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

Re: [10GMMF] Customer Issues with LRM



All,

I just got back from PR briefings in Europe and now
finally got a chance to read Bruce's requests.

It's important to heed Bruce's requests and as one
of your potential customer as well, it's critical
that LRM must support 300m for 62.5 and 50 micron
(aka, existing FDDI-grade fiber).

Not supporting these requirements (Bruce's request),
means saying good-bye to a large portion of the
market. Of course, it also means that those vendors
that meet Bruce's requirements have more
opportunities than those that don't.


Val Oliva
Product Line Manager for Edge and NMS Products
Foundry Networks, Inc.


--- Bruce Tolley <btolley@CISCO.COM> wrote:

> >Dear Colleagues:
>
> My job has changed a bit at Cisco and now I am focused more on
> booking
> revenues on a daily and monthly basis so I doubt I shall be able to
> attend
> the Plenary.
>
> I would like to sum up my perspective on customer requirements for
> LRM for
> the project to consider if we really hope to deliver a successful
> technology to the market. The data is based on 1) I am a customer
> and 2)
> interaction with my customers.
>
> Distance
> The clear requirement is for LRM to reach 300 meters. Anything less
> at this
> point is a non starter. The bar is not 220 meters with 1000BASE-SX
> on MMF
> but the fact that 10GBASE-SR and 10GBASE-LX4 are shipping and both
> reach
> 300 meters. Customers have the clear requirement to go 300 meters
> on MMF
> both installed and the new OM3 fiber.  This is reality today.
>
> Offset launches
> Customers (my customers) and me (a customer) need one LRM solution
> for 50
> and 62.5 micron fiber.  I am not convinced that one offset launch
> condition
> will be optimal for both 62.5 and 50 micron fiber.  I and my
> customers
> would rather deal with the complexity of a dedicated MCP than with
> two
> different products with different built in offsets. Based on
> engineering
> experience with a related project, I am also not convinced that an
> internal
> offset will offer any cost savings on the module cost over the cost
> of a
> module plus MCP.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
>
> Bruce Tolley
> Product Line Manager
> Transceiver Module Group
> Gigabit Systems Business Unit
> Cisco Systems
> 170 West Tasman Drive
> MS SJ B2
> San Jose, CA 95134-1706
> internet: btolley@cisco.com
> ip phone: 408-526-4534
>




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.
www.yahoo.com