|
Before
we jump right into the sections and sub-sections
I
suggest we spend some time establishing a baseline
understanding with the newly formed working group.
Part
of this would be to present the scope of the current
WG and
ensure their is closure. We need to flush out
whether we will deal with single rings or dual rings,
buffering/no-buffering, etc. There is far too much
reading
between the lines by many. It is good to see new
companies involved in drafting this standard.
However,
moving forward
with vague assumptions will waste
everyone's time.
The
next thing would be to get a schedule in place. This will
obviously require us to scope the work and hence we
can
look
at the broad organization of the standard (sections) and
get
smaller groups to undertake the task of scoping things out.
Harry,
I think your inputs are useful in this effort. However, we need
to
get a
team together focused on a common agenda and schedule.
The
PAR has got us this far. Closure on the PAR was possible
because we had a deadline to meet. Time commitment will
bring
focus
to any group. The first goal of the WG should be
to have clear scope and bounds of the standard followed
by setting
expectations of when the standard will be in place. I
suggest
to the chairs that they take these two stakes
seriously.
Raj
Sharma
Rob,
Thanks. I was trying to get the logistics. Here is
what I read from your comments
For
us to complete the standard there are many sections and sub sections to be
written.
Before that can be done there are many proposal to
evaluate.
Before that can be done there are the objectives and
scope.
I
propose a framework and then identify the scope and
objectives....
Network
single
Ring
Interconnected
Rings
Bridges and
router
MAC
Layer
Data path
function
forwarding
filtering
error
correction/detection
Control
Plane
header
definition
network
size
header
field definition
customer separation
header bit
definition
L2 functions
Node
discovery
Fairness
L3
interface
L1 management
I/F
L1
control
L1
Interfaces
Generic Packet interface
SONET
SDH
Gigabit Ethernet
DWDM
Digital Wrapper
Network Applications
Ring
interconnect
Transparent LAN
Service
ISP
Harry, here is my 2¢ on this one: I would
expect us to continue to refine our detailed scope and objectives, going
much further than the PAR input. I anticipate that 802.17 will be
doing a significant amount of voting at the March plenary meeting, some of
which will be establishing things like objectives. Hopefully a great
deal of the work will have been done ahead of time, including at the
upcoming meeting, and via email discussion. All of this work should
fundamentally build on what the Study Group has previously decided, even
though the Study Group's output is not binding on the decisions of the
Working Group.
I don't know how much time will be available at
the January interim meeting to address the issue of refinement of the Scope
and Objectives. If there is time, I think the topic will fit well with
the meeting's overall focus.
Best regards,
Robert D. Love President, LAN Connect Consultants 7105 Leveret
Circle Raleigh, NC 27615 Phone: 919
848-6773 Mobile: 919 810-7816 email:
rdlove@xxxxxxxx
Fax: 720 222-0900
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 11:40
AM
Subject: Q: Jan 15-17 meeting
mike:
Are you gathering scope an objectives to help
defining the tasks in the schedule to complete the standard?
Some of the scope were discussed in previous
meetings. Now that we are a WG are we recapturing and additional detail
scope
and objectives as confined in the PAR and 5
Criteria?
Regards,
Harry
|