| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
Chris, Your comments are also noted and in response, as well as in response to a correction request from the floor during the presentation, we made a change to the deck. It is now uploaded on the January meeting NG 100G OE SG web site as a post deadline contribution. (http://www.ieee802.org/3/100GNGOPTX/public/jan12/cole_03_0112_NG100GOPTX.pdf ) Page 5 has been changed to show a PAM-16 eye at the output of a 4th order Bessel LPF with Tr/f = 12ps. Thank you Chris From: Chris Bergey [mailto:cbergey@xxxxxxxxxxx] Chris Your comments are noted and clearly the rise and fall times required for a PAM8 or PAM16 system would need to be greater than 20ns. I would note that many of the papers you highlighted were focused on 10G NRZ systems for which a 20nS rise time would be quite sufficient and desired. As a data point, I would point you to the Palkert 01_1111 presentation from Atlanta showing 4x28G transceiver eyes. These eyes exhibited a rise and fall time <15ps and an ER>3dB, although we took out the measurement details out of the posted IEEE presentation we can provide them again. Regards Chris From: Chris Cole [mailto:chris.cole@xxxxxxxxxxx] During this afternoon’s NG 100G OE SG meeting, a proposal for PAM-8 and PAM-16 modulation 100GE alternatives were presented. http://www.ieee802.org/3/100GNGOPTX/public/jan12/bhoja_01_0112_NG100GOPTX.pdf It appears that required silicon modulator speed as measured by rise and fall times is about 3 times faster than the fastest reported devices in the literature.
We have submitted a post-deadline presentation showing ideal simulations where the ONLY optical device limitation is rise/fall time which is the simplest impairment to look at.
http://www.ieee802.org/3/100GNGOPTX/public/jan12/cole_03_0112_NG100GOPTX.pdf Chris |