Re: [8023-10GEPON] [Dual-Rate-PMD] New merged draft of presentation
David,
When the 10G signal is operating, the 1G channel will not be used, and vice
versa. That is the whole idea of the parallel scheme. So, crosstalk is
meaningless in this context.
Regarding losses, these filters are in the electronic domain, and so I fully
expect that sufficient amplification will be available to make the filter
losses tolerable.
Frank E.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Li [mailto:dli@ligentphotonics.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 2:12 PM
To: Frank Effenberger; STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] [Dual-Rate-PMD] New merged draft of presentation
Frank E,
On page 9 and page 10 of the PMD101 slides, two parallel LPFs are showed
after the TIA. One is for the 1Gbps Signal, the other is for the 10Gbps
Signal. Do you need a Data Rate Detect Circuit (maybe hard to realize in the
PMD modules) to switch these two LPFs?
In the 10G mode, without the Data Rate Detect Circuit, the low frequency
components of the 10Gbps Signal will leak through the 1GHz LPF and the ISI
(Inter-Symbol Interference) penalty will be very high for the 10G mode,
since the low frequency spectrum of the 10Gbps Signal can be lower than
10MHz.
In the 1G mode, the 1Gbps Signal will all leak through the 8GHz LPF besides
the signal path in the 1GHz LPF, then the two LPFs will act like a power
splitter, not ideal filters. The power penalty will be at least 3dB (ideal
case) in 1G mode.
Best regards,
David
David Li
Ligent Photonics, Inc.
2701 Dukane Dr., Suite 102
St. Charles, IL 60174
Phone 630-513-7226 ext 15
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Effenberger" <feffenberger@HUAWEI.COM>
To: <STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:43 PM
Subject: [8023-10GEPON] [Dual-Rate-PMD] New merged draft of presentation
> All,
>
> I have merged the additional analysis and data from Mr. Suzuki and Mr.
> Tasuta (that you both very much!) into the "PMD101" slides, producing the
> attached file. I think this gives a good technical review of where we
stand
> regarding the ad-hoc's analysis of the dual-rate burst receiver system.
>
> Regards,
> Frank E.
>