Re: [8023-10GEPON] [Channel link model ad-hoc]
Dear David,
(1) I would not be so quick to dismiss XPM. $B!9(BPM
gets stronger as delta lambda gets small, and at higher RF frequencies.
$B!*(Bt$B!G(Bs not well known but most video signals have or less discrete, high
modulation index, phase and/or intensity tones in the 2 $B!(B10 GHz range.
$B!5(Bhese are used for SBS suppression, and they vary significantly among
vendors.$B!(BI have not done any calculations, but there was a paper at ECOC
this year from KDDI that showed that cross-talk from RF carriers could
add a penalty $B!(Baside from power loss.
I looked for a paper you suggested, but I did not find it.
Anyway, if it is true, I agree with your comment.
(2) Is there any need to define the acceptable
degradation on the video signal?$B!(BThis is perhaps the most significant
issue with the B/GPON RF video overlay.$B!(BI am not concerned with power
loss (or gain) but rather the effective increase in RIN (mediated by
either XPM or SRS), or by discrete RF interference from idle fames again
mediated by XPM and/or SRS.$B!(B(Incidentally would these idle frames be in
phase if you had several 10G DWDM signals originating from the same
switch/router?
I do not think it is an issue of the channel link model, because we can
not put it on the spread sheet and also it is an implementation issue of
RF-ONU.
However, if we can consider it when we decide the output power level of
10GE-OLT and wavelength allocation of a downstream signal, it is good for
us.
Sincerely yours,
Tsutomu TATSUTA
At 02:02 07/01/10, David Piehler wrote:
Just a
few comments $B".(B
(1)
I would not be so quick
to dismiss XPM. $B".(BXPM gets stronger as delta lambda gets small, and at
higher RF frequencies. $B".(BIt$B!G(Bs not well known but most video signals have
or less discrete, high modulation index, phase and/or intensity tones in
the 2 $B".(B 10 GHz range. $B".(BThese are used for SBS suppression, and they
vary significantly among vendors.$B".(B I have not done any calculations, but
there was a paper at ECOC this year from KDDI that showed that cross-talk
from RF carriers could add a penalty $B".(B aside from power loss.
(2)
Is there any need to
define the acceptable degradation on the video signal?$B".(B This is perhaps
the most significant issue with the B/GPON RF video overlay.$B".(B I am not
concerned with power loss (or gain) but rather the effective increase in
RIN (mediated by either XPM or SRS), or by discrete RF interference from
idle fames again mediated by XPM and/or SRS.$B".(B (Incidentally would these
idle frames be in phase if you had several 10G DWDM signals originating
from the same switch/router?
I am not trying to open a big can of worms here, and my feeling is that
these effects are probably negligible, although measurable.
David Piehler
Alphion
mobile: +1 732 692 4581
From: Hajduczenia, Marek
[mailto:marek.hajduczenia@SIEMENS.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 3:56 AM
To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] [Channel link model ad-hoc]
Dear Tatsuta-san,
Thank You very much for Your contribution. I found it useful and if there
is no problem with it, I would like to reuse part of Your conclusions in
the introductory section of the presentation on the ad-hoc activities.
I agree with Your conclusions and I believe that the updated Excel
spreadsheet will contain SBS and SRS power penalties - SRS is completed
while SBS is still under examination to achieve 0 - order approximation
with reasonable quality.
The presentation will be
distributed today and I will ask for the potential supporters of the
conclusions and implementation.
The updated Excel spreadsheet will also be distributed in due time on the
reflector ...
Best wishes
Marek Hajduczenia
(141238)
SIEMENS Networks S.A.
- IC COM D1 R
Rua Irm$B".(Bos Siemens, 1
Ed. 1, Piso 1
Alfragide
2720-093 Amadora
Portugal
*
Marek.Hajduczenia@siemens.com
http://marekhaj.easyisp.pl/index.php
(+351.21.416.7472
4+351.21.424.2082
From: TATSUTA
[mailto:tatsuta@ansl.ntt.co.jp]
Sent: ter$B".(Ba-feira, 9 de Janeiro de 2007 6:32
To: Hajduczenia, Marek; STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] [Channel link model ad-hoc]
Dear Marek and all,
I summarized the influence of RF signal as attached.
My conclusion is following;
1. SRS and SBS should be studied.
2. XPM does not need to be considered, if a wavelength of 10G-EPON
downstream is separated in 5nm or more from RF signal wavelength.
3. The other items do not need to be considered, unless S/X value of ONU
input point is specified in the standard body (I do not think we specify
it.). I think S/X is implementation issue.
Sincerely yours,
Tsutomu TATSUTA
At 21:41 07/01/04, Hajduczenia, Marek wrote:
Dear Sergey,
I would appreciate any help You can provide me with. I have some formulas
to estimate the impact of the video channel overlay on the downstream and
upstream channels but I have a very hard time trying to figure out how to
calculate / estimate the values of individual parameters.
Do You have any idea how to apply the formulas with the set of parameters
that we have in the Excel spreadsheet?
Best wishes
Marek Hajduczenia (141238)
SIEMENS Networks S.A. - IC COM D1 R
Rua Irm$BeP(Bs Siemens, 1
Ed. 1, Piso 1
Alfragide
2720-093 Amadora
Portugal
*
Marek.Hajduczenia@siemens.com
http://marekhaj.easyisp.pl/index.php
(+351.21.416.7472 4+351.21.424.2082<?xml:namespace prefix =
o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
/>
From: Ten, Sergey Y
[mailto:TenS@CORNING.COM]
Sent: quarta-feira, 3 de Janeiro de 2007 19:32
To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] [Channel link model ad-hoc]
Marek,
The impact of the RF overlay
may be modeled (in zero approxiamtion) as increased loss at data signal
wavelength since Raman scattering will transfer energy from digital
signal to video signal.
In the next order approximation
one has to take into account transfer of the modulation.
I can help you with taking into
account zero approximation.
SergeyFax
+1 607 974 4354
-----Original Message-----
From: Hajduczenia, Marek
[mailto:marek.hajduczenia@SIEMENS.COM]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 11:14 AM
To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: [8023-10GEPON] [Channel link model ad-hoc]
Dear all,
since there was no activity in the said ad-hoc for
some time, I decided to run the first update of the channel link model
spreadsheet (please find it attached in a zipped form -
10GEPON-D.0.0.zip). The main changes included in this release are as
follows:
- the examined target range is always limited from L_start to Target
reach, with the granularity depending on the Target reach value. The
formula used to calculate the individual steps in column [A18:A34] is
defined as follows: =(($L$3-$L$4)/16*(ROW($A18)-ROW($A$18))+$L$4)
the resulting chart for power penalties versus
distance has now the auto ranges for X and Y /top value/ enabled - this
way the chart auto adjusts to the selected range
L_step was removed since the granularity is auto
adjusted ...
the "Add Ins Loss" parameter is now
calculated based on the split count for the PSC module used in the EPON
system. Cell L5 contains the split count (Split_count parameter). The
cell L8 value is calculated using the following formula:
=10*LOG(L5)+$AM$121*LN($L$5)+$AN$121, where the theoretical loss for N
way splitter are summed with the approximated excess loss, based on the
approximation curves estimated for typical, commercially available
splitters (Cell range [Y69:AL130]). The curve coefficients for average
expected splitter parameters are as follows: $AM$121 (A=0.5636) and
$AN$121 (B=0.3979) with the approximation curve of logarithmatic type:
A*ln(N)+B
To be added, if required: changing the
average splitter type into worst/best case scenario values - preferably
with the switch variables defined in the spreadsheet (may be tough to
find some space for that though :-9)
As for the other parameters in the spreadsheet: as
Dawe suggested previously, we should probably examine the "TP4
offset cell" (T8) which currently follows "Tx mask top"
(G14) in similar style to 10GEPBud3_1_16a.xls. Dawe thinks that this cell
needs a thorough review and we should adjust its value in such a way that
it compensates for the upstream channel burst mode transmission.
Additionally, we should try to numerate the impact
of the optional video overlay channel on the overall power budget. Is
anyone willing to help me with that ?
Thank You for Your time and attention
Best wishes
Marek Hajduczenia
(141238)
SIEMENS Networks S.A.
- IC COM D1 R
Rua
Irm$BeP(Bs
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