RE: [EFM-P2P][EFM] PMD considerations
I agree with your analysis. What cheesed me off was that the customer told
me (insisted even) that Fast Ethernet SMF PMD was part of the current EFM
project, because a supplier had told them so. I was left in the position of
explaining to them that that particular supplier was being economic with the
truth. Things may change in March I guess. That's the first time we get to
vote on changing the PAR isn't it.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Hugh
Sent: 18 December 2001 22:26
To: Bob Barrett
Subject: Re: [EFM-P2P][EFM] PMD considerations
I won't comment on the merits or otherwise of a 100Mbps p2p objective.
your anecdote raised two important issues:
1. The customer has a solution and "they would like it standardized."
It is not the purpose of IEEE 802.3 to "standardize" peoples' solutions. It
our purpose to make the best standards possible where they are required.
the customer be equally happy if we said - yes we will make a standard, but
will not match your deployments?
2. If the customer has a solution which they are deploying, what is their
purpose in requesting a standards effort? It seems that they have a supplier
a product that meets their needs. If we assume that the 802.3ah task force
to its schedule then there will be no standard until near the end of 2003.
the customer's deployment be finished by then?
Bob Barrett wrote:
> Dear all
> I went to a customer meeting today and had them tell me that 100M SMF was
> EFM work in progress. News to me :-). He may not have been correct, but he
> is the customer.
> The point being that this customer was deploying 100M SMF and would like
> to be standardised. I advised them to at least visit the email archive on
> the reflector, if not join the mailing list.