thanks for that… their name sounded familiar and now I know where from – AMS-IX peering exchange…
Thanks, Paul From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Roger Timmerman Sent: August 15, 2016 12:07 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DWDM Gear We have been using new and old DWDM gear from Adva Optical Networking on a span from Tremonton to St. George (~400 miles) in Utah with lots of add/drops along the way and several ROADMs. We're upgrading to their newer stuff (100G waves), but a lot of the older stuff (40x 10G) we have in place has been running for 5+ years without any reboot or problems. They are very cost-competitive but also a rock-solid platform. They get my recommendation for an active system. Roger On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Paul Stewart <p...@paulstewart.org <mailto:p...@paulstewart.org> > wrote: Cool .. very cool .. Thanks Faisal for your help as always .. Josh for your comments... appreciate it... Paul -----Original Message----- From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com> ] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds Sent: August 14, 2016 3:02 PM To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DWDM Gear The fiberstore CWDM stuff is stupid cheap and just works. It's passive after all. I haven't used any of their DWDM equipment. On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <fai...@snappytelecom.net <mailto:fai...@snappytelecom.net> > wrote: > There are some excellent tutorials on this topic. > > Fiberstore has a very nice collection of them... > > http://www.fs.com/wdm-networking-cid-9.html > > Start with the tutorial on basics first and then build on it with others. > > http://www.fs.com/do-you-know-all-these-terminologies-of-wdm-technolog > y-aid-474.html > > > Here is another nice set of tutorials, clearly written.. > http://www.fiber-optic-tutorial.com/category/network-solutions/wdm-opt > ical-network/cwdm-dwdm-mux-demux > > ** The only difference conversationally between an "Active" vs "Passive" > CWDM/DWDM gear is as to who is doing the 'Standard Color' to "CWDM/DWDM" > optical conversions. > This is what consumes/requires external power. (aka, media converter > packaging) > > if you take a media converter and a passive mux/demux put it into one > box, that now becomes an active solution if you take the media converter out, > as a separate box, then the mux/demux is considered to be a passive solution. > > If the gear on both sides is under your control, then you can skip the > media converters and just put in the matching colored optics in your gear on > both sides Otherwise you deploy a media converter to convert between the > colored optics to standard optics... both in context of Ethernet as well as > TDM). > > In regards to distance and ring topology......there is no issue, just how you > design the fiber path... aka fiber light link budget and optic's receive > sensitivity.. just like RSSI on a Fixed Wireless link.. There are standard > figures you can use for link loss, each panel appox 1 to 1.5db, (e.g. if the > TX is 1-4dbm, and Rx sensitivity is 15dbm, you have approx 12-15db margin... > using two muxes each with a 4.5db insertion loss, gives you 3-5db for other > losses......but if your mux has an insertion loss of 6db then you will need > to look at longer range optics, (higher tx power and higher rx sensitivity, > resulting in more expensive optics). > > >>Any particular vendors of the passive MUX, colored optics etc that you prefer >>and have worked well? > I have been happy and comfortable in working with the FiberStore > (fs.com <http://fs.com> ) There are other vendors which others have worked > with. > > To me, after everything has clicked together in my understanding.... I now > look at a passive mux in the same manner I would look at a Spool of Ethernet > cable.. > i.e. look at the specs, and the product, the cost, the name of the mfg. makes > little difference other then consistency in delivery and standing behind the > delivered product for the first 30/60 days. > >> It sounds like the costs are mainly the electronics to take the >> colored paths and "convert" them back to normal wavelength if I'm not >> missing something... > > Yep, bingo you are starting to understand it... > > > And most important, don't forget to buy a Light Meter, it does not have to be > anything fancy even a cheap one ($50) is good enough for deployment purposes, > since you can get relative information from it. > > Regards. > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232> > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <tel:%28305%29663-5518> Option 2 or Email: > supp...@snappytelecom.net <mailto:supp...@snappytelecom.net> > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Paul Stewart" <p...@paulstewart.org <mailto:p...@paulstewart.org> > >> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >> Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 2:07:01 PM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DWDM Gear > >> Thanks very much - much appreciate this ... >> >> Optical stuff has always been a "weak area" for me ... worked around >> them for years but 'spoiled' that we added X, Y, and Z per vendor >> recommendations along with a web interface and things just worked ;) >> >> My comments re: colored optics though were very specific to what I >> consider an "active" solution. A solution where we wouldn't have to >> put the colored optics specifically into switches on each side for >> example - realizing that the optics in the "solution" do the actual >> work .. I'm seen some passive systems where you have to put colored >> optics into your network gear for example. Those systems were pretty >> cool though in the sense where you didn't have to power them at all >> - but that's not what we want to accomplish here .. a number of these >> fibers we don't "own" both ends for example. Using an 'active' >> solution we can jump into the middle of the fiber no problem but for >> handoff to the network itself we need "standard" optics in place. >> >> For distance, this two locations with two paths so a ring topology >> .... one path is 1.1KM and the other path is approximately 3.2KM in >> length (geographic diversity between locations, separate cable >> entranceways, separate risers etc) so nice short run. Today we are >> just using 10KM single mode optics but burning fibers at a rapid rate .... >> >> Any particular vendors of the passive MUX, colored optics etc that >> you prefer and have worked well? It sounds like the costs are mainly >> the electronics to take the colored paths and "convert" them back to >> normal wavelength if I'm not missing something... >> >> Again - thanks ... appreciate this and really like the "build your >> own" approach ... with savings expected it makes it easier to look at >> sparing etc too >> >> Paul >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com> ] On >> Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz >> Sent: August 14, 2016 1:04 PM >> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DWDM Gear >> >> I just want to drill down, for the sake of an in-depth conversation, >> not just for you but for others who are lurking as well... >> >> see my answers inline below:- >> >> Faisal Imtiaz >> Snappy Internet & Telecom >> 7266 SW 48 Street >> Miami, FL 33155 >> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232> >> >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <tel:%28305%29663-5518> Option 2 or Email: >> supp...@snappytelecom.net <mailto:supp...@snappytelecom.net> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Paul Stewart" <p...@paulstewart.org <mailto:p...@paulstewart.org> > >>> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >>> Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 12:32:57 PM >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DWDM Gear >> >>> Thanks for that.... >>> >>> We want something managed and can be monitored ... >> >> There is no difference, or anything lost, in this arena, between an >> 'Active Solution' vs a "designed/yourself passive" solution. >> >>> modular in nature if possible. >> >> There is no "Canned solution" that can beat the a 'designed passive >> solution' in this area. >> >> >>> Thinking active as the "endpoints" (routers and/or switches) we do >>> not want to utilize colored optics nor can we support it in some >>> situations ... >>> so MUX for sure. >>> >> >> I think you are mis-understand how this actually works/gets implemented... >> All CWDM/DWDM solutions have a passive fiber Mux/Demux in the box, >> the only difference is what you see (out side the box) as optic options. >> >> e.g. each side just looks like this...... (passive mux/demux)---> >> {(Colored optics <--> SMF Optics)in a managed Media Converter} >> (One can use a managed modular media converter or a managed switch for >> this). >> >>> While we operate a WISP, this is part of our core network in one >>> city between two data centers so we want high quality >> >> There is nothing 'lost' or 'gained' in this area, only the perception >> of what is under the hood. >> >>> with a lower than we're used to price tag :) We would start with >>> 40x10G likely and see how it goes >> >> Be prepaid for some serious pain to the wallet for lots of marketing >> BS to justify that from those selling canned solutions. >> Also pay attention to the Cost and power range of the required >> optics, (do you power budget calcs due to insertion loss) >> >> My suggestion would be as follows:- >> For a moment, forget about which solution you are going to buy, take >> a bit of time to 'engineer' a passive solution, and just pencil in >> the figures, for all the components... >> >> Use this as a baseline to value the solution you are actually looking >> to buy, or negotiate for... >> >> (when I do such an exercise, 40c DWDM mux/demux units are running >> less than $2k each, low insertion loss units(3-4.5db), 100mhz >> channels, Colored optics (15db >> margin) are under $300 each. You can add 10g SFP+/SFP+ media >> converter for each side ($900each) or you can add your favorite brand >> of 10g 48 port switches to each side ...(running anything between $1000 to >> $1500 on the 2ndary markets). >> >> This would help in establish the value proposition and make you >> comfortable with what you end up going with. >> >> >>> >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com> ] On >>> Behalf Of Faisal Imtiaz >>> Sent: August 14, 2016 11:16 AM >>> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DWDM Gear >>> >>> Technically speaking, there is no magic to CWDM or DWDM solution.... >>> You can go with a 'canned' solution from folks such as >>> Ciena/Cisco/etc etc etc or you can create your own with the required >>> pieces, in the simplest form all one needs is couple of passive >>> Mux/Demux units, colored optics and a Switch/Media Converters (ones >>> that you can read the light levels from). >>> >>> Depending on length of the fiber, you may or may not need anything >>> more (such as regen units, amps etc). If you are going to design a >>> solution using passive Mux/Demux do pay attention to the insertion >>> loss figures on the different products. >>> >>> In my opinion, doing a CWDM/DWDM design calculations for a WiSP >>> should be fairly easy to understand. >>> >>> The benefit in designing your own solution, you gain a much better >>> understanding on what you can do and what you cannot do... (e.g. do >>> you know that you can potentially stack a DWDM solution right behind >>> a CWDM passive mux ? .... and you will end up with a much more >>> flexible solution, at a fraction of the cost of a comparable canned >>> solution. >>> >>> We did a CWDM (8ch) passive solution, along with colored optics, 10g >>> Switches between 4 different Data Center, for under $12k a couple of years >>> back. >>> They way we optimized our design for initial cost, while maintaining >>> the ability to expand my adding another CWDM or DWDM mux in the future. >>> >>> (We went with gear from Fiberstore, we did consult them with our >>> solution, and they offered us Mux/DeMux units with even lower >>> insertion loss that those listed on their website for a slight >>> premium, which in our case was well worth >>> it) >>> >>> >>> Faisal Imtiaz >>> Snappy Internet & Telecom >>> 7266 SW 48 Street >>> Miami, FL 33155 >>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 <tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232> >>> >>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <tel:%28305%29663-5518> Option 2 or Email: >>> supp...@snappytelecom.net <mailto:supp...@snappytelecom.net> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Justin Wilson" <li...@mtin.net <mailto:li...@mtin.net> > >>>> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> >>>> Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 10:52:02 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DWDM Gear >>> >>>> Are you looking for active or passive? >>>> >>>> We just replaced a failing Ciena Mux with an 18 channel passive mux >>>> for a data center client. Ours was CWDM, but they make a DWDM >>>> version. Total cost was under 5 grand, including spares. Ciena >>>> wanted 24k to update the service contract, update software, and >>>> troubleshoot an alarm state. >>>> >>>> Justin Wilson >>>> j...@mtin.net <mailto:j...@mtin.net> >>>> >>>> --- >>>> http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO >>>> xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth >>>> >>>> http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman Internet Exchange - Peering >>>> - Distributed Fabric >>>> >>>>> On Aug 14, 2016, at 10:41 AM, Chuck McCown <ch...@wbmfg.com >>>>> <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I have always used Cyan. >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Paul Stewart >>>>> Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2016 7:30 AM >>>>> To: Animal Farm >>>>> Subject: [AFMUG] DWDM Gear >>>>> >>>>> For those folks doing DWDM on fiber, whats your preferred equipment and >>>>> why? >>>>> >>>>> We currently use BTI equipment which works extremely well but it’s >>>>> priced in the same ballpark as Ciena, Nortel, Cisco etc … quite >>>>> expensive to deploy. Hoping to find something more economical but >>>>> just as reliable? By reliable I mean that it’s deployed for years >>>>> without having to do anything service impacting to it. For this >>>>> particular deployment I’m thinking of, ROADM isn’t important >>>>> neither. Prefer active solution vs passive. CWDM would even be ok at >>>>> this >>>>> point to consider … >>>>> >>>>> Basically looking at ways to cut down on 10G fibers between two >>>>> physical locations (the fiber is leased) >>>>> >>>>> thanks, >> > >> Paul
