Thread Links			Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week

To: STDS-802-3-400G@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week
From: "Fred Rabouw (frabouw)" <frabouw@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 11:30:43 +0000
Accept-language: en-US
Delivered-to: mhonarc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <9A7AFF014F8C3946B090A0FC25B6D2AB16149D19@SNY-EXCHANGE.ads.finisar.com>
List-help: <https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=STDS-802-3-400G>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG?body=INFO%20STDS-802-3-400G>
List-owner: <mailto:STDS-802-3-400G-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-subscribe: <mailto:STDS-802-3-400G-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:STDS-802-3-400G-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
References: <9A7AFF014F8C3946B090A0FC25B6D2AB16149D19@SNY-EXCHANGE.ads.finisar.com>
Reply-to: "Fred Rabouw (frabouw)" <frabouw@xxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: Ac+fpC4KGUmnbWEjBkyDznlM2qBKqACSSnOA
Thread-topic: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week
User-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.3.140616

I presume 1.6T and 800G for switches and 800G for servers, for 800G on servers and no 800G on switches would be challenging to connect….

Regards

Fred

From: Chris Cole <chris.cole@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Chris Cole <chris.cole@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday 14 July 2014 23:24
To: "STDS-802-3-400G@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <STDS-802-3-400G@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week

2) My view of the right next rate steps after 400Gb/s Ethernet are 1.6T for switches and 800G for servers, but not 1T.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week
  - From: Dedic, Ian

References:
- Re: [STDS-802-3-400G] [802.3_400G] Presentation for next week
  - From: Chris Cole