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