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

RE: 3PMD Proposal is not enough




Steve,

This is a fair request, but one that will take a fair amount of time to
compile. I am sure that you recognize that you are asking me to summarize
the last 6 months or more of information and discussion regarding PMD
tradeoffs including the one hour PMD discussion at the Ottawa meeting (a
slightly larger scope of question than the one I asked  :-).

Hey, I like a challenge as much as the next guy.

jonathan

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Swanson, Steven E [mailto:SwansonSE@corning.com]
>Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2000 7:24 AM
>To: 'stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org'; 'Jonathan Thatcher'
>Subject: RE: 3PMD Proposal is not enough
>
>
>Jonathan,
>
>This is a great set of questions but I would like to broaden 
>the scope to also include the other PMDs under consideration 
>by 802.3ae. I understand (I think) the motivation for 1550 nm 
>since support of extended link lengths is desired but I am 
>wondering if others could help me understand the following, 
>specifically as it relates to supporting a multimode cable plant:
>
>1. What are the motivations for customer choice of 1310 WWDM?
>2. What are the motivations for customer choice of 1310 Serial?
>3. Are they doing this to get greater distance?
>4. Are they doing this because they believe that operating a 
>1310 WWDM or 1310 Serial system over the installed base of MMF 
>is less expensive than another solution over new MMF?
>5. Other rationale?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Steve
>> ----------
>> From: 	Jonathan 
>Thatcher[SMTP:Jonathan.Thatcher@worldwidepackets.com]
>> Sent: 	Friday, June 23, 2000 7:21 PM
>> To: 	'stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org'
>> Subject: 	RE: 3PMD Proposal is not enough
>> 
>> 
>> John,
>> 
>> This is great information. Thank you.
>> 
>> What assumptions are used?  What are the motivations for 
>customer choice of
>> the new MMF?
>> 
>> 1. Are they doing this to get greater distance at gigabit speeds?
>> 2. Are they doing this to improve error rates at gigabit speeds?
>> 3. Are they doing this because the new MMF is less expensive 
>than existing
>> MMF?
>> 4. Are they doing this because they expect P802.3ae to adopt 
>an 850 nm
>> solution?
>> 5. Other rationale?
>> 
>> jonathan
>> 
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: George, John Emanuel (John) [mailto:johngeorge@lucent.com]
>> >Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 2:21 PM
>> >To: 'stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org'
>> >Subject: RE: 3PMD Proposal is not enough
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >The previous message had tables that may not have been 
>readable. This
>> >version is re-formatted.
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >
>> >John George
>> >Lucent Technologies
>> >770-798-2432 (Voice)
>> >770-798-3653 (Fax)
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From:	George, John Emanuel (John) 
>> >> Sent:	Tuesday, June 20, 2000 5:58 PM
>> >> To:	'stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org'
>> >> Subject:	RE: 3PMD Proposal is not enough
>> >> 
>> >> Howard,
>> >> 			
>> >> Good question. 
>> >> 
>> >> The short answer is that there will be more than enough 
>> >installed next
>> >> generation fiber to support the approximately 2 million 
>Ten Gigabit
>> >> Ethernet Ports that Bruce Tolley projected will ship through 2004.
>> >> 
>> >(http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/ae/public/may00/tolley_1_
>> >0500.pdf).
>> >> 
>> >	
>> >Global MM Shipments (KMI view)  	
>> >2001   4,316          
>> >2002   4,998   
>> >2003   5,795
>> >2004   6,522 
>> >
>> >% Next Gen MM of total KMI projection
>> >2001   10%
>> >2002   25%   
>> >2003   35%
>> >2004   50%
>> >
>> >Next Gen MM FMM (Fiber Mega Meters) annual installation
>> > 
>> >2001       432
>> >2002    1,250
>> >2003    2,028
>> >2004    3,261
>> >TOTAL 6,971
>> >
>> >Cumulative 10G ports supported by next generation MM, 0 - 300m
>> >
>> >(See assumptions below)
>> >
>> >2001       650,549 
>> >2002    2,488,049       
>> >2003    5,470,769
>> >2004  10,266,357
>> >
>> >Bruce Tolley (Cisco) Projection for Total 10 G Ethernet Ports 
>> >(Bruce, I estimated these from your logarithmic chart, and 
>> >apologize for any
>> >inaccuracies in my reading the datapoints)
>> >
>> >2001        10,000
>> >2002      200,000
>> >2003      800,000
>> >2004   2,000,000
>> >
>> >>  
>> >> We estimate that between now and 2004 the installed 
>quantity of next
>> >> generation multimode fiber will reach 7,000 FMM (fiber mega 
>> >meters). The
>> >> vast majority of the next generation fiber will be installed 
>> >in buildings
>> >> in links up to 300 meters. Assuming an average length of 170 
>> >meters for
>> >> <300 meter links (based on the 7/96 IEEE survey), and 
>> >assuming only 25% of
>> >> the fiber is lit, next generation multimode will be able to 
>> >support over
>> >> 10 million 10 Gigabit Ethernet Ports by 2004. Even assuming 
>> >that we ship
>> >> only half of the projected next generation multimode, a > 
>> >conservative view,
>> >> we will be able to support 5 million ports.    
>> >> 
>> >> Bottom line: There will be more than enough installed 
>next generation
>> >> multimode fiber to support 10 Gigabit Ethernet at 850 nm 
>from 0 - 300
>> >> meters.   
>> >> 
>> >> On the installed base question in general, the global 
>> >installed base of
>> >> all multimode by 2004 will be about 35,000 FMM. As of the 
>1996 IEEE
>> >> survey, only 20% of the installed FMM was in links up to 300 
>> >meters since
>> >> most of the fiber was in the campus and building.  By 2004, 
>> >we can assume
>> >> the installed base up to 300 meters will grow to 40% of the 
>> >total as fiber
>> >> grabs additional share of building backbones and FTTD grows. 
>> >> 
>> >> Thus, the installed base in links up to 300 meters will be 
>> >14,000 FMM (40%
>> >> of 35,000) by 2004, and next generation fiber will comprise 
>> >7,000 FMM, or
>> >> 50% of the installed base up to 300 meters. 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> Regards,
>> >> 
>> >> John George
>> >> Lucent Technologies
>> >> 770-798-2432 (Voice)
>> >> 770-798-3653 (Fax)
>> >> 
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From:	Howard Frazier [SMTP:hfrazier@cisco.com]
>> >> Sent:	Wednesday, June 14, 2000 9:09 PM
>> >> To:	stds-802-3-hssg@ieee.org
>> >> Subject:	RE: 3PMD Proposal
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 		John,
>> >> 
>> >> 		Can you provide some numbers to substantiate 
>> >this assertion:
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 		>Please note that pulling new fiber is a small 
>> >fraction of
>> >> the total system
>> >> 		>cost. Customers have already been installing the new
>> >> multimode that will be
>> >> 		>used today for 1000BASE-SX, and can be upgraded to
>> >> 10000BASE-850nm in the
>> >> 		>future. The bulk of 10 GBE port sales will occur after
>> >> 2002. By that time,
>> >> 		>there will be a significant and growing 
>> >installed base of
>> >> the new multimode
>> >> 		>fiber.  
>> >> 
>> >> 		What constitutes "a significant and growing 
>> >installed base
>> >> of the new
>> >> 		multi-mode fiber?"
>> >> 
>> >> 		Can you show us a timeline, going out for the next five
>> >> years, with
>> >> 		your projections of the percentage penetration 
>> >for the new
>> >> fiber in 
>> >> 		both the horizontal and backbone applications?
>> >> 
>> >> 		Howard Frazier
>> >> 		Cisco Systems, Inc.
>> >
>> 
>