| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
All, I think we are nearly a potential epiphany based on a “bottoms up” review of material presented in the study group. Let’s listen openly to the presentations, and outline encouragingly where we would like to see more material/data. In my opinion, 1. 100GBASE-SR10 CXP should be the basis of all relative cost comparison for any potential SMF Objective or any potential MMF Objective. 2. The relative cost of 100GBASE-LR4 to 100GBASE-SR10 should be understood for any potential common form factor, and I will note that relative cost does depend upon form factor. 3. Comparing to 100GBASE-LR4 misses the point of the study point that I believe is best known as “datacenter reach extension.” “100GBASE-nR4” was not meant to replace 100GBASE-LR4 but fill in where parallel optics either fail to perform or market acceptance of parallel fiber does not exist where I presume duplex SMF for “100GBASE-nR4.” Low cost, low power, and compactness (CFP4/QSFP) are paramount or the potential standard will not be adopted by the market. 4. We should realize that 100GBASE-SR10 will live as a deployed, durable, standard for years to come and likely shall see follow on implementations beyond CXP. 5. Parallel 4x25G SMF optics are showing potential merit at present as a viable proposal for interconnects in cases where the bulk of parallel fiber is acceptable. 6. “100GBASE-SR4” needs to be proven and at present its potential contender is parallel 4x25G SMF optics. 7. I would like to learn which markets will stick with 100GBASE-SR10 and which markets will move to or develop around “100GBASE-SR4.” Jeff Juniper Networks |