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

Re: [802.3_NGECDC] Definition of "Breakout"?

All,

 

The industry will offer modules supporting 2 x 400GBASE-FR4. For early adoption of 800G Ethernet, this module could be used to support a parallel single mode up to 500 meters with two TX fibers and two Rx fibers.

 

Jeff

 

 

Non-Juniper

From: Ali Ghiasi <aghiasi@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2020 9:19 AM
To: STDS-802-3-NGECDC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_NGECDC] Definition of "Breakout"?

 

[External Email. Be cautious of content]

 

Hello John,

 

In the past we had discussed number of time the breakout and at one point I was even proponent of defining breakout applications.  

The key item is to make sure 50G-SR is compatible with 400G-SR8, 100G-DR compatible with 400G-DR4, 100G-CR compatible with 400G-CR4,

overall we have done pretty good job already.  

 

Actually both FR/LR do have breakout use cases, such as 2x200G-FR4 or 2x200G-LR4 in OSFP/QSFP-DD today and in near future these port will become 

2x400G-FR4.

 

The real question is what should we do in the 802.3?  We can put a formal statement in the project objective similar to what we have done for OTN support.

There are numerous breakout implementation and connector types, today this material is captured in the QSFP-DD HW MSA.  Given that MSA’s are more flexible to 

add new breakout configuration as they emerge and some breakout use cases may not even have broad market usage that 802.3 require then I would leave 

the HW instantiation of breakout to the MSA’s.

 

Thanks,
Ali Ghiasi

 

On Aug 20, 2020, at 6:03 AM, John D'Ambrosia <jdambrosia@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

All,

As I explore the scope for the Beyond 400 GbE effort, I have been having a number of conversations related to “breakout”

 

While we all discuss it – I have never seen some actual formal definition that is agreed upon within 802.3.  So I would like to get some input.

 

I am going to start with breakout actually does and solicit input before proposing some definition to potentially use.

 

I see break out of the following –

  • AUI
  • Related PHYs
    • Backplane
    • Twin-ax cabling based on multiple different pairs
    • SR optics based on parallel MMF
    • DR optics based on parallel SMF

 

FR / LR / ER optics – I don’t see as being part of breakout.

 

Thoughts?

 

John

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGECDC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGECDC&A=1

 

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGECDC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGECDC&A=1

To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-NGECDC list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-NGECDC&A=1