RE: Long distance links
Absolutely none. Which is perfectly fine for our customer base. If there
is a problem on the network, it can only be one of 3 things - the fiber is
broken, a source transceiver has failed or a destination transreceiver has
failed. The problem can be diagnosed very quickly.
But these things are so reliable that it is very rare that we have a
transceiver failure.
Bill
Bill St. Arnaud
Senior Director Network Projects
CANARIE
bill.st.arnaud@xxxxxxxxxx
+1 613 785-0426
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roy Bynum [mailto:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: September 14, 1999 7:18 AM
> To: Bill.St.Arnaud@xxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: HSSG
> Subject: Re: Long distance links
>
>
> Bill,
>
> What sort of fiber fault management or maintenance without
> effecting traffic
> transport do these lasers provide?
>
> Thank you,
> Roy Bynum
> MCI WorldCom
>
> "Bill St. Arnaud" wrote:
>
> > Roy:
> >
> > Although there is no 802.3 WAN standard we do have GbE switches
> from vendors
> > that have 23 db lasers ( i.e. will drive over 100 km on G.652
> fiber). The
> > more common alternative is to use Gbe laser transceivers from a
> number of
> > suppliers. These also come with 20-23 db lasers
> >
> > No co-location space is required except at the node where the customer's
> > fiber interconnects to a DWDM channel, currently IP over SONET
> >
> > Shortly we are issuing an RFP for a "customer empowered
> network". Please
> > send me an e-mail for those who are interested in a draft copy
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > Bill St. Arnaud
> > Senior Director Network Projects
> > CANARIE
> > bill.st.arnaud@xxxxxxxxxx
> > +1 613 785-0426
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Roy Bynum [mailto:rabynum@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: September 12, 1999 6:06 PM
> > > To: Bill.St.Arnaud@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: HSSG
> > > Subject: Re: Long distance links
> > >
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > I believe that the "customer empowered networks" you are
> > > referring to, are those
> > > where the enterprise data customer is leasing the dark fiber from
> > > a utility or
> > > service provider. Because there isn't a WAN compatible PHY
> > > available for GbE,
> > > it requires a complete 802.3 data switch to regenerate the signal
> > > for long haul
> > > systems. It means that the enterprise data customer has to get an
> > > agreement from
> > > the utility or service provider to provide collocation space for
> > > the customer's
> > > data switch. It also means that the customer provides his own network
> > > management of the fiber facility. Over long distances, that
> could mean
> > > regularly dispatching someone to the various sites to support the
> > > collocated
> > > non-carrier data switches. While it is technically feasible to
> > > do this, over a
> > > period of time, this could get very expensive for enterprise data
> > > customers.
> > > Overall cost of ownership of this type of implementation does not
> > > make it very
> > > attractive. I do not think that there will be too many
> enterprise data
> > > customers that will be doing this for very long.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Roy Bynum
> > > MCI WorldCom
> > >
> > > "Bill St. Arnaud" wrote:
> > >
> > > > Roy, Rich:
> > > >
> > > > I think this reflects a fundamental misunderstanding between
> > > data people and
> > > > telco transport people.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it is true that 10GbE data switch will not be satisfactory for
> > > > regeneration of traditional mission critical traffic on carrier
> > > networks.
> > > >
> > > > However, we believe there is a whole new set of traffic requirements
> > > > resulting from "customer empowered networks" where 10GbE data
> > > switches will
> > > > be more than adequate for regeneration.
> > > >
> > > > What we are starting to witness in the marketplace is the
> deployment of
> > > > these customer empowered networks. Some next gen carriers,
> > > for example do
> > > > not deploy SONET rings as a given network requirement. Instead
> > > rings and
> > > > the type of regeneration are a customer option.
> > > >
> > > > Bill
> > > >
> > > > Bill St. Arnaud
> > > > Senior Director Network Projects
> > > > CANARIE
> > > > bill.st.arnaud@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > > +1 613 785-0426
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: owner-stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-hssg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> > > Roy Bynum
> > > > > Sent: September 11, 1999 3:33 PM
> > > > > To: rtaborek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Cc: HSSG
> > > > > Subject: Re: Long distance links
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Rich,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not writing that 10GbE end systems be managed by
> > > SONET/SDH network
> > > > > management standards. I wrote that trying to use 10GbE data
> > > > > switches as part of
> > > > > the transmission service systems would not meet the standards of
> > > > > the commercial
> > > > > services systems. The suggestion of putting a 10GbE switch in as
> > > > > a regenerator
> > > > > does not meet the security, operations support, or
> network management
> > > > > requirements that are in place for commercial transmission
> > > > > equipment. This is
> > > > > something that IP based data people normally do not have to deal
> > > > > with. It is
> > > > > easy to understand why they would not realize why a 10GbE data
> > > > > switch would not
> > > > > be used as a commercial service transmission regenerator. I
> > > was simply
> > > > > attempting to explain to them, with as few words as possible why
> > > > > this was so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > Roy Bynum
> > > > > MCI WorldCom
> > > > >
> > >
>