[177886] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Low cost WDM gear
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Faisal Imtiaz)
Sat Feb 7 15:44:21 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 20:44:19 +0000 (GMT)
From: Faisal Imtiaz <faisal@snappytelecom.net>
To: Rodrigo 1telecom <rodrigo@1telecom.com.br>
In-Reply-To: <29880E85-A533-40EE-84F2-975CFDB28263@1telecom.com.br>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
If you pay close attention to the Spec Sheets, on power output, insertion l=
oss, sensitivity, and do the proper calculation for your link, then using a=
nyone's products, passive or active will work unless the devices do not mee=
t specified specs.
If you don't do your homework, cals on the design, loss, and just buy stuff=
based on whatever, then it does not matter who the mfg. is, you are very v=
ery likely to be surprised in a bad way.
:)
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo@1telecom.com.br>
> To: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae@me.com>
> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>
> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 3:24:43 PM
> Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear
>=20
> What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this
> passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multipl=
ex
> solution... Is a active solution...
> We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10=
G
> sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux...
>=20
> Enviado via iPhone =EF=A3=BF
> Grupo Connectoway
>=20
> > Em 07/02/2015, =C3=A0s 16:04, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae@me.com> escr=
eveu:
> >=20
> > Hi Enviado,
> >=20
> > I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I
> > needed to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I s=
aw
> > a loss of over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which
> > created a total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances f=
or
> > our equipment with 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss
> > mux corrected our issue. I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you
> > may be able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover < 60km. I als=
o
> > notice that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power output w=
hen
> > compared to other vendors.
> >=20
> > Thanks
> >=20
> > Kenneth
> >=20
> >> On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom <rodrigo@1telecom.com.b=
r>
> >> wrote:
> >>=20
> >=20
> >> Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B whe=
n
> >> you using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)?
> >> I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test
> >> about 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... =
(
> >> only see ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access w=
ith
> >> ssh and pinging tests...
> >> What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this
> >> solution good?
> >> Thanks!!!
> >>=20
> >> Enviado via iPhone =EF=A3=BF
> >> Grupo Connectoway
> >>=20
> >>> Em 07/02/2015, =C3=A0s 14:55, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae@me.com> es=
creveu:
> >>> Mike,
> >>> I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hard=
ware
> >>> equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive
> >>> loss, poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without
> >>> threatening legal action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI
> >>> equipment so far. I run passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels).
> >>> On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Mar=C3=ADn <mmg@transtelco.net> =
wrote:
> >>> Hi Mike
> >>> I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective
> >>> solutions.
> >>> Ekinops & Packetlight.
> >>> On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
> >>> I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500)
> >>> muxes
> >>> to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't
> >>> work
> >>> so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefo=
re
> >>> must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channe=
ls
> >>> and
> >>> have a distance limitation.
> >>> What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg?
> >>> -----
> >>> Mike Hammett
> >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> >>> http://www.ics-il.com
> >>> --
> >>> TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | M=
X:
> >>> *+52
> >>> 656-257-1109*
> >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the u=
se
> >>> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> >>> information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclos=
ure
> >>> under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this
> >>> information, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distributi=
on,
> >>> or
> >>> copying of the communication is strictly prohibited.
> >>> AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Esta comunicaci=C3=B3n es s=C3=B3lo para e=
l uso de la
> >>> persona o entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener informaci=C3=B3=
n
> >>> privilegiada, confidencial y exenta de divulgaci=C3=B3n bajo la legis=
laci=C3=B3n
> >>> aplicable. Si no es el destinatario de esta informaci=C3=B3n, se le n=
otifica
> >>> que
> >>> cualquier uso, difusi=C3=B3n, distribuci=C3=B3n o copia de la comunic=
aci=C3=B3n est=C3=A1
> >>> estrictamente prohibido.
>
