| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
Dear Colleagues, Happy New Year! Please consider several options for the form of objectives that will be produced by the Study Group for “Next-Gen 200 & 400 Gb/s PHYs over fewer MMF pairs than Existing Ethernet Projects & Standards.” These differences arise from 1) different
forms of objectives in recent projects plus 2) whether we should choose the number of fiber pairs for a speed in Study Group vs. Task Force. (I only included single-pair and even numbers of fiber pairs, since those are the practical choices.) Historically
we have not specified that a specific grade of MMF was required to meet the objective. I show a 400 Gb/s example below, but the options would apply to a 200Gb/s objective as well. Q. What are the pro’s and con’s of these options? Which do you prefer?
•
Define a 400Gb/s PHY for operation over fewer than 16 pairs of MMF with channel lengths up to at least 100 m.
•
Define a 400Gb/s PHY for operation over (specify 1 vs. 2 vs. 4 vs. 8) pairs of MMF with channel lengths up to at least 100 m.
•
Provide physical layer specifications which support 400Gb/s operation over fewer than 16 pairs of MMF with channel lengths up to at least 100 m.
•
Provide physical layer specifications which support 400Gb/s operation over (specify 1 vs. 2 vs. 4 vs. 8) pairs of MMF with channel lengths up to at least 100 m. Let us have a healthy discussion in advance of the 1/11 telecon, so we can begin to write down draft objectives. Warm regards, Robert Robert Lingle, Jr., Ph.D. Director, OFS Systems & Technology Strategy
2000 Northeast Expy | Norcross, GA 30071 |