LAN (V for VSR)
	*       10GBASE-MX - 1310nm serial LAN (M for Metro)
	*       10GBASE-EX - 1550nm serial LAN
	*       10GBASE-SX - 850nm WDM LAN
	*       10GBASE-LX - 1310nm WDM LAN

	The WAN implementations would substitute "W" for the "X".

	If the number of PMDs should drop, we could realign the favorite


	        -----Original Message-----
	        From:   Roy Bynum [SMTP:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
	        Sent:   Monday, June 05, 2000 6:40 PM
	        To:     Booth, Bradley; stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxx
	        Subject:        Re: Nomenclature poll...


	        I have been giving this much thought.  I would like to come
in with
		support of a modified version of your option #2.  I would
	        to see:
	        < wavelength >< # of wavelengths>
		< coding scheme >< # of conductors/fibers >.

	        This keeps the wavelength designators next to each other as
		by Paul Kolesar (6/1/00).  Putting the number of conductors
	       fibers at the very end is consistent with previous versions
of 802.3
		such as 100BaseT4.

	        Thank you,
	        Roy Bynum