Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!apple!motcsd!hpda!hpcupt1!hprnd!pat
From: pat@hprnd.HP.COM (Pat Thaler)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: Starlan/Ethernet compatibility
Message-ID: <2230008@hprnd.HP.COM>
Date: 22 Jun 89 22:23:56 GMT
References: <2009@wasatch.utah.edu>
Organization: HP Roseville Networks Division
Lines: 62

henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
> 
> You know, I'd really like to see at least one vendor reply to that question
> with "we won't, since we think twisted-pair Ethernet is a dumb idea and
> totally unnecessary".  I don't expect that anyone's marketing department
> will let them get away with that, though...
> 
> IEEE is showing a depressing pattern of being unable to say no to any
> proposal for a new standard.  I realize the politics involved make this
> hard to fix, but it could use fixing.
> ----------

The IEEE 802.3 Working Group uses 5 Criteria to determine if a new
standard should be developed.  They are:

Broad Market Potential
  Will the proposal serve a broad set(s) of applications?
  Will the proposal be used by many users and supported by multiple vendors?
Compatability with IEEE Standard 802.3
  Conformance with IEEE 802.3 MAC and PLS
  Conformance with IEEE 802.2
Distinct Identity
  Substantially different from other 802.3 specifications/solutions
  Does fill the needs of an application area not served by other
   802.3 specifications?
Technical Feasibility
  Demonstrated feasibility
  Confidence in reliability
Economic Feasibility
  Reasonable cost for performance expected
  Total installation costs considered

There have been proposals which were rejected as not meeting these
criteria.  In some of those cases, proponents modified their proposals
and the revised proposals were accepted.  

At times, several similar proposals were brought to IEEE 802.3.  Under
the pressure of the Distinct Identity criteria, the proponents worked
together to develop a single joint proposal.

The additions to the original standard which IEEE 802.3 has developed
or is developing have been of two types:  Support of additional media,
e.g. twisted-pair and fiber-optics; and additional capabilities, 
e.g. network management and conformance test.

Some people feel as Mr. Spencer does.  Others feel that IEEE 802.3
makes it too hard to start a new addition and that the process
of showing that the criteria are satisfied takes too long.  In my
opinion, the process results in better additions to the standard due to 
the examining the objectives and synthesizing the ideas of the 
participants.

In March of 1988, IEEE 802.3 decided that the 10BASE-T proposal 
met the 5 criteria.  10BASE-T and 10BASE-F (fiber optic) should 
allow 802.3 networks to be installed in buildings wired in accordance
with EIA 41.8, a standard currently under development for 
building wiring.

Pat Thaler       

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of 
the 10BASE-T Task Force.