Re: Extending network over a dry pair

[Jameson, Daniel]

Look at a Hatteras hn400 and lpu  You can get about 5mbs/pair using g.shdsl.  
pairs can be bonded to add capacity (assuming at least 2 pair for t-1).  The 
repeaters fit in a standard 248 closure.

From: NANOG  on behalf of Baldur Norddahl 

Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2018 4:19:21 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Extending network over a dry pair

Rent a cable plow and make a quick run of fiber during the night. Nobody will 
notice.

:-)

6 miles is too far to get any speed on a phone line.

RE: A few GPON questions...

[Jameson, Daniel]

I’ve used this guy a couple times,  Use your favorite switch/POE switch and  
viola PON network using switches.  Pretty sure it doesn’t work with Zhone… But 
Zhone is #88 in my list of PON vendor choices ;)
https://supportforums.adtran.com/docs/DOC-8697


From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Ben Cannon
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 2:11 PM
To: Nick Bogle
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: A few GPON questions...

Rip it out.

Where are your splitters? You can probably fix this with PoE 8-port switches 
and UPS-es.

Every day you wait will cost more.

You will never get 25 years out of this, I predict 6mos and then you rip it 
completely and put in copper/IDFs.
-Ben

On Dec 11, 2018, at 1:04 PM, Nick Bogle mailto:n...@bogle.se>> 
wrote:
Unfortunately management didn't want an apple to apple comparison. They wanted 
a comparison to how it was spec'd out originally not how we typically deploy it 
now. I don't think this is a deal breaker for my job, we have 50+ buildings 
left to manage, and our contractor is responsible for maintaining it for the 
most part for the next year at minimum. The previous management (CIO/CTO/their 
assistants) were pretty much fired over this fiasco. New management is much 
better to deal with.

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 12:35 PM Alfie Pates 
mailto:alfie@fdx.services>> wrote:
>The cost analysis was already done.

>Costs were not factored in for BBUs on every ONT like should have been spec'd 
>out for emergency phone lines.

These two things do not quite agree.

Update your CV - It is not your responsibility to shoulder the stress of your 
superiors' bad decisions, especially if you have no room to learn from those 
mistakes.


~a

RE: optical circulator as a bidirectional one fiber solution

[Jameson, Daniel]

If we were talking 10G, adjacent channels,  add a TFFL filter it *Should* work. 
 100G isn’t just on-off at a high clock rate,  it’s also modulated  around the 
center frequency,  I don’t think it’d work even with a  wideband receiver.

From: Ben Cannon [mailto:b...@6by7.net]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 4:24 PM
To: Jameson, Daniel
Cc: Eric Kuhnke; nanog@nanog.org list
Subject: Re: optical circulator as a bidirectional one fiber solution

What about 100Ghz ITU spacing on the tx, are the rx optics broad enough to take 
the off-band input?
-Ben

On Aug 13, 2018, at 3:19 PM, Jameson, Daniel 
mailto:daniel.jame...@tdstelecom.com>> wrote:
You would still need to frequency shift TX and RX.  They are travelling 
opposite directions on the same piece of glass;  as the traffic rate increases 
the likelihood of collisions increases and you’ll start to get errors.  The 
collision would either cancel the ‘bit’ or act like OBI and get erroneous bits 
and checksum errors or missing chunks from the constellation.  There are BIDI 
100G transceivers for Multi-mode available today based on the Foxconn optics, 
I’d imagine we’ll see BIDI for the O and C bands in the next 18 months.

From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 3:56 PM
To: b...@6by7.net<mailto:b...@6by7.net>; 
nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org> list
Subject: Re: optical circulator as a bidirectional one fiber solution

For 1 and 10Gbps OOK modulation yes, but not for something like a ITU DWDM grid 
channelized or tunable coherent optic. In which the (QPSK, 8PSK, 16QAM) signal 
has a specific THz width and frequency not unlike a radio operating in a very, 
very narrow waveguide.


On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 1:57 PM Ben Cannon 
mailto:b...@6by7.net>> wrote:
Good news about almost all optics, their Rx window is pretty wide. Meaning a 
1550nm optic will activate the receiver on a 1560nm optic just fine (and 
probably anything in the 1500nm band).  Careful use of specialized single 
strand DWDM muxes (FS.com<http://FS.com>) can yield great bidi-like results 
with increased channel count.
-Ben

On Aug 13, 2018, at 10:49 AM, Eric Kuhnke 
mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Something that is broadly the same as a coherent 100G QPSK single wavelength 
optical module, but in two different frequencies, and a passive CWDM mux/demux 
prism at each end might work. The limitation would be availability of optics 
for a modern 100G MSA that are both coherent and Tx/Rx at two different THz 
frequencies.

Or with some box and vendor equipment in between, such as:

http://cdn.extranet.coriant.com/resources/Application-Notes/AN_Groove_Bidirectional_Fiber_74C0169.pdf?mtime=20180206023321

On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 1:00 PM Daniel Corbe 
mailto:dco...@hammerfiber.com>> wrote:
On 8/7/2018 15:46:03, "Baldur Norddahl" 
mailto:baldur.nordd...@gmail.com>>
wrote:

>Hello
>
>There is a lack of bidirectional one fiber (BIDI) options for 40G and
>100G optics. Usually BIDI is implemented using two CWDM wavelengths,
>one for tx and one for rx. However there is also a lack of CWDM and
>DWDM options for 40G and 100G.
>
>Would it be possible to use an optical circulator like this one
>(customized to 1310 nm)?
>
>https://www.fs.com/de/en/products/33364.html
>
>Combined with a traditional two fiber 1310 nm 10 km 40G QSFP module
>like this: https://www.fs.com/de/en/products/24422.html
>
>The link distance would be 5 km.
>
>The optical circulator separates tx and rx by the direction the light
>travels in. It would work even though both directions use the same
>wavelength. There will likely be some reflection but hopefully
>attenuated enough that it is regarded as background noise.
>
>Has anyone done this? Any reason it would not work?
>
>Regards,
>
>Baldur
>

The main issue you're going to run into (especially trying to plug
anything into a DWDM shelf) is 40G and 100G transceivers usually emit 4
lanes of traffic instead of a single lane like 10 and 1G optics do.

I'd imagine that's why there are so few solutions that don't involve
things like OTN.

RE: optical circulator as a bidirectional one fiber solution

[Jameson, Daniel]

You would still need to frequency shift TX and RX.  They are travelling 
opposite directions on the same piece of glass;  as the traffic rate increases 
the likelihood of collisions increases and you’ll start to get errors.  The 
collision would either cancel the ‘bit’ or act like OBI and get erroneous bits 
and checksum errors or missing chunks from the constellation.  There are BIDI 
100G transceivers for Multi-mode available today based on the Foxconn optics, 
I’d imagine we’ll see BIDI for the O and C bands in the next 18 months.

From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2018 3:56 PM
To: b...@6by7.net; nanog@nanog.org list
Subject: Re: optical circulator as a bidirectional one fiber solution

For 1 and 10Gbps OOK modulation yes, but not for something like a ITU DWDM grid 
channelized or tunable coherent optic. In which the (QPSK, 8PSK, 16QAM) signal 
has a specific THz width and frequency not unlike a radio operating in a very, 
very narrow waveguide.


On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 1:57 PM Ben Cannon 
mailto:b...@6by7.net>> wrote:
Good news about almost all optics, their Rx window is pretty wide. Meaning a 
1550nm optic will activate the receiver on a 1560nm optic just fine (and 
probably anything in the 1500nm band).  Careful use of specialized single 
strand DWDM muxes (FS.com) can yield great bidi-like results 
with increased channel count.
-Ben

On Aug 13, 2018, at 10:49 AM, Eric Kuhnke 
mailto:eric.kuh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Something that is broadly the same as a coherent 100G QPSK single wavelength 
optical module, but in two different frequencies, and a passive CWDM mux/demux 
prism at each end might work. The limitation would be availability of optics 
for a modern 100G MSA that are both coherent and Tx/Rx at two different THz 
frequencies.

Or with some box and vendor equipment in between, such as:

http://cdn.extranet.coriant.com/resources/Application-Notes/AN_Groove_Bidirectional_Fiber_74C0169.pdf?mtime=20180206023321

On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 1:00 PM Daniel Corbe 
mailto:dco...@hammerfiber.com>> wrote:
On 8/7/2018 15:46:03, "Baldur Norddahl" 
mailto:baldur.nordd...@gmail.com>>
wrote:

>Hello
>
>There is a lack of bidirectional one fiber (BIDI) options for 40G and
>100G optics. Usually BIDI is implemented using two CWDM wavelengths,
>one for tx and one for rx. However there is also a lack of CWDM and
>DWDM options for 40G and 100G.
>
>Would it be possible to use an optical circulator like this one
>(customized to 1310 nm)?
>
>https://www.fs.com/de/en/products/33364.html
>
>Combined with a traditional two fiber 1310 nm 10 km 40G QSFP module
>like this: https://www.fs.com/de/en/products/24422.html
>
>The link distance would be 5 km.
>
>The optical circulator separates tx and rx by the direction the light
>travels in. It would work even though both directions use the same
>wavelength. There will likely be some reflection but hopefully
>attenuated enough that it is regarded as background noise.
>
>Has anyone done this? Any reason it would not work?
>
>Regards,
>
>Baldur
>

The main issue you're going to run into (especially trying to plug
anything into a DWDM shelf) is 40G and 100G transceivers usually emit 4
lanes of traffic instead of a single lane like 10 and 1G optics do.

I'd imagine that's why there are so few solutions that don't involve
things like OTN.

RE: Rising sea levels are going to mess with the internet

[Jameson, Daniel]

Its not satellite data,  it's the exact same data-set that NOAA provides for 
ocean levels; The data is from tidal sensors;  the data is relayed via 
satellite so... technically ;). It's kind of funny the data in the table,  vs 
the chart-data presented,  some .orgs say 80mm, some say 60mm all depends on 
when you start counting. I'd like to see the raw data,  geospatially portray 
it,  and get a sense of the true impact;  an average of a statisticcal 
averages, smoothed and corrected over 60 days with a self-ratcheting 
baseline... Not sure how valuable the data here is other than support a 
presupposition.

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Chris Adams
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2018 12:01 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Rising sea levels are going to mess with the internet

Once upon a time, William Herrin  said:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 12:58 PM, Jason Kuehl  wrote:
> > Science https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/
> 
> "The first graph tracks the change in sea level since 1993 as observed
> by satellites."
> 
> I *really* want to understand the technology that lets a satellite
> hundreds of miles in the sky detect a 3mm change in average global sea
> level between the start and end of the year with an error bar that
> grows to only 4mm over a quarter of a century.

Well, you must not *really* want to understand, since there's a "Learn
more" link to follow on the above page that (after a couple more clicks)
would lead you to this page that has some explanation:

https://www.aviso.altimetry.fr/en/techniques/altimetry.html
-- 
Chris Adams 

RE: Broadcast television in an IP world

[Jameson, Daniel]

In the US certain channels have the *must Carry* designation.  Which puts a 
retransmitter in a poor negotiating position,  essentially the provider can 
charge whatever they want.

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Francois Mezei
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 3:28 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Broadcast television in an IP world

On 2017-11-17 16:37, Luke Guillory wrote:
> Have you seen what the OTA guys charge for retrans rights? They don't 
> want to do this,


Fair point. Coming from Canada, OTA stations, because are freely available, 
can't charge distributors (BDUs (MVPDs in USA) so their revenues are purely 
from advertising.

So that changes the equation. If going OTT allows them to shut down their OTA 
transmitters (and not pay for conversion to ATSC3) it could result in lower 
operating costs.

In canada, BDU subsriptions are down and if the trend continues, NOT making 
programming available on the net means you miss the boat.


In the USA, perhaps OTA stations could go to subscription model pn Internet to 
replace the MVPDs revenues and end retrans disputes.?

RE: Physical Layer fiber Software Tools?

[Jameson, Daniel]

<ID10T!>http://www.crestpt.com/data-center-infrastructure-management-dcim.html


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jameson, Daniel
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 11:32 AM
To: Craig; nanog group
Subject: RE: Physical Layer fiber Software Tools?

Give this a look.  It can track to the cross-connect level,  then provide a 
one-line drawing. Application is web driven and expandable.  It should be able 
to do what you need. 

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Craig
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 9:09 AM
To: nanog group
Subject: Physical Layer fiber Software Tools?

I am hoping someone could help me out with some suggestions for any software 
that is available, for individuals that are doing physical layer wiring in a 
data center?

The idea is the technician is performing the fiber runs from say RACK 111 
router AAA port 1/1/1 to RACK 222 router BBB port 1/1/1

The fiber is connected to a LIU in the TOP of the rack, and then will require 
various cross connects to get to the other rack. If the various racks and LIU's 
are pre-populated into the software, and then a standard for the fiber labels 
is also installed ahead of time into the software tool.

The technician has a tablet or laptop to enter the data, and then it will print 
out a cable label based on the info entered into the tool. The back-end data 
base is updated for each fiber so the complete path is known.
This way its a one step process.

Maybe my description of this is readily available or have other companies 
developed a custom software tool to achieve this?



Appreciate any feedback.

RE: Physical Layer fiber Software Tools?

[Jameson, Daniel]

Give this a look.  It can track to the cross-connect level,  then provide a 
one-line drawing. Application is web driven and expandable.  It should be able 
to do what you need. 

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Craig
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2017 9:09 AM
To: nanog group
Subject: Physical Layer fiber Software Tools?

I am hoping someone could help me out with some suggestions for any software 
that is available, for individuals that are doing physical layer wiring in a 
data center?

The idea is the technician is performing the fiber runs from say RACK 111 
router AAA port 1/1/1 to RACK 222 router BBB port 1/1/1

The fiber is connected to a LIU in the TOP of the rack, and then will require 
various cross connects to get to the other rack. If the various racks and LIU's 
are pre-populated into the software, and then a standard for the fiber labels 
is also installed ahead of time into the software tool.

The technician has a tablet or laptop to enter the data, and then it will print 
out a cable label based on the info entered into the tool. The back-end data 
base is updated for each fiber so the complete path is known.
This way its a one step process.

Maybe my description of this is readily available or have other companies 
developed a custom software tool to achieve this?



Appreciate any feedback.

RE: 100G QSFP28 DAC cables - experience

[Jameson, Daniel]

They're pretty fragile assemblies too,  I ruined about 30 of them lacing them 
in,  they need fish-paper around each cable so you don't crush the conductors 
when lacing. 

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Brant Ian Stevens
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 2:05 PM
To: Tyler Conrad
Cc: NANOG
Subject: Re: 100G QSFP28 DAC cables - experience

+1 on this...  I'd go so far as to say skip the copper, and just go with 
active-optical for short-run interconnects.

> Tyler Conrad 
> September 14, 2017 at 2:12 PM
> We're using a mix as well, some QSFP28 AOC, others DAC. One thing that you
> need to keep in mind about the DACs is going to be the bend radius. These
> things are girthy af, so make sure to either overestimate your runs
> slightly, or buy one to test first.
>
> Hugo Slabbert 
> September 14, 2017 at 12:54 PM
>
> On Wed 2017-Sep-06 09:17:39 +0200, Jiri Prochazka  wrote:
>
>
> We're deploying a decent chunk of 100G QSFP28 at the moment, but it's 
> a mix of:
>
> - a handful of 100G QSFP28 copper DACs for some switch peerlinks
> - a bit >100x 100G QSFP28 AOC for interswitch links
> - a lot more 100G QSFP28 -> 4x25G SFP28 copper breakouts
>
> We're only a few weeks in at this point, so mileage may vary in the 
> long run etc.
>
> The copper peerlinks are mostly 1M with some 3M.  We've had no issues 
> with them so far.
>
> The AOC interswitch links vary more in length, but some of those are 
> >10M (hence AOC rather than copper).  We've faced no issues with 
> those.  Granted, there is BGP with BFD running across those, so those 
> should help in terms of liveness checks and such.
>
> I mention that because where we _have_ had issues are on the 100G -> 
> 4x25G copper breakouts.  Those are for 25G edge connectivity.  It's a 
> decent sample size with a bit north of 600x 25G ports.  The trouble 
> we've had there have been with some links showing link up on the 
> switch and server side but actually failing to pass any traffic, so we 
> need to stuff some >L1 liveness checks on there to ensure those links 
> are good while we sort out the root issue.  It is not yet clear if 
> this is a cable fault, driver issue, or something firmware-ish on the 
> NICs.
>
> Also, fun fact: 25G only made its way into the 802.3ad bonding mode 
> driver in the Linux kernel in March this year[1].
>
> Jiri Prochazka 
> September 6, 2017 at 3:17 AM
> Hi folks,
>
> I'm wondering if anyone have (either positive or negative) experience 
> with 100G QSFP28 DAC cables?
>
> Is there anyone who is using 100G DAC in large scale and would 
> recommend it (which means there are no issues compared to SR4 links)?
>
> I'm thinking about cables with lenght up to 1m, not more.
>
> We have had quite bad experience with 10G DAC in the past - but I do 
> not want to be slave of the past.
>
>
>
>
> Thank you for your thoughts!
>
>
>
> Jiri
>

-- 

-- 
Regards,
--
Brant I. Stevens, Principal & Consulting Architect
bra...@argentiumsolutions.com
d:212.931.8566, x101. m:917.673.6536. f:917.525.4759.
http://argentiumsolutions.com

RE: Management softwares

[Jameson, Daniel]

Give this a look;  the webpage doesn't do it justice.  It Doesn't do 
billing/invoicing,  but does everything else on your list.

http://www.crestpt.com/fme-platforms.html

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of K MEKKAOUI
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2017 12:56 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Management softwares

Hi

 

We are a medium ISP. We are looking for Management software solutions. We are 
interested in finding a solution for billing, invoicing, scheduling, ticketing, 
provisioning and monitoring, Any suggestions or recommendations will be 
appreciated? We have been using multiple systems which do not communicate. Our 
objective is to use a single system or at least reduce the number of systems.

 

Thank you

 

KARIM M.

 

RE: Creating a Circuit ID Format

[Jameson, Daniel]

What's the intended use of the Circuit ID?  Internal ID, Stickered Customer 
CPE;  Planning to carry other carriers circuits?  With so many virtual 
components in circuits now,  Where the circuit ID used to have some useful 
information, it's been largely reduced to a minimum amount of information that 
can get a customer/service tech in touch with the right tech support group.  
It's a-typical to provide a circuit-id for residential customers,  they're 
typically reserved for business class services although there isn't anything 
that would prevent it other than managing the data/changes.

29/EC00/123456/002/MYCO/0
(prefix 2) usually a form of where the service originates (Commonly where the 
IP address is provisioned)
Service type - format is up to the circuit owner.
A common syntax is: 
First digit identifies the service delivery type -  E = Ethernet A=ATM 
S=Sonet P=PON ...
Second digit identifies the physical delivery type.
A=64K
B=1.5Mbps
C=25Mbps
D=45Mbps(STS1)
E=100Mbps
F=155Mbps(oc3)
G=100Mbps
H=466Mbps(oc9)
I=622Mbps(oc12)
J=1Gbps
K=1.5Gbps
L=2.5G
M=10Gbps (oc192)
N=13Gbps(oc255)
O=25gpbs
P=40Gbps(OC768)
Q=100G
...
   Third and fourth digits identify the fractional provisioned rate as a %
00=100%
10=10%
  25=25%
Serial number -  6 digit alphanumeric serial number usually encoded with 
cust/location/
Suffix - used if cust/location for circuit count. Or generically as circuit 
count. (customer has 2 10G)

Company Code - use up to 4 letter (this is the controller of the circuit)

Segment - if it's a multi-segment circuit.  Occasionally used to denote if a 
circuit is protection.









-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 2:26 PM
To: NANOG
Subject: Creating a Circuit ID Format

We are building a new fiber network, and need help creating a circuit ID format 
to for new fiber circuits. Is there a guide or standard for fiber circuit 
formats? Does the circuit ID change when say a customer upgrades for 100Mbps to 
1Gbps port?

What do the larger carriers do? Any advice on creating a circuit ID format for 
a brand new fiber network?


 Originally we ran a CLEC using a LECs copper, and our circuit ID was 
historically a telephone number for DSL circuits. The ILEC had a complex method 
for assigning circuit IDs.

I am sure anything will work as long as you keep track of it, but any advice 
would be great!

RE: Transparent Waves

[Jameson, Daniel]

They're probably looking for a G.709 spec service.  You still need to know 
something about their traffic,  is it analog RFOG,  or something already framed 
like SONET or 1/10/100G.  If they can hand you a connection with G.709 styled 
framing  most modern transport gear can ship it end-to-end,  even over ROADM.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.709
https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.709-201611-I!Amd1/en
https://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e=T-REC-G.709-201611-I!Amd1!PDF-E=items





-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Bryan Holloway
Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2017 9:22 AM
To: Rod Beck; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Transparent Waves

Are you referring to GFP?

I think G.7041 is what you want. The "transparent" flavor.

https://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e=T-REC-G.7041-201608-I!!PDF-E=items


On 8/4/17 12:34 PM, Rod Beck wrote:
> Can someone refer me to the ITU SPEC on transparent 10 gig wave service. I 
> have a client is looking to lease two 10 gig waves but they do not want an 
> Ethernet format. Just transparent. I want to make sure the carrier gets it 
> right when they configure the service.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Roderick.
> 
> 
> Roderick Beck
> 
> Director of Global Sales
> 
> United Cable Company
> 
> DRG Undersea Consulting
> 
> Affiliate Member
> 
> www.unitedcablecompany.com
> 
> 85 Király utca, 1077 Budapest
> 
> rod.b...@unitedcablecompany.com
> 
> 36-30-859-5144
> 
> 
> [1467221477350_image005.png]
> 

RE: BRAS/BNG Suggestion

[Jameson, Daniel]

The Nokia is the rebranded Alcatel 7750.  The syntax is funky, but it's a great 
bras.


From: NANOG on behalf of Tony Wicks
Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2016 2:17:20 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: BRAS/BNG Suggestion

I was told by some high up people in Ericsson several years ago that their
target for the Redback range is the top dozen telco's and they are not
really interested in smaller customers. It's a shame, because the Redback in
many ways is still superior to other offerings IMHO. To the OP's question -

1. The Nokia 7750 is a good option, but you would likely need the larger
7750-SR or 7750-e over the 7750-a series as the "a" does not have the MS-ISA
card option that allows access to several key BNG functions. Likely outside
of budget once spares etc are taken into account

2. Cisco ASR1K, likely this will do what you need, the advantage if the 1K
range is it's just a big CPU based box, so you don't need add on cards to do
anything fancy. There is also affordable support and an active grey market
option available (2x asr1006-esp40).

3. A virtual offering from Juniper (VMX) or Cisco might work for you.
Nokia's offering is a bit too new.


I would choose option 2 with option 3 as a backup if you want to get things
going quickly. Unless money is not an option then option 1 (2x 7750-sr7 or
7750-e2).



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Cole
Sent: Sunday, 4 December 2016 1:20 AM
To: t...@pelican.org
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: BRAS/BNG Suggestion

2nded, I tried for months to get Ericsson to get us a quote and sort us out
with a solution as I'd used their kit and liked it in the past.

Exactly as Tim said, they just didn't seem interested if you're not after a
big $$ solution.

We went with ASR1k as cisco came to the party on price and we were already
using 7200 at the time.  No complaints.

Patrick

Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 10:37:29AM -, t...@pelican.org wrote:

RE: Optical transceiver question

[Jameson, Daniel]

There are a bunch of variables that impact actual power needed vs. road-miles, 
number of cross-connects,  type of fiber, amount of slack,  type of connectors, 
 frequency,  dispersion, etc.  The km notation simplifies the naming 
convention.  As a general rule 40Km budget 20db,  60km budget 24db,  and 80km 
budget 28db.  Best practice is design and deploy to stay a minimum of 4db above 
the Minimum Input Sensitivity,  and 4db below the Max Receive Level to account 
for the change as the optic and glass as it ages.  If you are engineering a 
60km fiber length,  you'd step up to the next higher optic to account for other 
losses.  60KM is just a rough number.

There  is another value to worry about as well.  It's the De-Assert Level;  an 
optic will run all the way down to its minimum input sensitivity,  sometimes a 
couple db below.  But once it hit's the De-assert level,  the optic will stop 
forwarding what it receives.  So there is a little more fudge in the numbers if 
you're not playing by the rules.


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Robert Jacobs
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 3:33 PM
To: Eric Kuhnke; nanog@nanog.org list
Subject: RE: Optical transceiver question

Not buying fresh veggies here... All optics have about a 5 db range that the 
vendor will say it is good.  The better venders stamp the output power on the 
optics but not all do this... What he said is to achieve the 60 Km selling 
point you would have to have all the optic be on the high side of the db TX 
power... I have never heard of a 60 Km rated optics and it would seem they 
should be saying 40 to 60 not just 60.  It would be nice to say I only want the 
optics that have an output on the high side and will accept only a 1 db 
variance but have never seen that in reality.  Most are in the middle..

Robert Jacobs | Network Director/Architect 

Direct:  832-615-7742
Main:   832-615-8000
Fax:    713-510-1650

5959 Corporate Dr. Suite 3300; Houston, TX 77036



A Certified Woman-Owned Business 

24x7x365 Customer  Support: 832-615-8000 | supp...@pslightwave.com This 
electronic message contains information from Phonoscope Lightwave which may be 
privileged and confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of 
individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is 
prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please 
notify me by telephone or e-mail immediately.



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke
Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 3:51 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org list 
Subject: Re: Optical transceiver question

What you're saying is if you purchase ten identical optics with the same SKU, 
and put them on a few hundred meters of coiled SC/UPC to SC/UPC simplex fiber 
and an optical power meter on the other end, they're showing varying real world 
Tx powers from between +0 to +5dBm?

That's not right at all, they're supposed to be sorted at the factory by their 
actual optical power output before they have labels put on them.

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 1:23 PM, Frank Bulk  wrote:

> We recently purchased some generic optics from a reputable reseller 
> that were marketed to reach 60 km.
>
> But what we found, based on the spec sheets, is that it could only 
> reach that distance if the optics were transmitting on the high side 
> of the transmit power range.
>
> For example, if the TX range was 0 to +5 dBm and minimum RX power was
> -20 dB, the designed optical budget should be no more than 20 dB (0 - -20).
> Based on the wavelength the appropriate loss would be 0.4 dB/km and 
> results in only 50 km, not 60 km.  To get 60 km it would need 24 dB of 
> link margin, and that would only be attainable if it was transmitting 
> on the high side, at +4 dBm.
>
> Is it an industry practice to market distance based on the hot optics, 
> not on the worst case, which is minimum TX power?
>
> Frank
>
>

RE: Best practices for telcoflex -48VDC cabling & other power OSI layer 1

[Jameson, Daniel]

ATT TP76300, section 4 goes over installation best practices,  although it 
doesn't cover Engineering guidelines.  It's adapted from the Telcordia  GR - 
1275 standard,  little easier to read.  Is there a specific question you're 
looking to answer?

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Naslund, Steve
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 10:18 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Best practices for telcoflex -48VDC cabling & other power OSI 
layer 1

Not sure where to find it exactly but the Bellcore power wiring standard is 
what is used for central office installations.  I think if you google Bellcore 
standard you will find what you are looking for.

Steven Naslund
Chicago IL

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Eric Kuhnke
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 11:12 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Best practices for telcoflex -48VDC cabling & other power OSI layer 1

Hey all,


I'm looking for a document or set of photos/presentation on best practices for 
telcoflex/-48VDC power cabling installation. Labeling, routing, organization 
and termination, etc. Or a recommendation on a printed book that covers this 
topic.

Not necessarily fully oldschool "we're going to teach all the technicians how 
to do the kansas city stitch" stuff, but the sort of thing that's applicable in 
a modern colo/IP network environment.

RE: Cost-effectivenesss of highly-accurate clocks for NTP

[Jameson, Daniel]

Give this guy a look,  1RMU form factor, GPS with Rubidium holdover (7 days) if 
you need it very inexpensive,  
http://www.fibrolan.com/FibroLAN/SendFile.asp?DBID=1=1=3979
or
http://www.fibrolan.com/FibroLAN/SendFile.asp?DBID=1=1=3978  if you 
have a SYC-E source
or  If you just need highly accurate NTP without the holdover,  you can do it 
with FBSD,  and a GPS device.
http://www.satsignal.eu/ntp/FreeBSD-GPS-PPS.htm
http://www.brandywinecomm.com/46-products/bus-level-plug-in-boards/212-pcie-1588-universal-timing-card



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Mel Beckman
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2016 11:27 AM
To: Lamar Owen
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Cost-effectivenesss of highly-accurate clocks for NTP

Lamar,

Although VoIP has different technical challenges than TDM, they are all 
surmountable. Usually VoIP problems result from poor network design (e.g., 
mixed traffic with no QoS, Internet transport with no guarantees, etc). Public 
safety networks are generally well designed, don’t use the Internet, and 
support a single type of traffic: audio streams. I’ve done demonstrations of 
VoIP that works well in this environment, and you get the advantages of IP 
routing for redundancy, as opposed to clunky T1 failover mechanisms usually 
based on hardware switches.

But public safety customers are not swayed. TDM works, and it’s the gold 
standard. They don’t want to change, and you can’t make them. They only see 
risk, no reward. BTW, in the TDM model, remote data and audio are usually two 
different systems, which is probably a good idea for redundancy: you might lose 
audio or data, but rarely both.

In any event, I’m only proposing that public safety upgrade their audio systems 
to VoIP (or cellular-style private GSM, which is in essence VoIP). But nobody 
is willing.

 -mel

> On May 16, 2016, at 9:02 AM, Lamar Owen  wrote:
> 
> On 05/15/2016 01:05 PM, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>> I'm not used to thinking of IT as a relatively low-challenge environment! 
> 
> I actually changed careers from broadcast engineering to IT to lower my 
> stress level and 'personal bandwidth challenge.'  And, yes, it worked.  In my 
> case, I'm doing IT for radio and optical astronomy, and at least the timing 
> aspect is higher-challenge that most IT environments.
> 
>> You're implicitly suggesting there might be a technical case for replacing 
>> these T1/T3 trunks with some kind of VOIP provisioning less dependent on 
>> accurate time synch. Do you think that's true? 
> 
> While I know the question was directed at Mel specifically, I'll just say 
> from the point of view of a T1 voice trunk customer that I hope to never see 
> it go to a VoIP solution.  VoIP codecs can have some serious latency issues; 
> I already notice the round-trip delay if I try to carry on a conversation 
> between our internal VoIP system and someone on a cell phone.  And this is 
> before codec artifacting (and cascaded codec scrambling) is counted.  Can we 
> please keep straight μ-law (A-law if relevant) lossless DS0 PCM timeslices 
> for trunklines so we get at least one less lossy codec cascade?  Or have you 
> never experimented with what happens when you cascade G.722 with G.729 with 
> G.726 and then G.711 and back?  Calls become mangled gibberish.
> 
> I would find it interesting to see how many carriers are still doing large 
> amounts of SONET, as that is the biggest use-case for high-stability timing.
> 

RE: Patch panel solutions for 4x10GE breakout

[Jameson, Daniel]

Might be worth having a look at the Corning centrix modules.  Very high 
densities. 72 terminations  per u. Front side mpo/mtp connections.  Have some 
great slack storage and management options.


From: NANOG on behalf of Phil Bedard
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2016 9:28:55 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Patch panel solutions for 4x10GE breakout

So the newer equipment we are looking at uses QSFP+/MTP with 4x10GE breakouts 
to deliver 10G.  We are not wiring these up to things in the same rack, they 
will be going to patch panels and then elsewhere in a facility.  It could 
potentially get messy with the panels we have today so we are looking at other 
solutions.  These are all SM LR connections using LC.  There are a lot of SM 
MTP to LC options since that’s the way most panels are wired, but they 
typically have 6 duplex LC connectors per MTP and not 4 which isn’t very 
efficient in this use case.  I’ve seen others just use an intermediate LC to LC 
panel and just wire the breakouts to those and then jumper the other side 
elsewhere.

Anything else others have used?  The point of the solution is to keep the 
wiring mess in front of or near the device to a minimum.

Thanks,

Phil

RE: APC vs UPC?

[Jameson, Daniel]

Most SFP/XFP have upc connectors until you get above 5(ish) db of power,  then 
you'll start to see APC and/or E2000 connections.   You'll end up using a  
hybrid jumper (APC one end,  UPS on the other).  If you're looking for quality 
jumpers look at Clearfield or Corning. ADC makes tracelite jumpers that 
illuminate if that's part of your  need. You should only see a .1-.2 db 
increase in loss for an APC connecter vs a UPC connector.



-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Lorell Hathcock
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 7:12 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: APC vs UPC?

NANOGians:

APC wins!

My real question is surrounding the connection on the SFPs themselves. 

In general terms are the LC connectors on SFPs considered UPC or APC?

If the answer is UPC and if I am inheriting and/or building a network of single 
mode fiber with APC SC connectors, then is the best practice to use LC UPC to 
SC APC fiber jumpers?

If so, can anyone point me to a source for said jumpers that is (1) quick and 
(2) good?

Any thoughts on the same idea of mismatched fiber jumpers connector types to 
use on OLMs and OLSs?  OTDRs?  The concern here is to use the best possible 
fiber connector types (e.g. APC or UPC) when connecting lasers to my OSP fiber 
which uses APC with consideration to the optimal connector type for the laser 
transceiver. 

My thoughts are to use fiber jumpers with UPC connectors on the laser side with 
APC on and throughout the OSP, but if it should be purely APC everywhere, then 
that is what I need to know. 

Thanks!

Lorell Hathcock

RE: IGP choice

[Jameson, Daniel]

A lot of  carriers use ISIS in the core so they can make use of the' overload 
bit' with a  'set-overload-bit on-startup wait-for-bgp".  Keeps them from black 
holing Traffic while BGP reconverges.,  when you have millions of routes to 
converge it can take forever.  It's also a really handy tool when you're 
troubleshooting or repairing a link,  set the OL bit,  and traffic gracefully 
moves,  then when you're done it gracefully moves back.  You can do the same 
thing with the Metric,  and Cost in OSPF,  just not quite  as elegant.

Largely I think it's preference,  ISIS and OSPF tackle most of the same stuff 
just in different ways.

-D

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Petach
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2015 11:31 AM
To: marcel.durega...@yahoo.fr
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: IGP choice

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 1:41 AM, marcel.durega...@yahoo.fr 
 wrote:
> sorry for that, but the only one I've heard about switching his core 
> IGP is Yahoo. I've no precision, and it's really interest me.
> I know that there had OSPF in the DC area, and ISIS in the core, and 
> decide to switch the core from ISIS to OSPF.

Wait, what?
*checks memory*
*checks routers*

Nope.  Definitely went the other way; OSPF -> IS-IS in the core.

> Why spend so much time/risk to switch from ISIS to OSPF, _in the core_ 
> a not so minor impact/task ?
> So I could guess it's for maintain only one IGP and have standardized 
> config. But why OSPF against ISIS ? What could be the drivers? People 
> skills (more people know OSPF than ISIS) --> operational reason ?

I'm sorry you received the wrong information, the migration was from OSPF to 
IS-IS, not the other way around.

Thanks!

Matt

RE: sfp "computer"?

[Jameson, Daniel]

Mk802 might get you close.  Sub $50 plus a couple adapters.


From: NANOG on behalf of Baldur Norddahl
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 9:24:21 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: sfp "computer"?

Hi

Does anyone make a SFP with a system on chip "computer" that you can run a
small embedded linux on?

I am sure it can be done because I have a "GPON stick" which is basically a
ONU with a small embedded Linux all on a SFP module. Does get fairly hot
however.

My application is to run some small things that I feel is missing in my
switches/routers. Plug in this imaginary "SFP computer" to enhance the
switch with a small Linux. The SFP slot provides both networking and power
to the device.

Regards,

Baldur

RE: wanted: tool for traffic generation / characteristics / monitoring

[Jameson, Daniel]

How much traffic, and what data-points are you looking to describe? Is the 
environment a controlled/sealed lab world (No access to the InterWebs)

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Matthias Flittner
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 11:21 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: wanted: tool for traffic generation / characteristics / monitoring

Dear colleagues,

Currently we are looking for a magic tool with which it is possible to generate 
specific (realistic) traffic patterns between client and server to analyze 
(monitor) traffic characteristics (jitter, delay, inter arrival times, etc.).

It would be good if that wanted tool is not only able to generate different 
traffic patterns but also is able to collect different traffic metrics over 
time. So that it is possible to create catchy plots. :)

Any hints or links would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
-FliTTi

RE: SNMP - monitoring large number of devices

[Jameson, Daniel]

@op,

Can you expand a little on the end goal, health,  noise mitigation,  nms 
replacement,  modem validation?


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Blake Hudson
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 4:44 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: SNMP - monitoring large number of devices

I'm able to poll a few thousand CMs in a few seconds using perl's Net::SNMP and 
async calls. 50k seems pretty doable.

--Blake

Pavel Dimow wrote on 9/29/2015 3:20 PM:
> Hi all,
>
> recently I have been tasked with a NMS project. The idea is to pool 
> about
> 20 OID's from 50k cable modems in less then 5 minutes (yes, I know 
> it's a one million OID's). Before you say check out some very 
> professional and expensive solutions I would like to know are there 
> any alternatives like open source "snmp framework"? To be more 
> descriptive many of you knows how big is the mess with snmp on cable 
> modem. You always first perform snmp walk in order to discover 
> interfaces and then read the values for those interfaces. As cable 
> modem can bundle more DS channels, one time you can have one and other 
> time you can have N+1 DS channels = interfaces. All in all I don't 
> believe that there is something perfect out there when it comes to 
> tracking huge number of cable modems so I would like to know is there 
> any "snmp framework" that can be exteded and how did you (or would you) solve 
> this problem.
>
> Thank you.

RE: SNMP - monitoring large number of devices

[Jameson, Daniel]

Zabbix is probably one of the more robust snmp platform,  it's database backed 
by either postgres,  mysql or oracle and scales pretty big.   If this is more 
than a one-time event, you'll need some real horsepower and HDD space to keep 
all that data.  It might be worth writing a custom ruby/python/perl application 
on a platform that allows a clean fork just prior to the SNMP call  it'll allow 
you to remain in the wait-state for that one snmp thread without blocking the 
next request, and let you manage the workload of the server by controlling the 
number of simultaneous forks.

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+daniel.jameson=tdstelecom@nanog.org] On 
Behalf Of Pavel Dimow
Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2015 3:20 PM
To: NANOG
Subject: SNMP - monitoring large number of devices

Hi all,

recently I have been tasked with a NMS project. The idea is to pool about
20 OID's from 50k cable modems in less then 5 minutes (yes, I know it's a one 
million OID's). Before you say check out some very professional and expensive 
solutions I would like to know are there any alternatives like open source 
"snmp framework"? To be more descriptive many of you knows how big is the mess 
with snmp on cable modem. You always first perform snmp walk in order to 
discover interfaces and then read the values for those interfaces. As cable 
modem can bundle more DS channels, one time you can have one and other time you 
can have N+1 DS channels = interfaces. All in all I don't believe that there is 
something perfect out there when it comes to tracking huge number of cable 
modems so I would like to know is there any "snmp framework" that can be 
exteded and how did you (or would you) solve this problem.

Thank you.

RE: Ear protection

[Jameson, Daniel]

I use these 
http://www.amazon.com/V-MODA-Faders-Tuned-Earplugs-Electro/dp/B007RRTO2Y/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8=1443014097=8-9=er+20+ear+plugs
 in the equipment room, You can still hear,  just brings the level down to a 
manageable level. Looks like a pair of headphones.

RE: SAS Drive Enclosure

[Jameson, Daniel]

What are you thinking for connectivity,  Ethernet,  FiberChannel, Infiniband 
...  Building *Storage Nodes* or in need of just drive connectivity?


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Ray Van Dolson
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 2:53 PM
To: Graham Johnston
Cc: 'nanog@nanog.org'
Subject: Re: SAS Drive Enclosure

On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 07:19:59PM +, Graham Johnston wrote:
 I am looking for information about SAS drive enclosures, is there a 
 list like NANOG that covers that area of IT?
 
 I am specifically looking for an enclosure that can handle 12 or more 
 drives, I am looking to create a clustered file system between 
 multiple servers and would like to avoid a drive enclosure that only 
 works with a very small number of approved drives.  I am looking to 
 support traditional HDDs as well as SSDs.

There were discussions at some point about setting up a storage-centric list 
via SNIA or something else fairly 'neutral'.  Never really materialized, 
however.

Lists like lopsa-tech and the LISA/USENIX SAGE list are general enough you 
might get some good responses.

WRT your question, we've had good luck with the Dell MD1200 line of JBODs.

Ray

RE: Low Cost 10G Router

[Jameson, Daniel]

The running estimate is about 3 cores per 10GIf to maintain Line-Rate 
forwarding.  The Enterprise version of Vyatte runs around 1.5-2 cores per 10Gif 
(Depends on how the forwarding plane is treating traffic,  if you're remarking 
or heavy firewall rules the interrupt forwarding cost starts to impede.

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Max Tulyev
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 1:24 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Low Cost 10G Router

Last config I touched: 2xIntel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2650 0 @ 2.00GHz, 12 Gbit 
summary, 5% each core load.

On 19.05.15 21:06, Piotr Iwanejko wrote:
 Wiadomość napisana przez Max Tulyev max...@netassist.ua w dniu 19 maj 2015, 
 o godz. 19:58:
 We are using softrouters based on Supermicro chassis, E5v3 cpu, 
 Linux/BIRD and Intel 10G NICs. And VERY happy.
 
 Out of curiosity, how much traffic you pass over those softrouters?
 
 Piotr
 

RE: Low Cost 10G Router

[Jameson, Daniel]

What's the application, and what traffic levels do you anticipate.  Any special 
features like MPLS or MPLS-TE?

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Colton Conor
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 12:23 PM
To: NANOG
Subject: Low Cost 10G Router

What options are available for a small, low cost router that has at least four 
10G ports, and can handle full BGP routes? All that I know of are the Juniper 
MX80, and the Brocade CER line. What does Cisco and others have that compete 
with these two? Any other vendors besides Juniper, Brocade, and Cisco to look 
at?

RE: DWDM and EDFA and DCM

[Jameson, Daniel]

Rule of thumb is you need Dispersion compensation for any single  span over 
60Km.  10G/STM64 has a CD Tolerance of 1176 ps/nm, 40G/STM256 has a CD 
tolerance of 73.5ps/nm  but you don't want your dispersion number to ever go 
negative.  If  it's a single-span only  rule of thumb is use the next size 
smaller than the measured fiber distance  maintaining at least 10km on the 
bottom end,  65km would use a 40km dcm  70km  would use a 60km dcm.  As long as 
each site does OEO you can do Dispersion hop-by-hop,  if any node on the ring 
pass a channel through,  or is only optically amplified,  you need to calculate 
DC along the entire path,  ensuring that the DC number never goes negative. 

DC should be inserted between the egress of the combining mux and the post-amp 
to maximize your launch power.  Try to stay away from channel-by-channel DCM, 
it gets really messy as the system grows.  And remember always 
clean-scope-clean!


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Brandon Martin
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 2:36 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: DWDM and EDFA and DCM

On 04/23/2015 12:01 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:

 If you use 80km SFP+ then they should be able to handle the CD 
 (chromatic dispersion) of your 68km fiber stretch, and if you have a 
 power problem, then you can solve that by adding EDFA mid-span.

 CD causes noise (OSNR) to the receiver, it doesn't cause your power 
 levels to be low. So if you want to solve your power problem, add EDFA 
 mid-span. If you want to be able to use 40km optics (they might be 
 cheaper), add DCM as well if the manufacturer rates them as not being 
 able to electronically compensate for dispersion more than 40km.


Should you find yourself on the edge (or unknowing) of the dispersion tolerance 
of the 80km modules you would like to use, 120km-tolerant modules are also 
somewhat readily available these days, including from fiberstore.  They don't 
have the power to shoot 120km without external (generally mid-span) 
amplification, but they will tolerate the accumulation of ~120km worth of 
chromatic dispersion.  Thus, you can do 120km of fiber (typ.) with EDFAs in the 
span for power budget reasons but without an accompanying DCM at each hop.  
Since the commodity DCMs cost almost as much as commodity mid-power EDFAs, 
these days, that could be a significant cost savings.

As always when buying whitebox/commodity networking goods, careful review of 
the specifications and testing in your proposed application is in order.
--
Brandon Martin

RE: rack cable length

[Jameson, Daniel]

Cables should be within 2 feet of the total distance,  if you order a stack 
several sizes too long then add something like above/below the switch:
http://www.chatsworth.com/products/cable-management/horizontal-cable-management/
Slack should never be stored in the vertical,  only in the horizontal.


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of shawn wilson
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 1:44 PM
To: North American Network Operators Group
Subject: rack cable length

This is probably a stupid question, but

We've got a few racks in a colo. The racks don't have any decent cable 
management (square metal holes to attach velcro to). We either order cable too 
long and end up with lots of loops which get in the way (no place to loop lots 
of excess really) or too short to run along the side (which is worse). It 
appears others using the same racks have figured this out, but...

Do y'all just order 10 of each size per rack in every color you need or is 
there a better way to figure this out? I'm guessing something like 24 inches + 
1.75 inchex x Us) + 24 inches and round up to standard length...?

RE: MultiMode Fiber Connectivity... (850nm) Power Question

[Jameson, Daniel]

Usually on Multi-mode and Low-power single-mode optics the 
MaxOutputOpticalPower is less than or equal to the  MaxInputOpticalPower, so 
it's not necessary to attenuate.  The trade-off is optimized optics versus 
having an attenuator sticking out the front of the electronics.

Something along the lines of -9.5 to -4 transmit power and  -18 to 0 on the 
Receive power.  Multi-Mode optics tend to be more application specific than 
single-mode  A good rule of thumb is keep a minimum of 4dB off the bottom plus 
20% of the optical budget,  discounting any specific application the above 
optic would be optimal around -10dB.

Daniel Jameson
Manager - IP Network Engineering
TDS Telecom


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz
Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 2:48 PM
To: NANOG
Subject: MultiMode Fiber Connectivity... (850nm) Power Question

Hello,

I was looking for feedback on the following question:-

When connecting two MM SFP/SFP+/XFP 's together...(short range).

What should be the best practice receive power range ?

Is it true that if the rx power is higher than (x?) then it shortens the life 
of the optics ? 
(assumption being made here is that MAX Rx Power is not being exceed as per the 
spec sheets of the optics)

Regards

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet  Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net