| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Hi Frank,
Ah, understood. Maybe leave the speeds off then and focus with “optical” and “access”?
Mark
From: frank effenberger [mailto:frank.effenberger@xxxxxxxxxx]
Indeed, I was considering that – after all, that’s what we titled the CFI. But I tried this generic approach because 1) I know that a proposal to add additional speeds are going to be made, and 2) I learn from the 100G EPON experience the perils of putting the speed into the title.
However, if folks think it is more in keeping with precedent, then I am happy to change it, and then add any other speed that is in fact accepted. I do not intend any functional difference.
Sincerely, Frank E
From: Mark Laubach [mailto:mark.laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Hi Frank,
The 2.1 Project Title seems to cover a lot of 802.3 projects….<g> I suggest adding the two speeds mentioned the scope (and CFI title) as well as “optical” and perhaps “access”. Then the title is closer to matching the proposed 5.2B Scope.
From: frank effenberger [mailto:frank.effenberger@xxxxxxxxxx]
All, Please find attached my first cut at these project documents. If you have comments or suggestions, please let me have them.
Thank you. Sincerely, Frank Effenberger
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGBIDI list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGBIDI&A=1 To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGBIDI list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGBIDI&A=1 |