nanog mailing list archives
Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE
From: "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen () sprunk org>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:51:43 -0600
Thus spake "Chris Cole" <chris.cole () finisar com>
The 40km/10km cost ratio is between 1.6x and 2x, depending on the source. The 10km/4km cost ratio is between 1.15x and 1.3x, again depending on the source.
If those numbers translate into prices (not costs), then I'd prefer to see 40km and 4km optics, with no 10km optics. The important point is that the 40km optics neet to be able to handle 4.1km links with no attenuators, preferably without any human tuning at all. You only pay the extra capital cost once (if there even is any, due to more volume of fewer parts), but you pay labor and sparing over and over.
S Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws theK5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
Current thread:
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE, (continued)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Wayne E. Bouchard (Dec 14)
- RE: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Chris Cole (Dec 14)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Wayne E. Bouchard (Dec 14)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Robert E. Seastrom (Dec 12)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Deepak Jain (Dec 12)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Robert E. Seastrom (Dec 12)
- SC vs other connectors, optical budgets decreasing (was Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE) Alex Pilosov (Dec 12)
- Re: SC vs other connectors, optical budgets decreasing (was Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE) Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 12)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Deepak Jain (Dec 12)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Robert E. Seastrom (Dec 12)
- RE: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 12)
- RE: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Chris Cole (Dec 13)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Stephen Sprunk (Dec 13)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Owen DeLong (Dec 13)
- RE: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Chris Cole (Dec 13)
- Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Robert E. Seastrom (Dec 13)
- RE: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Chris Cole (Dec 13)
- RE: IEEE 40GE & 100GE Chris Cole (Dec 13)