Re: WAN PHY name
ALL,
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A SONET PHY PROPOSAL HERE!!!!!!!!
There is a proposal for a PHY that is compatible with the WAN transmission
systems of both SDH and SONET. SDH is the non-North American signaling
protocol for transmission systems. SONET is the North American ONLY
transmission signaling protocol.
All of the proposed name changes seem to be predicated on the perception
that P802.3ae will only be used in North America. The proposed WAN
compatible PHY would be usable in transmission systems world wide. I
personally do not want to see the name changed to something generates a
FALSE perception.
The term 'WANC' seems to have a "special" meaning in the UK. 'WC' could not
be used because it means 'water closet', which is a 'commode in the USA.
There are probably other terms that would be perceptionally correct for the
WAN compatible PHY that also have "special" meanings somewhere in the world.
The reality is that the proposed WAN compatible PHY is just that. It is
compatible with any and ALL fiber optic communications implementations.
Perhaps a better name would be the "All Optical PHY".
Thank you,
Roy Bynum
----- Original Message -----
From: Seto, Koichiro <seto@sj.hitachi-cable.com>
To: <stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org>
Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 9:56 AM
Subject: Re: WAN PHY name
>
> [Date: 04/01/2000 From Seto]
>
> Jonathan,
>
> How about 'SONET Framing PHY'?
> It seems to me what so-called 'WAN PHY' folks are wanting is SONET
framing.
>
> SONET friendly PHY sounds OK, but there is another 'SONET friendly PHY'
proposal
> that does not use SONET framing, i.e. XGENIE proposal from Osamu Ishida of
NTT.
> If we use XGENIE, we can achieve most of the things that SONET signaling
is
> serving for. It seems to me this, too, is a SONET friendly proposal.
>
> Seto
>
> >
> > I have been thinking about this a great deal and have yet to find what
is
> > really loveable.
> >
> > I recommend that we don't want the "word" WAN anywhere in the
definition. To
> > include it implies that we believe that WAN and SONET are in some way
> > equivalent. While some people may in their hearts believe this, a number
> > would be quite adverse....
> >
> > If we remove "WAN" as an option, we are pretty much left with "SONET" as
a
> > key qualifier (or "Telecom"). What I remember seeing so far:
> >
> > SONET Friendly PHY
> > SONET Compatible PHY
> > PHY with SONET framer
> > SONET-compliant PHY
> > Telecom PHY
> >
> > A number of people voiced dislike for use of the words "compatible" and
> > "compliant." I remember the arguments being something like: how can it
be
> > compatible and not compliant and how can it be compliant and not SONET.
> > Sigh.
> >
> > This leaves:
> >
> > SONET Friendly PHY
> > PHY with SONET framer
> > Telecom PHY
> >
> > Any more ideas?
> >
> > jonathan
>