What others vendors do you using? Here in Brazil only PADTEC have this passive solution... Some days ago Digitel contact me to show your multiplex solution... Is a active solution... We import this from fiberstore, but i don't know others vendors to buy 10G sfp+ cwdm and this mux/demux...
Enviado via iPhone Grupo Connectoway > Em 07/02/2015, às 16:04, Kenneth McRae <[email protected]> escreveu: > > Hi Enviado, > > I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them. I needed > to cover only 3km from A to B side. When using 10km optics, I saw a loss of > over 5db with their passive mux inserted into the path which created a total > loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for our equipment with > 10km SFP+. Using another vendors low insertion loss mux corrected our issue. > I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you may be able to tolerate a > higher insertion loss to cover < 60km. I also notice that their CDWM optics > averaged about 3db less in power output when compared to other vendors. > > Thanks > > Kenneth > >> On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B when you >> using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)? >> I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test about >> 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... ( only see >> ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access with ssh and >> pinging tests... >> What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this >> solution good? >> Thanks!!! >> >> Enviado via iPhone >> Grupo Connectoway >> >>> Em 07/02/2015, às 14:55, Kenneth McRae <[email protected]> escreveu: >>> Mike, >>> I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware >>> equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive loss, >>> poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without threatening legal >>> action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI equipment so far. I run >>> passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels). >>> On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Mike >>> I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective solutions. >>> Ekinops & Packetlight. >>> On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) muxes >>> to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't work >>> so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefore >>> must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channels and >>> have a distance limitation. >>> What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg? >>> ----- >>> Mike Hammett >>> Intelligent Computing Solutions >>> http://www.ics-il.com >>> -- >>> TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: *+52 >>> 656-257-1109* >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the use >>> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain >>> information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure >>> under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this >>> information, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or >>> copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. >>> AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Esta comunicación es sólo para el uso de la >>> persona o entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener información >>> privilegiada, confidencial y exenta de divulgación bajo la legislación >>> aplicable. Si no es el destinatario de esta información, se le notifica que >>> cualquier uso, difusión, distribución o copia de la comunicación está >>> estrictamente prohibido.
