[166368] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Pad 1310nm cross-connects?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Justin M. Streiner)
Sun Oct 20 01:10:16 2013
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 21:24:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAN8DL0XVDUV20-Wk6LYuuuufq22VnNznOVRvwL=_aYt90bagkg@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sat, 19 Oct 2013, Chris Costa wrote:
> What are the opinions/views on attenuating short, 1310nm LR cross-connects.
> Assume < 20m cable length and utilizing the same vendor optics on each
> side of the link. Considering the LR transmit spec doesn't exceed the
> receiver's high threshold value do you pad the receiver closer to the
> median RX range to avoid potential receiver burnout over time, or just
> leave it un-padded?
If this is using Cisco 10GBASE-LR optics, then padding in this instance
should not be necessary. However, if SR optics (again, assuming these are
Cisco devices), would be a better fit for the distance, using an OM3 or
OM4 multimode jumper.
The reason I asked about the vendor is because things like SR and LR can
mean different things to different vendors.
jms
