[177887] in North American Network Operators' Group
Low cost WDM gear
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kenneth McRae)
Sat Feb 7 15:47:12 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Faisal Imtiaz <faisal@snappytelecom.net>
From: Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae@me.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2015 20:46:20 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Faisal, I worked directly with FiberStore's engineers to determine the opt=
ics and mux needed for my use case. =C2=A0They recommended the mux and the=
optics for the 3km distance. =C2=A0 You can always buy stronger optics, b=
ut that is not point I am making. =C2=A0 I provided the scale and scope of=
the project and they provided the BOM to deliver the required service. =C2=
=A0When the equipment failed, FiberStore refused to honor their return pol=
icy and issue an RMA until we threatened legal action.=C2=A0=0A=0ASame sal=
es scenario with OSI Hardware.. =C2=A0They provide the BOM with passive mu=
xes and 10km optics and it works with no problem.=0A=0AIn this scenario, I=
can definitely blame the manufacturer. =C2=A0No to mention the terrible t=
echnical support that they offer.=0A=0A=0AOn Feb 07, 2015, at 12:30 PM, Fa=
isal Imtiaz <faisal@snappytelecom.net> wrote:=0A=0AKenneth, =0A=0AI am sor=
ry, but it sounds like you made a mistake in not calculating loss of the d=
evices in the path, and are blaming a Mfg for the mistake... They clearly =
list the insertion loss for the different muxes in the specs on their webs=
ite.=0A=0A=0AFaisal Imtiaz=0ASnappy Internet & Telecom=0A=0A----- Original=
Message -----=0AFrom: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae@me.com>=0ATo: "Rodri=
go 1telecom" <rodrigo@1telecom.com.br>=0ACc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>=0AS=
ent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 2:04:10 PM=0ASubject: Re: Low cost WDM gea=
r=0AHi Enviado,=0AI cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience =
with them. =C2=A0I needed=0Ato cover only 3km from A to B side. =C2=A0When=
using 10km optics, I saw a loss of=0Aover 5db =C2=A0with their passive mu=
x inserted into the path which created a=0Atotal loss of over -20db which =
is outside of the tolerances for our=0Aequipment with 10km SFP+. =C2=A0Usi=
ng another vendors low insertion loss mux=0Acorrected our issue. =C2=A0I a=
m sure if you are using an 80km optic, you may be=0Aable to tolerate a hig=
her insertion loss to cover < 60km. =C2=A0I also notice=0Athat their CDWM =
optics averaged about 3db less in power output when compared=0Ato other ve=
ndors.=0AThanks=0AKenneth=0AOn Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom=
<rodrigo@1telecom.com.br>=0Awrote:=0AHi kenneth... which the distance do =
you have from side A to side B when you=0Ausing passive solutions from fib=
erstore( mux and demux)?=0AI buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fibe=
r) and only make a test about=0A60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with=
sfp+10gb for 80km... ( only see=0Addm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km)=
. Test switch access with ssh and=0Apinging tests...=0AWhat kind os issue =
do you have? For distances less than 60km is this solution=0Agood?=0AThank=
s!!!=0AEnviado via iPhone =EF=A3=BF=0AGrupo Connectoway=0AEm 07/02/2015, =C3=
=A0s 14:55, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae@me.com> escreveu:=0AMike,=0AI jus=
t replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware=0Aequ=
ipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive loss,=0Ap=
oor technical support, refusal to issue refund without threatening legal=0A=
action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI equipment so far. I ru=
n=0Apassive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels).=0AOn Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 =
AM, Manuel Mar=C3=ADn <mmg@transtelco.net> wrote:=0AHi Mike=0AI can recomm=
end a couple of vendors that provide cost effective solutions.=0AEkinops &=
Packetlight.=0AOn Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.=
net> wrote:=0AI know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less th=
an $500) muxes=0Ato throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However=
, they don't work=0Aso well when you don't control the optics used on both=
sides (therefore=0Amust use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a ha=
ndful of channels and=0Ahave a distance limitation.=0AWhat solutions are o=
ut there that don't cost an arm and a leg?=0A-----=0AMike Hammett=0AIntell=
igent Computing Solutions=0Ahttp://www.ics-il.com=0A--=0ATRANSTELCO| Manue=
l Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: *+52=0A656-257-1109=
*=0ACONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the us=
e=0Aof the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain=0A=
information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure=0A=
under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this=0Ainfo=
rmation, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or=0A=
copying of the communication is strictly prohibited.=0AAVISO DE CONFIDENCI=
ALIDAD: Esta comunicaci=C3=B3n es s=C3=B3lo para el uso de la=0Apersona o =
entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener informaci=C3=B3n=0Aprivilegiad=
a, confidencial y exenta de divulgaci=C3=B3n bajo la legislaci=C3=B3n=0Aap=
licable. Si no es el destinatario de esta informaci=C3=B3n, se le notifica=
que=0Acualquier uso, difusi=C3=B3n, distribuci=C3=B3n o copia de la comun=
icaci=C3=B3n est=C3=A1=0Aestrictamente prohibido.=
