Re: [8023-10GEPON] FW: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher splitratio - Conference Call Minutes
Glen
As the standard of laser is based on IEC in Japan, higher power laser than
Class 1 is also allowed. In fact, long haul systems in Japan use optical
amplifier which exceeds Class 1.
Takahashi
Glen Kramer wrote:
>
> Dear Takahashi-san,
>
> Does this mean that higher power levels allowed by IEC 60825 are not allowed
> in Japan?
>
> This is a question for all: should we limit ourselves to 60825-1 to make it
> a more universally applicable spec, or should we follow the latest
> amendments that allow higher power levels, even though it may put it above
> the limit in some countries?
>
> I am curious what norms and regulations exist in other countries. Please,
> comment if you have this info.
>
> IEEE 802.3ah has referred to 60825-1, even though at the time of 802.3ah
> approval (2004), the 60825-2 already existed.
>
> Note: It may turn out that the effects of channel non-linearities put much
> more stringent limits on launch power, so the question of which safety
> standard to follow may not be critical. Our high-split ratio ad hoc should
> answer this question.
>
> Glen
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Akira Takahashi [mailto:Takahashi.Akira@AJ.MITSUBISHIELECTRIC.CO.JP]
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 8:09 AM
> > To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] FW: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher
> > split ratio - Conference Call Minutes
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The class of laser is standardized in each country, it is standardized
> > in JIS(Japanese Industrial Standards) JISC6803 in Japan, and IEC 60825-1
> > is the base.
> > In ad hoc on wavelength and co-existence, 1210nm and 1580nm are also
> > discussed as the candidates. In Table 1 of IEC 60825-1, the output of
> > the laser limited with Class 1 is as follows,
> >
> > 1210nm 15.6mW(+12dBm)
> > 1310nm 15.6mW(+12dBm)
> > 1420nm 10mW(+10dBm)
> > 1490nm 10mW(+10dBm)
> > 1550nm 10mW(+10dBm)
> > 1580nm 10nm(+10dBm)
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Takahashi
> >
> > MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC CORPORATION
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Pete Anslow
> > To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> > Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 7:36 AM
> > Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] FW: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher
> > split ratio - Conference Call Minutes
> >
> >
> >
> > Glen,
> >
> >
> >
> > You asked ? "Can we somehow translate the 60825 requirements into a
> > maximum limit for launch power at ONU?"
> >
> >
> >
> > The answer is that to do this properly you have to apply all of the rules
> > found in IEC 60825-1 and 60825-2 and the maximum power you get depends on
> > wavelength. However, Table D.1 of IEC 60825-2 contains the limits for 11
> > um mode field diameter single mode fibre for the following wavelengths:
> >
> >
> >
> > 1310 nm 15.6 mW (+12 dBm)
> >
> > 1420 nm 10 mW (+10 dBm)
> >
> > 1550 nm 10 mW (+10 dBm)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "is it reasonable to anticipate that a customer sooner or later will
> > decide to look directly into the ONU connector?"
> >
> > I think that the answer to that is definitely "Yes"
> >
> >
> >
> > "Is it reasonable that a customer will try to pry open a shutter door that
> > a connector may have."
> >
> > I think that this is much more difficult to answer and may be affected by
> > how difficult it is to do etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > "Is the ONU's mode of operation when it shuts down its laser when it sees
> > no incoming signal a reasonable measure to classify higher-power optics as
> > class 1?"
> >
> > I think that the correct terminology for equipment that operates at high
> > power levels and automatically shuts down in the event of loss of
> > continuity
> > of the link is that it is Hazard level 1.
> >
> > The answer to whether an ONU is Hazard level 1 because of a shutdown
> > mechanism depends on things like the time between the loss of continuity
> > of the
> > link and the power reduction (I think that this must be < 1 second for
> > unrestricted locations) and the reliability of the shutdown mechanism
> > (e.g.
> > software based shutdown may not be reliable enough).
> >
> > This is a complex subject ? see IEC 60825-2 for details.
> >
> >
> >
> > IEC 60825-2 also contains information specific to PONs. For example
> > clause D.4.6
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Pete Anslow
> >
> >
> >
> > Nortel Networks UK Limited, London Rd, Harlow, Essex CM17 9NA, UK
> >
> > External +44 1279 402540 Fax +44 1279 405670 ESN 742 2540
> >
> >
> >
> > Email: pja@nortel.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >
> > From: Glen Kramer [mailto:glen.kramer@teknovus.com]
> > Sent: 01 November 2006 20:51
> > To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] FW: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher
> > split ratio - Conference Call Minutes
> >
> >
> >
> > > Class 4 lasers are of high power . may have sufficient energy to
> > ignite materials .
> >
> >
> >
> > That's what I need! Now we are talking business.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Seriously, our RAP stated that our project won't "result in any health,
> > safety, security, or environmental guidance that affects or applies to
> > human
> > health or safety". For 1G EPON, clause 60 explicitly limits us to class I
> > optics and it explicitly refers to IEC 60825:
> >
> >
> >
> > 60.8.2 Laser safety
> >
> > 1000BASE-PX10 and 1000BASE-PX20 optical transceivers shall conform to
> > Class 1 laser requirements as
> >
> > defined in IEC 60825-1, under any condition of operation. This includes
> > single fault conditions whether
> >
> > coupled into a fiber or out of an open bore. Conformance to additional
> > laser safety standards may be
> >
> > required for operation within specific geographic regions.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I am not very clear how to interpret the Class I rules below:
> >
> >
> >
> > A class 1 laser is safe for use under all reasonably-anticipated
> > conditions of use; in other words, it is not expected that the maximum
> > permissible
> > exposure (MPE) can be exceeded. This class may include lasers of a higher
> > class whose beams are confined within a suitable enclosure so that access
> > to
> > laser radiation is physically prevented.
> >
> >
> >
> > What are all reasonably-anticipated conditions and what is expected MPE?
> > For example, is it reasonable to anticipate that a customer sooner or
> > later
> > will decide to look directly into the ONU connector? Is it reasonable
> > that a customer will try to pry open a shutter door that a connector may
> > have.
> >
> >
> >
> > Is the ONU's mode of operation when it shuts down its laser when it sees
> > no incoming signal a reasonable measure to classify higher-power optics as
> > class 1? My point is that this protection (a useful side-effect of MPCP,
> > really) is done at a protocol level, way above PMD.
> >
> >
> >
> > Can we somehow translate the 60825 requirements into a maximum limit for
> > launch power at ONU?
> >
> >
> >
> > Glen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom,
> >
> > Good data. I am not sure why you were not able to post. I am forwarding
> > this to the reflector (phone and e-mail from you signature were removed to
> > curb spam).
> > Glen
> >
> >
> > Glen, I tried posting to the listserv but I guess I've only got Lurking
> > permissions. I have some awareness of laser safety as our test products
> > use
> > Lasers up to 20 mw or so:
> > As one might expect Laser Safety is not a simple issue. Requirements are
> > generally concerned about optical power density (mw/cm^2). I would guess
> > that an EDFA output at +20 dB (100 mW) could fall under class IIIB.
> > Revised system
> > In 2002 the system of Laser Classes was revised as part of a revision of
> > the international laser safety standard, IEC 60825. The revision was based
> > on
> > the greater knowledge of lasers that had accumulated since the original
> > classification system was devised, and was intended to permit certain
> > types of
> > lasers to be recognized as having a lower hazard than was implied by their
> > placement in the original classification system. The revised system is
> > expected to be adopted for use in the US in the next revision of the ANSI
> > Laser Safety Standard (ANSI Z136). The FDA, which regulates lasers offered
> > in commerce in the United States, does not object to its use on imported
> > laser products' labels and markings.
> >
> > class I
> >
> > A class 1 laser is safe for use under all reasonably-anticipated
> > conditions of use; in other words, it is not expected that the maximum
> > permissible
> > exposure (MPE) can be exceeded. This class may include lasers of a higher
> > class whose beams are confined within a suitable enclosure so that access
> > to
> > laser radiation is physically prevented.
> >
> > class IM
> >
> > Class 1M lasers produce large-diameter beams, or beams that are divergent.
> > The MPE for a Class 1M laser cannot normally be exceeded unless focusing
> > or
> > imaging optics are used to narrow down the beam. If the beam is refocused,
> > the hazard of Class 1M lasers may be increased and the product class may
> > be
> > changed.
> >
> > class II
> >
> > A class 2 laser emits in the visible region. It is presumed that the human
> > blink reflex will be sufficient to prevent damaging exposure, although
> > prolonged viewing may be dangerous.
> >
> > class IIM
> >
> > A class IIM laser emits in the visible region in the form of a large
> > diameter or divergent beam. It is presumed that the human blink reflex
> > will be
> > sufficient to prevent damaging exposure, but if the beam is focused down,
> > damaging levels of radiation may be reached and may lead to a
> > reclassification of the laser.
> >
> > class IIIR
> >
> > A class 3R laser is a continuous wave laser which may produce up to five
> > times the emission limit for Class 1 or class 2 lasers. Although the MPE
> > can
> > be exceeded, the risk of injury is low. The laser can produce no more than
> > 5 mW in the visible region.
> >
> > class IIIB
> >
> > A class 3B laser produces light of an intensity such that the MPE for eye
> > exposure may be exceeded and direct viewing of the beam is potentially
> > serious. Diffuse radiation (i.e., that which is scattered from a diffusing
> > surface) should not be hazardous. CW emission from such lasers at
> > wavelengths above 315 nm must not exceed 0.5 watts.
> >
> > class IV
> >
> > Class 4 lasers are of high power (typically more than 500 mW if cw, or 10
> > J/cm2 if pulsed). These are hazardous to view at all times, may cause
> > devastating and permanent eye damage, may have sufficient energy to ignite
> > materials, and may cause significant skin damage. Exposure of the eye or
> > skin to both the direct laser beam and to scattered beams, even those
> > produced by reflection from diffusing surfaces, must be avoided at all
> > times. In
> > addition, they may pose a fire risk and may generate hazardous fumes.
> >
> > (From The Physical and Theoretical Chemistry Laboratory Oxford
> > University)[7]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Tom Durston
> >
> > Product Development Manager
> >
> > Greenlee / Textron
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >
> > From: Glen Kramer [mailto:glen.kramer@TEKNOVUS.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 1:21 PM
> > To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher split ratio -
> > Conference Call Minutes
> >
> >
> >
> > David,
> >
> >
> >
> > What about upstream launch power? I am not sure, but I'd guess the safety
> > rules would be different for CO and for a household.
> >
> >
> >
> > Are there any volunteers to make a short overview presentation on the
> > topic?
> >
> >
> >
> > Glen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >
> > From: David Piehler [mailto:dpiehler@ALPHION.COM]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 6:55 AM
> > To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher split ratio -
> > Conference Call Minutes
> >
> >
> >
> > I don't know the exact safety issues involved, but I do know that carriers
> > deploying the video overlay do launch up to +20 dBm at 1550 nm into the
> > OSP fiber. Also in the CATV world, this type of launch power is not
> > uncommon.
> >
> >
> >
> > David Piehler
> >
> > Alphion
> >
> > mobile: +1 732 692 4581
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >
> > From: Glen Kramer [mailto:glen.kramer@teknovus.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 11:49 AM
> > To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher split ratio -
> > Conference Call Minutes
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike,
> >
> >
> >
> > This is a great point. Could you provide some more info on class 1 safety?
> > In general, what regulations apply to CPE side and to CO side? It would
> > be great to have a presentation in November covering this topic. It
> > definitely should be part of the set of constraints that the high-split ad
> > hoc
> > considers.
> >
> >
> >
> > Glen
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >
> > From: Mike Dudek [mailto:mike.dudek@PICOLIGHT.COM]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 11:35 AM
> > To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher split ratio -
> > Conference Call Minutes
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> >
> >
> > One question related to the higher split ratio that I haven't seen
> > discussed is related to laser eye safety. Is this a problem for EPON?
> > For other
> > ethernet standards we've normally required class 1 eye safety. I think
> > powers significantly higher than this are being considered here.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Mike Dudek
> > Director Transceiver Engineering
> > Picolight Inc
> > 1480 Arthur Avenue
> > Louisville
> > CO 80027
> > Tel 303 530 3189 x7533.
> > mike.dudek@picolight.com
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------
> >
> > From: Hajduczenia, Marek [mailto:marek.hajduczenia@SIEMENS.COM]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 1:06 AM
> > To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: [8023-10GEPON] 10GEPON ad hoc on higher split ratio - Conference
> > Call Minutes
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> >
> >
> > below please find the conference call minutes, taken down by Glen (thank
> > You for the job well done)
> >
> >
> >
> > please let me know if You find any irregularities in the minutes or if You
> > have any comments on those.
> >
> >
> >
> > **************************************************************************
> > *****
> >
> >
> >
> > Attendees:
> >
> > Haim Ben-Amram
> >
> > Russell Davey
> >
> > Glen Kramer
> >
> > Marek Hajduczenia
> >
> > Frank Chang
> >
> > Silvia Pato
> >
> > David Piehler
> >
> > Harold Kamisugi
> >
> > Bin Yeong Yoon
> >
> > Dong Soo Lee
> >
> > Wael Diab
> >
> >
> >
> > Task 1: estimation of 1x64 and 1x128 port splitter power loss values
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Discussed Marek's presentation. Few questions about derivation of splitter
> > loss. No objections. Task 1 is considered completed.
> >
> >
> >
> > Task 2: non-linear effects in fiber channel
> >
> > -------------------------------------------
> >
> > Silvia gave brief overview of the paper on non-liner effects in 10GEPON.
> > SBS seems like major impairment. Mentioned dithering technique for laser
> > sources.
> >
> > Questions that need more research:
> >
> > 1) Can video-overlay even be supported on 1x128 PON? What power budget
> > will be required?
> >
> > 2) Can we use high-power source for data wavelength and use video-overlay?
> > Effects of Raman crosstalk due to high-power source.
> >
> > AR: Silvia will finish sub-task 2.2 "estimate the maximum launch power
> > into fiber which can be achieved without introducing non-linear effects"
> > by
> > November 6th.
> >
> >
> >
> > Task 3: TX/RX technology
> >
> > ----------------------
> >
> > Bin Yeong Yoon and dong Soo Lee are in the process of compiling a survey
> > of receivers, transmitters, and amplifiers available on the market today.
> >
> > AR: Bin Yeong Yoon is to finish the first draft later this week. Then
> > narrow down the viable configurations based on input from task 2.
> >
> >
> >
> > Task 4: power margins in the EPON systems
> >
> > -----------------------------------------
> >
> > It seemed to be difficult to get this data from carriers. It was decided
> > that for now we will reverse-calculate this data from insertion loss taken
> > in
> > 802.3ah. We later may update it with more accurate numbers based on
> > carriers' responses to a wavelength/power survey.
> >
> > AR: Marek is to calculate allocation for penalties and outside plant aging
> > and repair margins later this week.
> >
> > An additional conference call may be scheduled to discuss final drafts of
> > the presentations.
> >
> >
> >
> > **************************************************************************
> > *****
> >
> >
> >
> > Best wishes
> >
> >
> >
> > Marek Hajduczenia (141238)
> > (PhD Student - COM RD1)
> > SIEMENS Networks S.A. - IC
> > Rua Irmaos Siemens, 1
> > Ed. 1, Piso 1
> > Alfragide
> > 2720-093 Amadora
> > Portugal
> > * Marek.Hajduczenia@siemens.com
> > http://marekhaj.easyisp.pl/index.php
> > (+351.21.416.7472 4+351.21.424.2082
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
> > and/or proprietary information intended only for the addressee.
> > Any unauthorized disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on
> > the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may
> > constitute a violation of law. If you are not the intended
> > recipient, please notify the sender immediately by responding to
> > this e-mail, and delete the message from your system. If you
> > have any questions about this e-mail please notify the sender
> > immediately.
--
三菱電機（株）情報技術総合研究所
光通信システム部 光アクセスノードチーム
高橋 章
TEL：0467-41-2888 FAX：0467-41-2419
E-mail：Takahashi.Akira@aj.MitsubishiElectric.co.jp