Frank
C. -----Original Message-----
From: Frank
Effenberger [
mailto:feffenberger@huawei.com]
Sent:
Thursday, February 22, 2007 10:50 AM
To: Frank Chang;
STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.orgSubject:
RE: [8023-10GEPON] [POWER_BUDGET] Report of local discussion
Dear
Frank,
Unfortunately, you are mistaken:
The current 1G EPON
does NOT use PX-10 or PX-20 optics.
NTT has been telling us that for
about a year now.
Regards,
Frank E.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Frank Chang [
mailto:ychang@VITESSE.COM]
Sent:
Thursday, February 22, 2007 12:58 PM
To:
STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.orgSubject:
Re: [8023-10GEPON] [POWER_BUDGET] Report of local discussion
Frank et
al.
I have asked the group similar questions before but in different
way. My
interpretation is that we maynot have to do 1/10 coexistence for
29dB
budget. If current 1G use PX-10 and PX-20 optics specified at 20dB and
24dB,
then assuming 10G optics going to share the same fiber installment,
so it
doesnot make any sense to me we have to specify 10G budget as 29dB
for the
same ODN. I donot think the extra loss form connector hold true
here.
My understanding 1/10 coexistence is only for 20dB and 24dB
budgets, 29dB
budget will be a standalone case for 10G, addressing the apps
similar to
gpon B+ case, unless the current 1G deployment use aggressive
budgets other
than spec'd.
Regards
Frank C.
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Effenberger [
mailto:feffenberger@huawei.com]
Sent:
Thursday, February 22, 2007 9:03 AM
To:
STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.orgSubject:
Re: [8023-10GEPON] [POWER_BUDGET] Report of local discussion
Dear All,
I have an observation to make... It seems that the current
standard
specifies loss budgets for PX-10 and PX-20 optics at 20dB and
24dB.
However, it should be clear by now that the actual fielded optics are
in
most cases producing an Insertion Loss budget of 29dB. I think we
are
missing a standard specification for this.
If that was all,
then IEEE could decide to revise clause 60 (or whatever
editorial method
you want to do), or decide not to (and leave the market to
its own devices:
pun intended). However, our task force has embarked on
the
standardization of 10/1 optics, and it seems that many folks want
to
consider the 29dB budget, and compatibility with 1/1G EPON is also
desired.
So, I don't think we have a choice - we need to define what the 29
dB power
budget is for 1G EPON. (And note: by power budget, I mean
the specification
of the transmitter and receiver power ranges, any
penalties that come to
bear - in short, everything you find in clause 60.)
If we don't specify the budget of the practical 1G EPON optics, then
we
cannot do a proper job of considering compatibility, shared use of
the
1310nm channel, and so forth. It is critical.
So,
since we seem to have a gathering of the Japanese companies that are
deeply
involved in the 1G EPON deployments, it is a good time to ask them
to
please present, to our task force, what is their version of clause 60
for
the "29dB" 1G EPON systems, in the field today.
Sincerely,
Frank Effenberger
-----Original
Message-----
From: Motoyuki TAKIZAWA [
mailto:mtaki@ACCESS.FUJITSU.COM]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 2:47 AM
To:
STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.orgSubject:
[8023-10GEPON] [POWER_BUDGET] Report of local discussion
All,
As
I was assigned in the last telecon to form a group to work
on a Tx and Rx
characteristic table for the 29dB CHIL especially
from the view point of
system vendors, we had a discussion on it
among some Japanese members.
I
don't submit the draft table to here now. We did have draft
characteristic
tables from some vendors but we ended up modifying
them again considering
the issues we came up with in the call.
This is an intermediate report
of our talk.
<Date>
Feb 20, 1:00PM-3:00PM
JST
<Participants>
Tsutomu Tatsuta
NTT
Akihiro Otaka NTT
Ken-ichi
Suzuki NTT
Tomoaki Masuta
NEC
Akio Tajima NEC
Toshiaki
Mukojima Oki
Shinji Tsuji
Sumitomo
Hiroki Ikeda
Hitachi
Satoshi Shirai Mitsubishi
Naoki
Suzuki Mitsubishi
Hiroshi
Hamano Fujitsu Laboratory
Tetsuya
Yokomoto Fujitsu Access
Motoyuki Takizawa Fujitsu
Access
<Assumption>
The assumption of wavelengths were 1.31um
for US and 1.57um for DS,
following the solution 3 in the presentation
below.
http://www.ieee802.org/3/av/public/2007_01/3av_0701_tatsuta_1.pdf<Downstream>
The
main point was wheather applying PIN-PD or APD in the ONU.
Needless to say,
PIN should be better for the cost reason, however
we need to take a risk
applying 'high power' SOA at the OLT that
has less maturity
(reliability).
One idea of judging this is if the ONUs should have the
same
architecture for each class(PX10, PX20, ClassB++) as same as
802.3ah
standard. It will have an influence on cost and selection for
pieces
of components both on the OLT/ONU.
<Upstream>
"PD +
Preamp -------- DFB(EML)" would be a preferable solution
for many of us.
But we need a narrow band filter between
Preamp(SOA) and PD and it doesn't
seem we can have 1G/10G
coexistence at the moment for this reason because
1GEPON needs
100nm band around 1310nm.
Possible solutions are:
- Seeking possibility of increasing LD(DFB/EML) power
- Considering
another appropriate wavelength for US
Another topic was the availability of
uncooled laser @10G
with broad range of temperature(-40 to +85 degrees C),
which
will be expected to use for PX10/PX20.
<Action
Item>
- Revise the draft charasteristic table
DS: PD vs APD,
considering if all ONUs should have the
same
arthitecture for each class.
US: Study two solutions in detail.
-
Study availability of uncooled 10G laser with broad temperature
range(-40 to +85 degrees C).
Next discussion will be held on 2/23
JST.
[Clarification]
This local talk is actually not a
closed one but I think it is
important to make a draft ASAP and that it is
good to have a
local discussion among Japanese System Vendors first like
I
was asked to in the last telecon, maybe for the reason of
timezone,
language, etc...
I think I'll report back to the ad hoc here and we'll have
a
fruitful discussion.
Best Regards,
--
Motoyuki
Takizawa
Fujitsu Access Ltd. R&D Center