Frank And All:
Yes, but lets not be deceived, keep in mind that the
needs of one National Lab (read that government funded)
are not the basis of Broad Market Potential!
Thomas Dineen
Frank Chang wrote:
Hi Bent;
I think this is slightly different from the CERN tour, which I missed last week. NERSC tour may be the real oppty to let everyone observe/realize how badly the 100g is immediately needed for aggregation, as I recall Mike's talk of end-users' perspective below:
http://www.ieee802.org/3/hssg/public/sep06/bennett_02_0906.pdf
I agree this tour better not conflict with the group discussion, so take lunch break or between meeting times, but I personally believe definitely a nice thing to have.
Thanks
-Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Brent Draney [mailto:brdraney@NERSC.GOV]
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 11:04 AM
To: STDS-802-3-HSSG@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [HSSG] July session/NERSC tour
All,
As has been correctly pointed out, the purpose of IEEE is to perform
very important tasks and an offer for a Tour is outside the scope
of HSSG. For anyone that wishes to visit NERSC, please contact me
and I will arrange a time that does not conflict with the important
work of HSSG at the July Plenary (before, after, and after hours).
Thank You,
Brent
John,
I'm sorry to see that things are getting bogged down. I hope that
July goes better. I was wondering how the CERN tour went and if
you thought that a tour of the NERSC computational center would
be an interesting event. NERSC is only a 20 minute bart ride away.
We can do multiple tours of groups around 20. Sign-in is little
more than a name on a paper badge. Because we are strictly
unclassified cameras are encouraged. It would be an opportunity
to see some of the biggest computers on the Internet.
Let me know if you think this would be worth while.
Thanks,
Brent Draney
NERSC
PS: Let me know if you think of any way I can help reach consensus.
Dear Members of the HSSG,
Given the events of last week, as an 802.3 Study Group, we now find
ourselves in a precarious position.
With the failure to get a PAR / 5 criteria approved at last week's
interim meeting, we must now worry about gaining approvals for extension
of the study group life. At this point the SG has been given two
extensions. The third extension in July was intended to cover the SG
while the PAR / 5 Criteria went through the cycle of approval at 802EC,
NesCom, and the IEEE-SA Standards Board. As the situation now is, the
third extension is needed to extend the lift of the SG, and a fourth
extension would be requested at the November meeting to cover the
approval process at 802EC, NesCom, and the IEEE-SA Standards Board in
the November / December timeframe. It is unprecedented for a SG to get
four extensions, and at the last meeting, a number of individuals were
already speaking against a third extension if no forward progress was
made by the SG by the end of the July meeting.
I will be pushing for the SG to finalize and approve its recommendations
regarding PAR(S) and respective 5 Criteria responses at the July
meeting. Assuming the SG can progress this far, we can then present
these recommendations to the 802.3 Working Group for approval at the
July Plenary. This would then allow us to pre-submit the SG
recommendations to the 802 EC in July for consideration at the November
meeting, which would help strengthen the SG's requests for extensions at
the July and November meetings.
Please keep this in mind between now and the July Plenary. The ability
of this study group to reach consensus regarding a PAR or PARs on the
40G / 100G issue will be dependent upon its members. All must work
together to drive towards a consensus position or the future of this
group is clearly in doubt.
John D'Ambrosia
Chair, IEEE 802.3 Higher Speed Study Group
|