Awesome. Sounds like you guys are on top of it. Not trying to rain on anyone's parade, I am SUPER stoked that companies are starting to put SFP ports on radios. I just don't understand why everyone's implementation isn't exactly like my own.
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure there are any practical implementations of fiber and DC that > I haven't already gone over with Jaime... more than once. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > > Midwest Internet Exchange > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Jeremy" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Saturday, October 24, 2015 12:17:18 PM > > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] B11 copper v fiber > > I can see your point, but it seems that you are missing part of the idea > of why we run direct DC and fiber, to avoid ESD issues frying the sensitive > Ethernet components. We already have direct -48vdc and fiber sitting in > our tower box, ready for future expansion. You simply needed one > additional small connector and you could have made everyone happy. There > are already a number of manufacturers out there who not only support POE, > but also have direct DC connectors as well. AFAIK, The connector part is > less than a buck. Consider this my request for a future hardware revision > that adds the small direct DC connector as an option. > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Jaime Fink <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yes it is powered via 802.3at PoE. You do not need Ethernet PHY >> operational though once you've configured the SFP, it just accepts power >> through the circuit at that point. >> >> Unfortunately not everyone has gone to fiber yet so PoE is still needed >> for some transitionally. >> >> Jaime >> >> On Oct 24, 2015, at 9:19 AM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I do not see the direct DC connector on any of the marketing photos. Do >> these still need to be powered via POE? >> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Jaime Fink <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Mike. >>> >>> Yes the aggregates Mike quoted are roughly correct as well, but…it’s a >>> bit different when you’re using our Auto-TDMA mode. Assuming you’re not >>> fully loaded, users running speedtests get results at a Gigabit in up and >>> down direction and around 1 ms RT latency, so it feels higher speed >>> aggregate since we’re adapting to actual usage on the fly. In other words >>> we fill up the underutilized directional demand with the direction that’s >>> in demand (usually downstream of course). >>> >>> That’s opposed to locking down the MAC/PHY layer at 50/50 like FDD does, >>> or 75/25 TDMA modes, etc. >>> >>> Jaime >>> >>> From: Af <[email protected]> on behalf of Mike Hammett < >>> [email protected]> >>> Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>> Date: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 at 2:33 PM >>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>> >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] B11 copper v fiber >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> 1200 - 1500 aggregate. >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From: *"TJ Trout" <[email protected]> >>> *To: *[email protected] >>> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 21, 2015 2:00:16 PM >>> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] B11 copper v fiber >>> >>> Jamie; >>> >>> Is the b11 based on 802.11 silicone? >>> >>> Is the b11 capable of 750fd or 1500fd? >>> >>> Thank you >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Rory Conaway <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> And Mike quits sending you nasty emails because you think copper was >>>> sent to us by an evil entity from another dimension. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Rory >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Adam Moffett >>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 21, 2015 11:27 AM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] B11 copper v fiber >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Two reasons: >>>> >>>> 1) Peace of mind regarding *future* EMI problems >>>> 2) It's pretty sexy these days to tell people you have fiber to the >>>> antenna, >>>> >>>> On 10/21/2015 1:35 PM, Scott Vander Dussen wrote: >>>> >>>> Mimosa recommends these SFP modules: >>>> >>>> AFBR-5710APZ >>>> <http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Avago-Technologies/AFBR-5710APZ/?qs=%2fha2pyFaduhaC58MVLqFl44%252bx6hS5cz1YhojZqdUVyI7Wp%252bPDPG4Rg%3d%3d>ï¿1Ž2 >>>> 1.25 GBd MMF Transceiver for Gigabit Ethernet, SFP, Bail de-latch, Ext Temp >>>> (-40 to 85C) >>>> >>>> AFCT-5715ALZ >>>> <http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Avago-Technologies/AFCT-5715ALZ/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujhJvt9bnk9ES81EX7WBD7ZrbBItK6kCZLHNEN0X0r%2fGA%3d%3d> >>>> 1.25 GBd SMF Transceiver with DMI for Gigabit Ethernet, SFP, Std de-latch, >>>> Ext Temp (-40 to 85C) >>>> >>>> FTLF8519P3BTL >>>> <http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Finisar/FTLF8519P3BTL/?qs=%2fha2pyFaduh7nd4n5kIrSHIvC1uJRiq8EwAcMil5upKcc76M2JIwDQ%3d%3d> >>>> Fiber Optic Transmitters, Receivers, Transceivers GigE 1x/2x FC, 2.129 Gb/s >>>> trnscvr, 550m >>>> >>>> FTLF1318P3BTL >>>> <http://www.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Finisar/FTLF1318P3BTL/?qs=%2fha2pyFaduikXVilIKTQvJhiq4n%2fsUYWQAU7K0qEJnA1f%252bqIw1quUw%3d%3d> >>>> Fiber Optic Transmitters, Receivers, Transceivers 1310nmFP GigE 1x FC >>>> 1.25Gb/s trnscvr10km >>>> >>>> ï¿1Ž2 >>>> >>>> Assuming cable length and EMI are not issues, is there any benefit to >>>> using fiber over copper? >>>> >>>> ï¿1Ž2 >>>> >>>> `S >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> > >
