Mailing List Archive

>
>
> Everything we have uses the QSFP28 form factor, and there doesn't seem to
> be any optics on the market yet with that form factor that is going to
> work, though there should be some coming out in the second quarter.
>
> At this point, we'd like to turn the service up sooner that later, so we're
> looking for options. We could put something in between their equipment and
> ours (AST9901 fixed chassis), but I have no idea what that might be. We're
>
>
Have you checked out the Transceiver compatibility matrix (
https://tmgmatrix.cisco.com/iop?tpid=6)? In particular, the page I linked
(and I may just not be understanding correctly) seems to be saying
that QSFP-100G-ER4L-S may be compatible with what you are looking for.

Regards,
Nathan
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

I have. They're telling me I need

The pluggable optic must be DWDM 1530 to 1563 nm with QPSK modulation that
fits 50Ghz (~31 to 35Gbaud) and a launch power of ZR+ 0dBm. The customer
channel should have Rx: Max <-10 dBm/Ch and Tx: Min: >–5 dBm/Ch to Max: <+
6.5dBm/Ch in order to meet the GOSNR margin of 2.5dBm or more.



On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:44?AM Nathan Lannine <nathan.lannine@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>> Everything we have uses the QSFP28 form factor, and there doesn't seem to
>> be any optics on the market yet with that form factor that is going to
>> work, though there should be some coming out in the second quarter.
>>
>> At this point, we'd like to turn the service up sooner that later, so
>> we're
>> looking for options. We could put something in between their equipment
>> and
>> ours (AST9901 fixed chassis), but I have no idea what that might be.
>> We're
>>
>>
> Have you checked out the Transceiver compatibility matrix (
> https://tmgmatrix.cisco.com/iop?tpid=6)? In particular, the page I
> linked (and I may just not be understanding correctly) seems to be saying
> that QSFP-100G-ER4L-S may be compatible with what you are looking for.
>
> Regards,
> Nathan
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote on 19/01/2024 14:35:
> At $dayjob we're working on turning up a 100G connection with a provider.
> At this point, it looks like the only optic that's meets their criteria is
> a CFP2.

sounds like metro 100G connectivity. What sort of distances are
involved, and is there a requirement for DWDM? If it's shorter distance
and no DWDM, 100G LR4 extended reach might work (8dB power budget,
compared to the usual 4dB for standard LR4).

Nick
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote on 19/01/2024 14:58:
> The pluggable optic must be DWDM 1530 to 1563 nm with QPSK modulation that
> fits 50Ghz (~31 to 35Gbaud) and a launch power of ZR+ 0dBm. The customer
> channel should have Rx: Max <-10 dBm/Ch and Tx: Min: >–5 dBm/Ch to Max: <+
> 6.5dBm/Ch in order to meet the GOSNR margin of 2.5dBm or more.

right, so DWDM alien wave requirement then. That's very non-portable and
kit specific.

Depending on the application, you might be better off ditching the
requirements that they're imposing and simply using 100G transponders
(i.e. 100G as a service). Or something like the smartoptics open line
system with PAM4 QSFP28 transceivers.

It really depends on what's between you and the other end. D/F has
simple options open for single 100G. If you're connecting into something
more complicated, it can get messy and expensive.

Nick
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

I know when we are talking about DWDM my usual expectation these days
is to use a "0km optic" (aka one that is meant to launch just far
enough to make it into an amp)... so one of those (from anyone, e.g.
fs.com, whatever) followed by an amp might be doable? I would advise
you to contract someone to work that out though (I myself don't even
fully understand the intricacies).

the point of the 0km optic is that it fits in QSFP+ generally. It's a
lot to ask, to get a precisely tuned DWDM wave coming out of a lil
QSFP+ at ZR levels.

The other option of course being to send it LR and then use a
transponder closer to the DWDM gear, as Nick suggested.

--
Hunter Fuller (they)
Router Jockey
VBH M-1C
+1 256 824 5331

Office of Information Technology
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Network Engineering

On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:07?AM Nick Hilliard via cisco-nsp
<cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote on 19/01/2024 14:58:
> > The pluggable optic must be DWDM 1530 to 1563 nm with QPSK modulation that
> > fits 50Ghz (~31 to 35Gbaud) and a launch power of ZR+ 0dBm. The customer
> > channel should have Rx: Max <-10 dBm/Ch and Tx: Min: >–5 dBm/Ch to Max: <+
> > 6.5dBm/Ch in order to meet the GOSNR margin of 2.5dBm or more.
>
> right, so DWDM alien wave requirement then. That's very non-portable and
> kit specific.
>
> Depending on the application, you might be better off ditching the
> requirements that they're imposing and simply using 100G transponders
> (i.e. 100G as a service). Or something like the smartoptics open line
> system with PAM4 QSFP28 transceivers.
>
> It really depends on what's between you and the other end. D/F has
> simple options open for single 100G. If you're connecting into something
> more complicated, it can get messy and expensive.
>
> Nick
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Thanks - we don't really understand the intricacies either. This is our
first adventure in this area.

The distances are quite large (800+ Km). It's a dark wave service, though
we don't have to worry about anything in the middle, just the 2 end points.

I'm told Adva / Adtran will be releasing a ZR+ 0dBm QSFP28 that would (or
should) work in Q2 2024, but I'm looking for other options. I did check
out FS.com, but they're telling me the only option they have available uses
a 200Gig CFP2 and 2 100gig QSFP28s.

Any idea where else we might look? We'd be happy to engage someone to help
us design a solution, we're just not sure where to turn.

Shawn

On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:25?PM Hunter Fuller <hf0002@uah.edu> wrote:

> I know when we are talking about DWDM my usual expectation these days
> is to use a "0km optic" (aka one that is meant to launch just far
> enough to make it into an amp)... so one of those (from anyone, e.g.
> fs.com, whatever) followed by an amp might be doable? I would advise
> you to contract someone to work that out though (I myself don't even
> fully understand the intricacies).
>
> the point of the 0km optic is that it fits in QSFP+ generally. It's a
> lot to ask, to get a precisely tuned DWDM wave coming out of a lil
> QSFP+ at ZR levels.
>
> The other option of course being to send it LR and then use a
> transponder closer to the DWDM gear, as Nick suggested.
>
> --
> Hunter Fuller (they)
> Router Jockey
> VBH M-1C
> +1 256 824 5331
>
> Office of Information Technology
> The University of Alabama in Huntsville
> Network Engineering
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:07?AM Nick Hilliard via cisco-nsp
> <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
> >
> > Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote on 19/01/2024 14:58:
> > > The pluggable optic must be DWDM 1530 to 1563 nm with QPSK modulation
> that
> > > fits 50Ghz (~31 to 35Gbaud) and a launch power of ZR+ 0dBm. The
> customer
> > > channel should have Rx: Max <-10 dBm/Ch and Tx: Min: >–5 dBm/Ch to
> Max: <+
> > > 6.5dBm/Ch in order to meet the GOSNR margin of 2.5dBm or more.
> >
> > right, so DWDM alien wave requirement then. That's very non-portable and
> > kit specific.
> >
> > Depending on the application, you might be better off ditching the
> > requirements that they're imposing and simply using 100G transponders
> > (i.e. 100G as a service). Or something like the smartoptics open line
> > system with PAM4 QSFP28 transceivers.
> >
> > It really depends on what's between you and the other end. D/F has
> > simple options open for single 100G. If you're connecting into something
> > more complicated, it can get messy and expensive.
> >
> > Nick
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

It sounds as though your provider is suggesting a CFP2-DCO, such as
one of these:
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/transceiver-modules/datasheet-c78-743732.html

They're giving you a specification that includes the entire C band
(4.8THz), but stating that your wavelength must fit within 50GHz,
which is a traditional ITU-T channel width for DWDM systems, so they
should probably also specify which channel you're going to use.

CFP2-DCOs tend to work because they've got the space and power for the
DSPs, and it has been difficult to cram that into QSFP28s (coherent
optics requires a lot of signal processing). As you've already noted,
there are products in the pipeline, but I'm not aware of any that are
widely supported yet. Cisco do seem to suggest there is a QSFP-DD
using QPSK for 100G, but I've not looked too closely at it (and note
that QSFP-DD is different to QSFP28, having about three times the
electrical power available):
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/transceiver-modules/datasheet-c78-744377.html

Cheers,
Rob

On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 19:54, Shawn L via cisco-nsp
<cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
> Thanks - we don't really understand the intricacies either. This is our
> first adventure in this area.
>
> The distances are quite large (800+ Km). It's a dark wave service, though
> we don't have to worry about anything in the middle, just the 2 end points.
>
> I'm told Adva / Adtran will be releasing a ZR+ 0dBm QSFP28 that would (or
> should) work in Q2 2024, but I'm looking for other options. I did check
> out FS.com, but they're telling me the only option they have available uses
> a 200Gig CFP2 and 2 100gig QSFP28s.
>
> Any idea where else we might look? We'd be happy to engage someone to help
> us design a solution, we're just not sure where to turn.
>
> Shawn
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:25?PM Hunter Fuller <hf0002@uah.edu> wrote:
>
> > I know when we are talking about DWDM my usual expectation these days
> > is to use a "0km optic" (aka one that is meant to launch just far
> > enough to make it into an amp)... so one of those (from anyone, e.g.
> > fs.com, whatever) followed by an amp might be doable? I would advise
> > you to contract someone to work that out though (I myself don't even
> > fully understand the intricacies).
> >
> > the point of the 0km optic is that it fits in QSFP+ generally. It's a
> > lot to ask, to get a precisely tuned DWDM wave coming out of a lil
> > QSFP+ at ZR levels.
> >
> > The other option of course being to send it LR and then use a
> > transponder closer to the DWDM gear, as Nick suggested.
> >
> > --
> > Hunter Fuller (they)
> > Router Jockey
> > VBH M-1C
> > +1 256 824 5331
> >
> > Office of Information Technology
> > The University of Alabama in Huntsville
> > Network Engineering
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:07?AM Nick Hilliard via cisco-nsp
> > <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote on 19/01/2024 14:58:
> > > > The pluggable optic must be DWDM 1530 to 1563 nm with QPSK modulation
> > that
> > > > fits 50Ghz (~31 to 35Gbaud) and a launch power of ZR+ 0dBm. The
> > customer
> > > > channel should have Rx: Max <-10 dBm/Ch and Tx: Min: >–5 dBm/Ch to
> > Max: <+
> > > > 6.5dBm/Ch in order to meet the GOSNR margin of 2.5dBm or more.
> > >
> > > right, so DWDM alien wave requirement then. That's very non-portable and
> > > kit specific.
> > >
> > > Depending on the application, you might be better off ditching the
> > > requirements that they're imposing and simply using 100G transponders
> > > (i.e. 100G as a service). Or something like the smartoptics open line
> > > system with PAM4 QSFP28 transceivers.
> > >
> > > It really depends on what's between you and the other end. D/F has
> > > simple options open for single 100G. If you're connecting into something
> > > more complicated, it can get messy and expensive.
> > >
> > > Nick
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

...and I've just re-read that you were looking for what you could use.

There's something like this:
https://www.packetlight.com/products/100g-200g-dwdm-transport/200g-single-wavelength-muxponder

I've no personal experience of it, and there may be other similar
products on the market, but that looks like it could have a
100GBASE-LR4 uplink to your router, and a CFP2-ACO transceiver facing
the provider.

Rob

On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 17:50, Rob Evans <internetplumber@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It sounds as though your provider is suggesting a CFP2-DCO, such as
> one of these:
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/transceiver-modules/datasheet-c78-743732.html
>
> They're giving you a specification that includes the entire C band
> (4.8THz), but stating that your wavelength must fit within 50GHz,
> which is a traditional ITU-T channel width for DWDM systems, so they
> should probably also specify which channel you're going to use.
>
> CFP2-DCOs tend to work because they've got the space and power for the
> DSPs, and it has been difficult to cram that into QSFP28s (coherent
> optics requires a lot of signal processing). As you've already noted,
> there are products in the pipeline, but I'm not aware of any that are
> widely supported yet. Cisco do seem to suggest there is a QSFP-DD
> using QPSK for 100G, but I've not looked too closely at it (and note
> that QSFP-DD is different to QSFP28, having about three times the
> electrical power available):
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/transceiver-modules/datasheet-c78-744377.html
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 19:54, Shawn L via cisco-nsp
> <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks - we don't really understand the intricacies either. This is our
> > first adventure in this area.
> >
> > The distances are quite large (800+ Km). It's a dark wave service, though
> > we don't have to worry about anything in the middle, just the 2 end points.
> >
> > I'm told Adva / Adtran will be releasing a ZR+ 0dBm QSFP28 that would (or
> > should) work in Q2 2024, but I'm looking for other options. I did check
> > out FS.com, but they're telling me the only option they have available uses
> > a 200Gig CFP2 and 2 100gig QSFP28s.
> >
> > Any idea where else we might look? We'd be happy to engage someone to help
> > us design a solution, we're just not sure where to turn.
> >
> > Shawn
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:25?PM Hunter Fuller <hf0002@uah.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > I know when we are talking about DWDM my usual expectation these days
> > > is to use a "0km optic" (aka one that is meant to launch just far
> > > enough to make it into an amp)... so one of those (from anyone, e.g.
> > > fs.com, whatever) followed by an amp might be doable? I would advise
> > > you to contract someone to work that out though (I myself don't even
> > > fully understand the intricacies).
> > >
> > > the point of the 0km optic is that it fits in QSFP+ generally. It's a
> > > lot to ask, to get a precisely tuned DWDM wave coming out of a lil
> > > QSFP+ at ZR levels.
> > >
> > > The other option of course being to send it LR and then use a
> > > transponder closer to the DWDM gear, as Nick suggested.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Hunter Fuller (they)
> > > Router Jockey
> > > VBH M-1C
> > > +1 256 824 5331
> > >
> > > Office of Information Technology
> > > The University of Alabama in Huntsville
> > > Network Engineering
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:07?AM Nick Hilliard via cisco-nsp
> > > <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote on 19/01/2024 14:58:
> > > > > The pluggable optic must be DWDM 1530 to 1563 nm with QPSK modulation
> > > that
> > > > > fits 50Ghz (~31 to 35Gbaud) and a launch power of ZR+ 0dBm. The
> > > customer
> > > > > channel should have Rx: Max <-10 dBm/Ch and Tx: Min: >–5 dBm/Ch to
> > > Max: <+
> > > > > 6.5dBm/Ch in order to meet the GOSNR margin of 2.5dBm or more.
> > > >
> > > > right, so DWDM alien wave requirement then. That's very non-portable and
> > > > kit specific.
> > > >
> > > > Depending on the application, you might be better off ditching the
> > > > requirements that they're imposing and simply using 100G transponders
> > > > (i.e. 100G as a service). Or something like the smartoptics open line
> > > > system with PAM4 QSFP28 transceivers.
> > > >
> > > > It really depends on what's between you and the other end. D/F has
> > > > simple options open for single 100G. If you're connecting into something
> > > > more complicated, it can get messy and expensive.
> > > >
> > > > Nick
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Thanks -- I was looking at that exact box earlier today and have sent them
a request for more information.

In a perfect world I'd like to keep it as simple as possible, but I also
want to get this project moving and get things turned up, so other options
are greatly appreciated.

Shawn

On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 12:57?PM Rob Evans <internetplumber@gmail.com>
wrote:

> ...and I've just re-read that you were looking for what you could use.
>
> There's something like this:
>
> https://www.packetlight.com/products/100g-200g-dwdm-transport/200g-single-wavelength-muxponder
>
> I've no personal experience of it, and there may be other similar
> products on the market, but that looks like it could have a
> 100GBASE-LR4 uplink to your router, and a CFP2-ACO transceiver facing
> the provider.
>
> Rob
>
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 17:50, Rob Evans <internetplumber@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It sounds as though your provider is suggesting a CFP2-DCO, such as
> > one of these:
> >
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/transceiver-modules/datasheet-c78-743732.html
> >
> > They're giving you a specification that includes the entire C band
> > (4.8THz), but stating that your wavelength must fit within 50GHz,
> > which is a traditional ITU-T channel width for DWDM systems, so they
> > should probably also specify which channel you're going to use.
> >
> > CFP2-DCOs tend to work because they've got the space and power for the
> > DSPs, and it has been difficult to cram that into QSFP28s (coherent
> > optics requires a lot of signal processing). As you've already noted,
> > there are products in the pipeline, but I'm not aware of any that are
> > widely supported yet. Cisco do seem to suggest there is a QSFP-DD
> > using QPSK for 100G, but I've not looked too closely at it (and note
> > that QSFP-DD is different to QSFP28, having about three times the
> > electrical power available):
> >
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/transceiver-modules/datasheet-c78-744377.html
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Rob
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 19:54, Shawn L via cisco-nsp
> > <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks - we don't really understand the intricacies either. This is
> our
> > > first adventure in this area.
> > >
> > > The distances are quite large (800+ Km). It's a dark wave service,
> though
> > > we don't have to worry about anything in the middle, just the 2 end
> points.
> > >
> > > I'm told Adva / Adtran will be releasing a ZR+ 0dBm QSFP28 that would
> (or
> > > should) work in Q2 2024, but I'm looking for other options. I did
> check
> > > out FS.com, but they're telling me the only option they have available
> uses
> > > a 200Gig CFP2 and 2 100gig QSFP28s.
> > >
> > > Any idea where else we might look? We'd be happy to engage someone to
> help
> > > us design a solution, we're just not sure where to turn.
> > >
> > > Shawn
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:25?PM Hunter Fuller <hf0002@uah.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I know when we are talking about DWDM my usual expectation these days
> > > > is to use a "0km optic" (aka one that is meant to launch just far
> > > > enough to make it into an amp)... so one of those (from anyone, e.g.
> > > > fs.com, whatever) followed by an amp might be doable? I would advise
> > > > you to contract someone to work that out though (I myself don't even
> > > > fully understand the intricacies).
> > > >
> > > > the point of the 0km optic is that it fits in QSFP+ generally. It's a
> > > > lot to ask, to get a precisely tuned DWDM wave coming out of a lil
> > > > QSFP+ at ZR levels.
> > > >
> > > > The other option of course being to send it LR and then use a
> > > > transponder closer to the DWDM gear, as Nick suggested.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Hunter Fuller (they)
> > > > Router Jockey
> > > > VBH M-1C
> > > > +1 256 824 5331
> > > >
> > > > Office of Information Technology
> > > > The University of Alabama in Huntsville
> > > > Network Engineering
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:07?AM Nick Hilliard via cisco-nsp
> > > > <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote on 19/01/2024 14:58:
> > > > > > The pluggable optic must be DWDM 1530 to 1563 nm with QPSK
> modulation
> > > > that
> > > > > > fits 50Ghz (~31 to 35Gbaud) and a launch power of ZR+ 0dBm. The
> > > > customer
> > > > > > channel should have Rx: Max <-10 dBm/Ch and Tx: Min: >–5 dBm/Ch
> to
> > > > Max: <+
> > > > > > 6.5dBm/Ch in order to meet the GOSNR margin of 2.5dBm or more.
> > > > >
> > > > > right, so DWDM alien wave requirement then. That's very
> non-portable and
> > > > > kit specific.
> > > > >
> > > > > Depending on the application, you might be better off ditching the
> > > > > requirements that they're imposing and simply using 100G
> transponders
> > > > > (i.e. 100G as a service). Or something like the smartoptics open
> line
> > > > > system with PAM4 QSFP28 transceivers.
> > > > >
> > > > > It really depends on what's between you and the other end. D/F has
> > > > > simple options open for single 100G. If you're connecting into
> something
> > > > > more complicated, it can get messy and expensive.
> > > > >
> > > > > Nick
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > > > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Hi,

?That product looks rather old; why not use Smartoptics DCP-404 instead?
> And it's QDD based too, for the day when you want to move the QDD pluggable
> into the router instead.
>

Yeah, as I mentioned, there may be alternatives. Noting that the OP wanted
a range of 800km+, do SO also offer a suitable pluggable for the
line-side? The ones I could see from a cursory glance appear to be
dispersion limited to 450km at 50GHz, or need 100GHz.

Cheers,
Rob
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Rob Evans via cisco-nsp wrote on 24/01/2024 23:27:
> Yeah, as I mentioned, there may be alternatives. Noting that the OP wanted
> a range of 800km+, do SO also offer a suitable pluggable for the
> line-side? The ones I could see from a cursory glance appear to be
> dispersion limited to 450km at 50GHz, or need 100GHz.

oh duh, I missed the 800km+ requirement bit. This is definitely the sort
of area where for ease of implementation / longer-term support, getting
an off-the-shelf 100G transport device would be useful. A DCI /
transponder solution here would leave local hand-off to short-haul
optics (lr4 / sr4 / aoc), which abstracts all the complexity /
transceiver cost / etc away from any L3 device.

The OP would also need to figure out what's happening with regen in the
middle. Is this OEO or optical-only amplification? Link characterisation
becomes a thing once you're outside short-haul / metro connectivity.

Obviously this isn't to say that you can't do long haul on alien waves -
you certainly can. But I wouldn't like to get involved when something
goes wrong and everyone starts finger-pointing at everyone else about
whose kit is acting the maggot. Strategically it's usually simpler to
abstract off potentially complex areas like this into their own
self-contained box which can be managed as a discrete unit. Once you
factor in the cost of managing complexity, it's usually no more
expensive and often less. All the more so in cases where the A and B
ends of a link are different organisations.

There are plenty of market options for this. An internet search for
"long haul dci" will give manufacturer names.

Nick

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Hi Rob,

Sorry for the delay, yes, SO use Cisco Acacia QDD Bright 400ZR+ and DCP-404 also seems to support Cisco Acacia 100G QDD DWDM pluggable.

I'm unsure about the 100G QDD DWDM spec and price, but Bright 400ZR+ can definitely cover that distance at 200G and 100G within 50 GHz.

Best Regards
Ted

> On 25 Jan 2024, at 00:27, Rob Evans <internetplumber@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>> ?That product looks rather old; why not use Smartoptics DCP-404 instead? And it's QDD based too, for the day when you want to move the QDD pluggable into the router instead.
>
> Yeah, as I mentioned, there may be alternatives. Noting that the OP wanted a range of 800km+, do SO also offer a suitable pluggable for the line-side? The ones I could see from a cursory glance appear to be dispersion limited to 450km at 50GHz, or need 100GHz.
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/