Re: [EFM] Communication statement from T1E1- Is there a hidden meaning here?
All
About 6 years ago, T1E1.4 made a similar decision with respect to ADSL issue 2. They decided to develop std T1-413 (ADSL) issue II based on DMT and develop a technical report for CAP/QAM based ADSL, which held a very respectable % of a then small ADSL market. Soon thereafter, the ADSL Forum chose only to work with DMT based ADSL. A few years later, DMT based ADSL overwhelmed CAP/QAM, which eventually disappeared.
T1E1's decision to go with DMT for the VDSL standard appears to be similar to the 1997 ADSL decision- a standard has more industry acceptance than a Technical Requirements document, as it provides more detail and depth needed for interoperability.
However, there is one unknown: what is a T1 Technical Requirement document? Have any ever been published and, if so, what happened to the referenced technology? Is such a Requirements document sufficient to ensure multi-vendor interoperability- at the chip and system level?
Perhaps, some T1E1 experts could enlighten us on this point
Regards,
alan
Alan Weissberger
Data Communications Technology
2013 Acacia Ct
Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482
1 408 863 6042 voice
1 408 863 6099 fax
----- Original Message -----
From: Howard Frazier <millardo@dominetsystems.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 13:45:55 -0700
To: stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org
Subject: [EFM] Communication statement from T1E1
>
> Dear Members of the IEEE 802.3ah EFM Task Force,
>
> Attached please find a communications statement from
> T1E1 concerning their decision on the linecode for VDSL.
>
> Howard Frazier
> Chair, IEEE 802.3ah EFM Task Force
<< from_T1E1.pdf >>
Alan Weissberger
2013 Acacia Ct
Santa Clara, CA 95050-3482
1 408 863 6042 voice
1 408 863 6099 fax