Re: Renaming the WAN PHY
Bruce,
It is has never been stated by any of the presentors that the WAN compatible
PHY would in work on LAN implementations. Since P802.3ae is full duplex
point to point, for those people that want remote fiber trouble shooting
functionality, the WAN compatible PHY will work very well in the LAN. At
present, there has not been proposed a "WAN only PHY". Since the proposed
WAN compatible PHY is also compatible with LAN implementations, I propose
that we call it the "WLAN" PHY and the LAN only PHY can remain the "LAN"
PHY.
By the way, I am looking forward to when the service providers that are
offering retail customer network services over GbE MANs start having
maintenence issues. GbE works extreemely well, and is easy to set up and
operate, if there are no problems. When problems do occur, GbE becomes
extreemely difficult and labor intensive to support. Unlike most of the
people in the group, I have actually been designing, building, and
supporting large enterprise LANs, MANs, and WANs as a customer and user for
years. I am not showing disrespect for the high achievement and achidemic
expertise of the group or individual of the P802.3ae TF. I do have
disrespect for the inexperienced people that attempting to create service
provider companies using GbE.
Thank you,
Roy Bynum
----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce Tolley <btolley@cisco.com>
To: <stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2000 1:49 PM
Subject: Renaming the WAN PHY
>
> Colleagues:
>
> To follow up on the suggestion made by Jonathan during the New Mexico
> plenary, may I be so bold as to suggest that we change the name of the
"WAN
> PHY" to something very simple like PHY with SONET framer.
>
> We need to get the word WAN out of the name of the PHY
>
> o Most common folk outside the esteemed IEEE process think long distance
> when they think WAN and on the basis of Paul Bottorf of Nortel,'s
> presentations the initial application of the WAN PHY would be for short
> links between collocated equipment often in the same room.
>
> 2) There are ways to build MANs/WANs that do not require SONET. For 10GbE
> some of these MANs/WANs will use the LAN PHY and a 1550 PMD over dark
fiber
> or dark wavelengths. The proof point for this is the 1000s of long
distance
> 1310 nm 1550 nm 1000BASE-X GBICs that are being deployed today over dark
> fiber. The WAN PHY as stated in the goal does not address the total
> possible 10GBE WAN market and confuses people.. This makes it a bad name
in
> my opinion
>
> I do not think we necessarily need a motion to change the objective, but I
> think we need to choose our words carefully when we name the PHY that the
> objective signifies.
>
>
> Bruce
> Cisco Systems
>