Re: [8023-10GEPON] Downstream wavelength review
Dear Marek and all.
Thank you for your prompt comment.
This is Akihiro Otaka.
I think if there are someone who try to realize B++ and PX20/10
OLT with identical device (it may be a cooled device), the superset
band idea is better for them.
Are there no such requirement in practice?
Best regards,
Akihiro Otaka
At 16:18 07/08/30, Hajduczenia, Marek wrote:
>Dear Suzuki-san,
>
>I believe I may answer this question since Frank is probably still at night
>time (Frank, please confirm if I what I am saying is OK) ...
>The main reason why Frank proposes to have PR10/PR20 PMDs use the 1580 -
>1600 nm window in the downstream is the compatibility with the CDWM
>wavelength grid and the availability of uncooled transmitters centered
>around 1590 nm with the power putput sufficient to cope with these
>particular power budgets. You are right that it does little harm to expand
>the band to 1574 - 1600 though the big question is whether it will be used
>in practice. I do not see a reason to block part of the band which will not
>be used by the PMDs anyway.
>
>Hope that answers Your question
>
>Marek Hajduczenia (141238)
>NOKIA SIEMENS Networks S.A., Portugal - R
>Rua Irmテ」os Siemens, 1
>Ed. 1, Piso 1
>Alfragide
>2720-093 Amadora
>Portugal
>* Marek.Hajduczenia@siemens.com
>http://www.marekhajduczenia.info/index.php
>(+351.21.416.7472 4+351.21.424.2082
>"C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but
>when you do, it blows away your whole leg." - Bjarne Stroustrup
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ken-Ichi Suzuki [mailto:kenyichi@ansl.ntt.co.jp]
>Sent: quinta-feira, 30 de Agosto de 2007 8:00
>To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
>Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] Downstream wavelength review
>
>Dear Frank
>
>Thank you for your proposal.
>Basically, I agree to your proposal.
>But I have a comment on Option D.
>
>I believe the full wavelength range of 1574 to 1600 nm can be used
>for PX10 and PX20 in Option D.
>If someone wants to use the range of 1574 to 1580 for PX10 and PX20
>as well as the range of 1580 to 1600 nm, I think we should not limit
>the wavelength range of Option D.
>
>So I would like to confirm whether we should limit the wavelength
>range because I believe that the specifications should be accepted
>by as many people as possible (although I do not have a strong
>opinion to PX10 and PX20).
>
>Best regards,
>Ken-Ichi
>
>At 2007/08/29 0:07 Frank Effenberger wrote:
>> Dear All,
>>
>>
>>
>> I have put together some slides that review the downstream wavelength issue,
>> and put forward a solution that I think may have some common support.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please give me your comments, and if you would like to support it, let me
>> know that, also.
>>