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

Re: [8023-10GEPON] Upstream Wavelength



Dear Mr. Jim Farmer

This is Akihiro Otaka from NTT.

I don't understand your concern about 1260 nm
wavelength.
Fiber type of 10G-EPON is IEC 60793-2 B1.1 and B1.3.
The maximum cable cut-off wavelength is 1260 nm.
I think 1260-1280 nm is not dangerous.

And I understand it is not necessary to allocate
100 nm band for 10G-EPON upstream.
So I think narrow and enough bandwidth is prefer for
future use of wavelength. (i.e. co-ex with enhanced band
G-PON)

Best regards,

Akihiro Otaka



Jim Farmer:
> I'm campaigning for a comment submitted barely in time for the May 
> meeting.  The 10 Gb/s upstream wavelength is currently defined as 1260 
> to 1280 nm.  See for example, Table 91-6 and many following references.  
> This wavelength is also specified for the for 10/1GBASE–PRX–D3 (Table 
> 91-7)*. * According to my expert, this wavelength is dangerous because 
> single mode fiber becomes overmoded at about 1260 nm, resulting in a 
> second propagation mode at a different velocity.  In addition, this 
> wavelength will be overlapped by the normal 1310 nm 1 Gb/s upstream 
> optical signal.  This is acknowledged in the proposed document:
> 
> *91A.3.2 Upstream wavelength allocation*
> The 1.25 GBd upstream transmission uses the 1270 – 1360 nm wavelength 
> band, as specified in Clause 60.  The 10.3125 GBd upstream transmission 
> uses the 1260 – 1280 nm wavelength band, as specified in Clause 92. The 
> two wavelength bands overlap, thus WDM channel multiplexign {sic} cannot 
> be used to separate the two data channels.
> 
> An OLT supporting both upstream channels must use TDMA techniques to 
> avoid collisions between transmissions originating from different ONUs.
> 
> 
> We presume that the reason for specifying a separate wavelength band is 
> to afford the opportunity to build a mixed-mode OLT receiver (capable of 
> receiving both 1 Gb/s and 10 Gb/s) that is optimized for 10 Gb/s.  
> However, this would imply a WDM at the OLT receiver, whose loss could 
> rob a good bit of the improvement to be gained.  This is acknowledged in 
> Section 91A.5.  Furthermore, this implies tight standards for the ONT 10 
> Gb/s laser, which could add cost.  Since we have already acknowledged 
> that the OLT will need to use TDMA to separate the 1 Gb/s from the 10 
> Gb/s upstream, we propose that the 1260-1280 nm upstream requirement be 
> dropped, and that upstream transmitters for both speeds use the same 
> wavelength band. 
> 
> Figure 91A-5 shows some dual-rate receiver architectures that seem 
> practical and which can provide optimization for each speed without 
> having to use dual receivers.  Implicit in these receivers is the 
> ability to not only switch bias, but to also switch low pass filtering - 
> since you have electrical amplification ahead of the filters, you can 
> even leave both filters connected to the source and their respective 
> loads all the time, so that the transient response of the filter is 
> minimized.
> 
> This seems a better solution than using dual wavelengths, with the 
> potential issues of the 1260 - 1280 nm band.
> 
> Thanks,
> jim
> 
> Jim Farmer, K4BSE
> Chief Technical Officer,
> Wave7 Optics, Inc.
> An Enablence Technologies Company
> 1075 Windward Ridge Parkway
> Alpharetta, GA 30005 USA
> 678-339-1045
> 678-640-0860 (cell)
> jim.farmer@w7optics.com
> _www.wave7optics.com_ <file://www.wave7optics.com>
>