Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
That’s kind of what I was thinking about – once someone creates the measurement setup, getting measurement with fiber in the path for TDP assessment would be trivial and would get us extra data. Regards From: Harstead, Ed (Nokia - US) [mailto:ed.harstead@xxxxxxxxx] Marek, The idea is that we don’t want to mix up dispersion penalty with sensitivity. Of course it wouldn’t hurt to, in addition to back-to-back, also do measurements with fiber. That information could be used as input to help answer another question: quantification of TDP. Ed From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxxxxx] I also had a question on whether back-to-back measurement only is sufficient to properly characterize the APD receiver sensitivity and give us all the information we need. Regards From: frank effenberger [mailto:frank.effenberger@xxxxxxxxxx] Thanks for this draft – I think it is very close. Regarding the question on “margin”, while I may be asking for too much, it would really be great if we could ask for the standard deviation on the sensitivity. Moreover, we should clarify that the “sensitivity” we ask for is the mean (or typical) value. If we could get mean and standard deviation, then we can properly account for spec difficulty vs. yield trade-off. As it is now, I think there is a potential confusion in that some people report their typical number, while others will report their maximum (worst) sensitivity. And different people have different levels of pain tolerance. For instance, some may be comfortable with a 1dB margin, while others like 2~3 dB of margin. Thanks, Frank E. From: 이한협 [mailto:hanhyub@xxxxxxxxxx] Dear all, Enclosed find a draft of questionnaire on 25 Gb/s APD receiver sensitivity. Ed, Yong and me summarized test conditions and questions. It could be discussed tomorrow meeting. Best regards, Han |