[166382] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Pad 1310nm cross-connects?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (joel jaeggli)
Sun Oct 20 15:12:15 2013
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAN8DL0XVDUV20-Wk6LYuuuufq22VnNznOVRvwL=_aYt90bagkg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 12:11:52 -0700
To: Chris Costa <ccosta92630@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--Apple-Mail=_A1AE1326-0B06-4AA1-AE2C-66DCCF5D0989
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=iso-8859-1
It's a pretty normal situation. even with a 1-2m jumper I see light =
levels that are well below the maximum rx levels for 10km optics. e.g. =
the max might be .5 and the actual readings are -1.4 - -2.7. our WDM =
terminals sit in the the adjacent racks to the pop routers so they're =
all like that.=20
ER/ZR is another matter.
On Oct 19, 2013, at 7:33 PM, Chris Costa <ccosta92630@gmail.com> 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?
>=20
> Thanks
>=20
--Apple-Mail=_A1AE1326-0B06-4AA1-AE2C-66DCCF5D0989
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iEYEARECAAYFAlJkKvgACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrIT8QCfZcYNPHjE5wvk0MxuYR313ifs
GuYAn1/Ukw+hCHBz4zN7/XRMv3+H7ik/
=4jRP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Apple-Mail=_A1AE1326-0B06-4AA1-AE2C-66DCCF5D0989--
