Title: | FDDI - The Next Generation |
Moderator: | NETCAD::STEFANI |
Created: | Thu Apr 27 1989 |
Last Modified: | Thu Jun 05 1997 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 2259 |
Total number of notes: | 8590 |
From: NPSS::HUTCHISON "note new network address" To: SCHOOL::MAJIKAS SCHOOL::DUNBECK SKYWAY::MRGATE::"A1_GENIE::DEY" CC: NETCAD::B_CRONIN,NETCAD::MELARAGNI,NPSS::HUTCHISON Subj: UTP interoperability - FDDI Probably the most important thing is to say "if it doesn't work, bring it back and we'll fix it or return your money". This has not been a problem. (If this ever happens - get documentation on the problem and send it here!-) The best evidence of the interoperability of our FDDI TP-PMD products is the public interoperability demos and testing - some references: Fall "Interop" 1993 (tradeshow) had some 23 vendors including DEC and their respective FDDI UTP products in one FDDI ring. This was writen up in trade journals at the time although I don't have any good references. One such article was written by author Michael Fahey (don't have title, date or anything else). DEC had several adapters and Concentrators in the show configuration. The Boston FDDI-UTP interoperability demo - June 2, 1993, had 13 Vendors in the test including several DEC products (both concentrators and adapters). A press release was issued by Lisa Hempel, Cunningham Communications (408-952-0400) and a presentation by Charles R. Robbins (Aberdeen Group, Director of Communications Research 617-723-7890) describe the event. Also, DEC participated in interoperability testing conducted by the Interop test labs in California (AMD) and University of New Hampshire (UNH) for several years. We supplied equipment to both labs so that we would receive notification of any problems identified by these independent labs. All problems were resolved, I don't remember if we had any ourselves, but folks like Bill Cronin from DEC spent weeks chasing down some of the things that came up and became well known in the industry as a key technical expert. These FDDI test labs are now pretty much shut down due to lack of need. (Now, they've all moved on to ATM:-) Finally, please don't use "CDDI" in reference to DEC FDDI UTP products. Say, "ANSI TP-PMD" or FDDI-UTP. If you must say the four letter word, add a reference to "ANSI TP-PMD standard". CDDI was the official trademark of a propriatary design which is not interoperable with the standards. Because of the confusion, we need to be clear we're interoperable with ANSI standard products. Oh, one other possible pointer - the DEC PCI-FDDI adapter includes UTP and won an award as "Years best product" from Data Communications. Mike Paquette (DEC) can provide more info if needed. Hope this helps. You can post this if that's useful. jer
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1753.1 | NETCAD::STEFANI | Machines to humanize | Wed Jul 19 1995 11:47 | 26 | |
>>Finally, please don't use "CDDI" in reference to DEC FDDI UTP products. Say, >>"ANSI TP-PMD" or FDDI-UTP. If you must say the four letter word, add a >>reference to "ANSI TP-PMD standard". CDDI was the official trademark of a >>propriatary design which is not interoperable with the standards. Because of >>the confusion, we need to be clear we're interoperable with ANSI standard >>products. Just to add to Jerry's comment. The adapter group has always referred to "ANSI TP-PMD" as the name of the standard. The more astute readers know the standard and expect us to follow it. However, "CDDI" has become a marketing/sales term for ANSI TP-PMD (whether we like it or not) and for all intents and purposes today it means the ANSI standard. I've had sales people, end users, field service, and marketing folks refer to "CDDI" as the name for our FDDI over UTP products, and it's stuck. It's beyond re-education at this point since even the media uses "CDDI". Should anyone call asking whether we support "CDDI", our response should be "Yes, we support the ANSI standard for running FDDI over UTP cabling". Please don't respond with "No" since 99.99999% of the time they're asking for ANSI compliant products. - Larry |