New Proposals vs. Last Feature
Clearly, a "Proposal" meant
something BIG and a "Feature" meant something -- relatively speaking -- small.
The line was always intended to be slightly vague, thereby allowing us some
latitude to make progress without arbitrary definitions getting in the way.
Fortunate, no? [rhetorical question, please don't respond). When we adopted the schedule, I think
that it is reasonable to assume that everyone understood the tie between
"Last New Proposal" and "Adopt Core Proposal."
As chair, my read is
1. The first and prime
objective is to make progress and move the project along at optimal
2. For those areas where we
have adopted a specific proposal to solve one or more of our objectives, the
"Last New Proposal" rule is in effect. These are locked
3. There is no reason to
hold the committee to this for the MMF objectives. If someone can come up with a
"New Proposal" that can resolve these still-open-objectives, it would be absurd
to not hear it. Similarly, if the resolution to the these MMF objectives impacts
the existing "Core Proposal," we will have to resolve this also. This could
require us to accept additional "New Proposals."
4. More likely (regarding
3., above), we can expect to see "New Features" to existing PMD
Now, more specific to Ben's
5. If someone asked me to
put a presentation on the agenda for September which was an "Existing Proposal
(meaning we had heard this before)" with or without "New Features," and said
Proposal had no counterpart in the baseline proposal, I would be hard spent
to turn it down. LSS fits into this category.
6. Similarly, Ben's request
for a "New Feature" to the "Baseline Proposal" which would satisfy
the interest in Break-Link and Remote-Fault also seems to be quite
If I believe that the
committee will be interested in hearing a Proposal, I will likely put it on the
agenda. This will clearly be a subjective decision. In either case (meaning
accepted or denied), the committee will have the chance to modify the
agenda at the September meeting. This will be a procedural vote, of
In the meantime, let us focus on the solutions to the
If I have written this even
the least bit well, you should be able to answer all but one of the following
questions easily [Hints included]:
a) Will you accept
presentations on 850 nm Serial, 850 nm WWDM, and 1310 nm?
b) Will you accept
presentations on LSS? [Yes]
c) Will you accept
presentations on MAC rate control? [No]
d) Will you accept
presentations for a more efficient SONET framing mechanism?
e) Will you accept
presentations on MB810? [Hmmmmm. Does it help solve the MMF
Chair, IEEE 802.3ae (10 Gigabit
Principal Engineer, World Wide Packets
PO BOX 141719, Suite B;
12720 E. Nora, Spokane, WA 99214
509-242-9000 X228; Fax 509-242-9001;