Re: [802.3_4PPOE] SPI Public Input
Dear Fred,
Thank you so much for the clarification
and thoughtful response. I'm pleased to hear that SPI has taken our
feedback to heart and taken the initiative to submit comments to remove
most (if not, all) of the PoE references.
Looking forward to seeing you in Bonita
Springs - Val
Valerie Maguire, BSEE
Global Sales Engineer
602-228-7943 mobile
www.siemon.com
From:
Fred Dawson <fred.c.dawson@xxxxxxxxx>
To:
STDS-802-3-4PPOE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Date:
08/26/2015 11:31 AM
Subject:
Re: [802.3_4PPOE]
SPI Public Input
Hi Val,
I understand your concerns regarding the focus on "PoE"
in the substantiation given by Code Making Panel 16 (CMP 16). This concern
was also expressed at the IEEE meeting in Hawaii.
Fortunately the substantiation does not become part of
the NEC. What does become part of the NEC (unless changed during the comment
process) is the language in the box, and it makes no reference to PoE.
It was never our (SPI's) intent to single out IEEE
PoE when submitting SPI's PI's to NFPA. It was used as an example because
it is by far the best known remote powering method.
Based on the concerns expressed in Hawaii we (SPI) have
drafted a number of comments specifically to remove the term PoE in most,
if not all places where it is referenced in the First Draft text. I encourage
others to do the same so that this concern is addressed.
Fred
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 8:28 AM, <Valerie_Maguire@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thanks, Fred. This is helpful
for us to study.
From my perspective, I believe that the CMP-16 text is too focused on "PoE"
as the example powering system. While it may be the most ubiquitous,
the PoE systems that are on the market are extremely safe (including accommodating
extra precautions such as device detection and classification prior
to voltage delivery) and the cause for concern with PoE is significantly
overstated. Furthermore, singling out PoE as the one example makes
it appear to the reader that this is the powering system to be concerned
about when, in fact, there are other powering systems (such as direct injectors)
that are much more likely to cause safety problems.
Hopefully, this is something that the 802.3bt Task Force can consider further
in Bonita Springs.
All the best - Val
Valerie Maguire, BSEE
Global Sales Engineer
602-228-7943
mobile
www.siemon.com
From: Fred
Dawson <fred.c.dawson@xxxxxxxxx>
To: STDS-802-3-4PPOE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
Date: 08/25/2015
03:56 PM
Subject: [802.3_4PPOE]
SPI Public Input
All,
This is the main other SPI public input that expands the scope and coverage
of Article 840 to match the new title “Premises-Powered Broadband Communications
Systems”.
The remaining PI's submitted by SPI make similar changes to the attached
one. i.e. they expand sections of article 840 to include all types of communications
systems rather than just optical ones.
I don't plan to send more of these as I don't believe they add to the discussion.
If anyone wants the other proposed language changes please let me know
and I will try to extract them.
Fred
email: fred.c.dawson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[attachment "840 1 FR-4582.pdf"
deleted by Valerie Maguire/The Siemon Company]