nanog mailing list archives

Re: 40G and 100G optics options


From: Fredrik Korsbäck <hugge () nordu net>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 20:30:19 +0100


19 dec. 2017 kl. 19:24 skrev Sabri Berisha <sabri () cluecentral net>:

----- On Dec 18, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Fredrik Korsbäck hugge () nordu net wrote:

This is the "failure" of us (the business) choosing QSFP as the de-factor
formfactor for 100G, there is not power in
that cage to make 10km+ optics in an easy way. If we would have pushed for CFP4
as the "last" formfactor in 100G land we
would be much better off.

How about OSFP? The OSFP MSA has a large number of backers, including Juniper, Arista, Finisar and Google. 

Yes, on OSFP we have the possbility of making this right again for 400G. It will not have the same backward compability 
as QSFP-DD and not the same faceplate density (but close enough i would say). But in return we would most likely see 
longrange optics MUCH earlier in the lifecycle of 400G



It's the vendors that chose to go for QSFP due to the density options in a single RU chassis.

Thanks,

Sabri



Current thread: