Hi All:
Due to I have a meeting to attend in tomorrow ‘s morning, so I am sorry that I can’t attend the incoming telephone meeting due to it’s too late for me here.
I can present it in San Diego .
From: Liudekun
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 10:06 PM
To: Curtis Knittle; STDS-802-3-NGEPON@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Duane Remein
Subject: RE: [802.3_NGEPON] Call for agenda items -- weekly consensus building for IEEE 802.3ca (100G-EPON)
Hi Curtis and All:
The attachment is my contribution on four wavelength mix (FWM) crosstalk analysis in O-band.
Due to the telephone meeting time is really tough for the GMT+8:00 time zone in east Asia, so I can only try to join the meeting in the middle night .
I make some brief explain about the results here.
Based on my simulation, 100GHz and 200GHz equal channel spacing can’t work in a noticeable wavelength range in O-band. 400GHz spacing should be able to work in all O-band
as long as launch power less than 10dBm (in each channel). More than 400GHz spacing will be OK.
I assume all 4 channels have a same polarization state, same launch power (from 0dBm scan to maximal 13dBm), and then increases the fiber dispersion coefficient D. Due to
FWM is seriously refrained by fiber dispersion (it destroys the phase match condition very quickly, which is very important for FWM effect) , , so when I increase the D, the FWM penalty will decrease very quickly. So I simulated the required fiber dispersion
coefficient D, which can have a less than 0.2dB penalty (compared with close other 3 channels).
For example, the fiber dispersion should be larger than 0.3ps/nm/km to achieve a <0.2dB penalty by FWM when 8dBm launch power in each channel and 200GHz channel spacing is
used.
Consider that , for 400GHz channel spacing, the required fiber dispersion is only >0.1e-3 ps/nm/km when launch power =10dBm, this is a very small restriction (only preclude
the wavelength λ0±0.1nm, λ0
is the zero dispersion wavelength ), so I conclude that 400GHz channel spacing is a fairly feasible system, while more than 400GHz spacing will be quite safe then.
With the required dispersion and the fiber dispersion slope coefficient (maximal 0.093ps/nm^2/km), I can get what wavelength will have strong FWM crosstalk(>0.2dB), that’s what the second
table means.
Best regards
Dekun Liu
____________________________________________________
Advanced Access Technologies Dept.
网络研究接入技术部
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
华为技术有限公司
Phone: +86 027-59267217 Email: liudekun@xxxxxxxxxx
湖北武汉市关山一路光谷软件园A7-9
邮编：430074
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
A7-9 Wuhan Optical Valley Software Park,Guan Shan Road,Wuhan,Hubei, P.R.China
From: Curtis Knittle [mailto:C.Knittle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 6:57 AM
To: STDS-802-3-NGEPON@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [802.3_NGEPON] Call for agenda items -- weekly consensus building for IEEE 802.3ca (100G-EPON)
(Trying the reflector again)
Dear Colleagues,
We have a 100G-EPON (IEEE 802.3ca) consensus building meeting scheduled for this Thursday, July 07, 11:30 am ? 1:00 pm MDT.
I believe this week we have at least one agenda item:
・
Shawn to show FWM wavelength calculations (confirmed?) (Shawn Esser, to be confirmed)
Please let me and Mark Laubach (mark.laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
know of any agenda additional items by 5:00 pm MDT Wednesday. As a reminder, I will be out of the office and Mark Laubach has kindly agreed to host the meeting.
Thank you,
Curtis
Curtis Knittle
VP Wired Technologies ? R&D
CableLabs
desk: +1-303-661-3851
mobile: +1-303-589-6869
Stay up to date with CableLabs: Read the blog and
follow us on Twitter