[156157] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Are people still building SONET networks from scratch?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Sun Sep 9 03:32:19 2012
Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 09:31:24 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20120909044539.GD24232@besserwisser.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
---137064504-1579498695-1347175884=:13902
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
On Sun, 9 Sep 2012, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> Still, the stupid f€%&€/# that make prices for linecards made me go GE
> instead of OC48 for the most recent deployment. In Sweden, both vendors
> claim about 6 times as much, per megabit, for SDH line cards.
The "once-in-a-lifetime" that happened here (took a while though) was WAN
PHY for 10GE. All the benefit of SDH at Ethernet cost.
When I approached the 40GE/100GE working group about getting a few of the
benefits of this into that standard, I was instantly shut down by people
who thought WAN PHY was a huge mistake that shouldn't be repeated.
The only thing I wanted was to have frames sent all the times so one would
get a basic bit error reading, plus having the PHY send some basic
information such as "I am seeing light and my world looks ok", so we could
get PHY based interface-down when there was a fiber cut.
But that wasn't to be, so the only way to get this will be to OTN-frame
the whole thing I guess. *sigh*
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
---137064504-1579498695-1347175884=:13902--
