| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
John,
If it turns out that a signal conditioner will always be
needed and a direct attach between the host IC and the pluggable module cannot
be supported (at least for the many situations you mention below), then I think
the signal conditioner should be integrated into the pluggable optical module
(and ideally into the existing Tx and Rx ICs in the module as Ryan as suggested
in the past).
This would provide the lowest overall system power (and
especially if the SC is integrated into existing ICs in the module). It also
means that we would have one less electrical interface to deal with, as the PMD
service interface would now be an internal module interface completely under the
control of the individual module vendors and there would be no need to specify
it within 802.3ba (which would save us all alot of
work).
Gary
From: PETRILLA,JOHN [mailto:john.petrilla@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2008 11:40 PM To: STDS-802-3-HSSG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [802.3BA] XR ad hoc Phone Conference Notice Colleagues Perhaps, I can point
this out before Ryan. It seems to me that many pcb layouts will present
sufficient challenges such that a direct connection between the host IC and
pluggable module will not be supported and a signal conditioner will be needed
between the host IC and module. This means that for reasons other than
extending the optical link reach, the means to extend the optical link reach are
in place at least for these situations. All that is needed then is a way
to permit the installer to take advantage of the optical link extension that an
external signal conditioner, adjacent to but not included in the module,
provides. It will be frustrating to have all the pieces paid for and in
place and not be able to take advantage of the extended link reach that they
offer. By the way, a similar
situation exists with respect to using FEC. Regards, John
From: Gourgen
Oganessyan [mailto:gourgen@xxxxxxxxxxx] Petar, Well, sadly that’s what
has been happening in the 10G world, people are forced to amortize the cost of
300m reach (LRM), while in reality the number of people who need 300m is close
to 0. That’s why I am
strongly in support of your approach of keeping the 100m objective as primary
goal. Frank, OM4 can add as
much cost as it wants to, the beauty is the added cost goes directly where it’s
needed, which is the longer links. Alternatives force higher cost/higher power
consumption on all ports regardless of whether it’s needed there or not.
Gourgen
Oganessyan Quellan
Inc. Phone: (630)-802-0574
(cell) Fax: (630)-364-5724 e-mail:
gourgen@xxxxxxxxxxx From: Petar
Pepeljugoski [mailto:petarp@xxxxxxxxxx]
From: Jeff Maki
[mailto:jmaki@xxxxxxxxxxx] |