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

Re: [HSSG] 40G MAC Rate Discussion

The key words are "starting 5 to 8 years from now."  Given likely adoption rates (and previous history with 10GE shows that this takes longer than any of us anticipate), I believe my point stands.  


-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Cole []
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 2:02 PM
Subject: RE: [HSSG] 40G MAC Rate Discussion


Key architects from the three major server manufacturers (SUN, IBM, HP)

have stated that servers will need 100GE ports starting 5 to 8 years

from now (see page 3 of my Broad Market Potential presentation from the

March HSSG meeting, and Muller's presentation from the January HSSG

meeting.) It is diificult to see how starting to develop technology that

will migrate into this market can be characterized as departing from



-----Original Message-----

From: OJHA,JUGNU [mailto:jugnu.ojha@AVAGOTECH.COM]

Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 1:32 PM


Subject: Re: [HSSG] 40G MAC Rate Discussion


Matt, to address your point about BMP for 40G, I can't help but think it

ironic when even the strongest proponents of 100G say that they do not

see a market for more than 100's to 1000's of links in the next 5+

years.  We departed from reality long ago....


-----Original Message-----

From: Matt Traverso [mailto:matt.traverso@GMAIL.COM]

Sent: Friday, April 06, 2007 10:27 AM


Subject: Re: [HSSG] 40G MAC Rate Discussion


I'd like to comment from an optical component / module vendor point of



Personally I'm not convinced that broad market potential has been

demonstrated, but... Operating under the assumption that the 40GbE

broad market potential is verified with end user input:

- As we heard/saw in Jack Jewel's presentation focused on the cost &

reliability of the MMF objective, extending from a 1x10G VCSEL to a

10x10G VCSEL does not represent a linear cost increase -- similarly a

4x10G would only be an incremental increase

- The dominant cost in a nx10G MMF interface is likely to be any

premium charged for the interface IC as well as costs associated with

the development quad laser drivers & quad amplifiers (or deka drivers

& amps)

- I'd like to hear a comment / perspective from the fiber

manufacturers on the utilization rate of the ribbon fiber strands.

For a 4x10G MMF approach presumably 8 strands in the 12 ribbon would

be used 4 for TX and 4 for RX.  For a 10x10G MMF approach it would be

2 @12 with 10 @ Tx and 10 @ RX.  What does this do to the cost and

usage rate metrics of MMF cabling?

- Would an SMF PMD objective at 40GbE have broad market potential

(BMP)?  Here I am very skeptical

- Assuming that BMP was shown for an SMF PMD objective, I would

advocate a 2km serial 40Gbit/s scheme rather than a 4 lambda approach

as the transmission problems are not as severe

- This would represent the path that reuses the most technology and

allows for a compact & low power dissipation end solution

- As I have stated one of the primary impediments is the availability

of a low power interface IC -- this is the primary obstacle for OC768

(40G SONET/SDH) modules

- A 4 lambda x 10G at single mode would not simply be able to plug in

the work done on 802.3ae as the technical challenge of MUX/DMUX

optical loss and packaging would require a new round of investment


In closing I'd like to see some supporting data for the Broad Market

Potential of 40GbE (including distance / media usage

comments/assumptions) that reflects the timeframe of standard

development -- eg. demand/need in 2009-2012.



--matt traverso


NOTE: This e-mail is being sent from my personal e-mail account rather

than my corporate e-mail address at Opnext due to default signature

files embedded in my Opnext e-mail account.