|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Excuse my ignorance, but why? When 10G started, this was an important debate. If they had stuck with the number of PMDs in 802.3z, then there would have only been two PMDs. The study group needs to define the markets that it wants to satisfy, and only then when the study group becomes a task force can the group decide on the actual number of PMDs required.
From: Drew Perkins [mailto:dperkins@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 10:45 AM
To: Brad Booth; STDS-802-3-HSSG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [HSSG] Reach Objectives
I have a simple proposal to save everyone a lot of time. Let’s make the baseline plan to stick with exactly the same number of PMDs with exactly the same reaches as 10GbE. They have all been developed to fit someone’s requirements. We should have a very high hurdle to eliminate any of these or add to them.
Chief Technology Officer
1322 Bordeaux Drive
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
WWW : http://www.infinera.com
The 10km vs. 2km debate occurred in 802.3ae. It was determined that the solution for 2km was virtually the same as that for 10km; therefore, the task force felt it would be better to select only one of those reaches and 10km was it. If there is a desire for 2km and 10km reaches in HSSG, then in my humble opinion, those wishing to support will need to bring justification forward as to why the study group should consider possibly increasing the number of PHYs.
I agree datacenter for up to 100m. How about 10GigE LR disctance (10km) or campus 2km discussed earlier?