Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

Re: [8023-10GEPON] Downstream wavelength review



Dear Suzuki-san, 
Thank You for the feedback - I find it very useful. 
I would still like to hear the opinions of more than 1-2 people :) 
BR


Marek Hajduczenia (141238)
NOKIA SIEMENS Networks S.A., Portugal - R
Rua Irmãos 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 9:37
To: STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: Re: [8023-10GEPON] Downstream wavelength review

Dear Marek and all,

Thank you for your answer.
So I believe we should not limit the wavelength range of PX10/20
transmitters considering both the use of CWDM grid and compatibility
to PX30 cooled-lasers, if there are no reasons for that limitation.

Best regards,
Ken-Ichi

At 2007/08/30 17:23 Hajduczenia, Marek wrote:
> Dear Otaka-san, 
>>From what I gather from the presentations provided so far, the OLT transmitters required for PR30 systems have different requirements than PR10/PR20 ones - for once, they require (most likely) cooling which is not required (at least that is what I gather) for PR10s and PR20s. I would like to learn the opinions of components vendors - they are more likely to be familiar with market availability of 1580 - 1600 nm devices meeting PR10/20 requirements. 
> Please note also that the ONU receiver remains a universal device, with the sensitivity window spanning between 1574 and 1600 nm, thus covering both PR10/20 and PR30 devices on the other end of the link. The only differentation here would be the OLT transmitter, nothing else. 
> Any other comments ? 
> Thank You for Your feedback 
> 
> Marek Hajduczenia (141238)
> NOKIA SIEMENS Networks S.A., Portugal - R
> Rua Irmãos 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: Akihiro Otaka [mailto:ootaka@ansl.ntt.co.jp] 
> Sent: quinta-feira, 30 de Agosto de 2007 9:18
> To: Hajduczenia, Marek; STDS-802-3-10GEPON@listserv.ieee.org
> Subject: 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.
>  >> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Ken-Ichi Suzuki
NTT Access Network Service Systems Labs.
E-mail:kenyichi@ansl.ntt.co.jp
Tel:+81-43-211-3189/Fax:+81-43-211-8250