Re: [8023-10GEPON] Updated Questionnaire
Tatsuta-san hello,
Thanks for your feedback. I am sorry that you were unable to attend the telecon on the survey as we tried to wrap up all the outstanding issues. To respond to your points:
> Question 1.2
> What is a purpose of this question?
> I think only a purpose of this question is to decide we consider coexistence of the current PON and 10G-EPON. If the number of the current PON customer is big, do we consider the coexistence?
> If my assumption is right, I think questions 2.1 and 2.2 are enough to decide it.
In my opinion Question 1.2 tells us how much experience the provider has had with PON technology - an important point of background.
> Question 1.6
> I think we need to specify a word of "optical design margin".
> If it means the difference between a real loss budget and an official loss budget, I think we cannot use the margin as 10G-EPON optical margin because it is a margin for service providers' network design.
> If the optical margin is different meaning, please specify it.
If I recall, the intent was to ask the margin of "slack" built in to the fiber plant to allow for aging/deterioriation etc. I agree that the meaning is not clear from the current language.
< Question 1.7-b
< I think we can ask it directly. I was modified the question as attached.
OK w/ me.
> Question 1.8
> What is a purpose of this question?
> If it is used to decide the distance of 10G-EPON, I think another question in section 2 is better. Please check the question 2.4 I revised.
Your question 2.4 is a different way to ask the operator about these issues. See my comments on 2.4 below.
> Questions 2.1 and 2.2
> What is a purpose of this question?
This tells us the extent of the provider's interest in PON technologies. If an operator is anticipating a comparatively large rollout we might regard their views differently in our decisions.
> Questions 2.4 and 2.5
> As for the split ratio
> I think a split ratio is not so important and a loss budget is very
> important. A split ratio is one of the aspects of a loss budget.
> For example; when two operators want 29dB loss budget, it is possible that
> one operator's network is 1ª16 split and many connectors and another
> operator's network is 1ª32 split and few connectors.
> As for the fiber distance
> A fiber distance is necessary to decide the effect of the dispersion penalty.
> My conclusion is we need to ask operators their requirement of the loss
> budget and the distance. I combined question 2.4 and 2.5 and modified it as
> question 2.4 as attached.
This makes sense - both for the reasons that you say and also because when they are asked the operators seem to think in terms of the power budget rather than the parameters that we are asking for. On the other hand it does seem that the Task Force should involve itself to determine what Power Budget value is needed rather than just collecting poll results.
Moreover, this is a more substantive change than I think was envisioned at this stage for the survey document. If the group is receptive, then
perhaps the solution is to accept the matrix you created in 2.4 and add 2 more matrixes for "splits" and "connector loss" (as a function of budget in db). There could be text indicating that higher power typically results in higher-cost/complexity in the optics.
If the adhoc group is receptive, then we could adjust this (and also the "margin" text) over the reflector - and avoid another telecon.
BRs,
- Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: T.TATSUTA [mailto:tatsuta@ANSL.NTT.CO.JP]
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:01 AM
To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] Updated Questionnaire
Dear Shane and all,
This is Tsutomu TATSUTA.
Thank you for the great work.
I reconsider the survey and I had some comments and questions.
Question 1.2
What is a purpose of this question?
I think only a purpose of this question is to decide we consider coexistence of the current PON and 10G-EPON. If the number of the current PON customer is big, do we consider the coexistence?
If my assumption is right, I think questions 2.1 and 2.2 are enough to decide it.
Question 1.6
I think we need to specify a word of "optical design margin".
If it means the difference between a real loss budget and an official loss budget, I think we cannot use the margin as 10G-EPON optical margin because it is a margin for service providers' network design.
If the optical margin is different meaning, please specify it.
Question 1.7-b
I think we can ask it directly. I was modified the question as attached.
Question 1.8
What is a purpose of this question?
If it is used to decide the distance of 10G-EPON, I think another question in section 2 is better. Please check the question 2.4 I revised.
Questions 2.1 and 2.2
What is a purpose of this question?
Questions 2.4 and 2.5
As for the split ratio
I think a split ratio is not so important and a loss budget is very
important. A split ratio is one of the aspects of a loss budget.
For example; when two operators want 29dB loss budget, it is possible that
one operator's network is 1ª16 split and many connectors and another
operator's network is 1ª32 split and few connectors.
As for the fiber distance
A fiber distance is necessary to decide the effect of the dispersion penalty.
My conclusion is we need to ask operators their requirement of the loss
budget and the distance. I combined question 2.4 and 2.5 and modified it as
question 2.4 as attached.
Please forgive me my skill less for Microsoft Word. The question number
became odd after question 2.4 and I was not able to fix it.
Question 2.8-b
Same as question 1.7-b.
Sincerely yours,
Tsutomu TATSUTA
At 00:58 06/10/31 -0500, Shane Eleniak wrote:
>All,
>Please find an updated version of the questionnaire based on this
>afternoon's call. Would appreciate if everyone on the call reviewed it and
>sent me any feedback.
>
>Additionally, please send me directly the service provider's you can
>contact.
>
>Regards,
>Shane
>
>
>
>
>