> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:cisco-nsp- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lincoln Dale > > Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > So if one wants to do ~20 km and LX doesn't work, one can usually do ZX > at > > only one end, as 1550nm light only has half the attenuation of 1310nm > > light, which means more of the light get to the receiver for it to be > > enough with the ~ -18dB sensitivty of LX, you don't really need the > ~24dB > > of ZX. The -24dB receiver on the ZX can be sensitive enough to receive > the > > LX on the other end correctly. > > > > are you operating any links like this in production today with real > traffic? A year ago we had to do similar setup on a 60km dark fibre span for a 7600 to a 12k. The 7600 was ok as ZX xenpak (it was a 67xx card) was available but the 12k did not have ZR XFP yet so we went with something like ZX xenpak <-> ER XFP, worked like a charm.
> i'd love to see what (if any) CRC/Framing errors you may be recording, > some people think that running equipment in this manner significantly > compromizes the bit-error-rate of the link. > i don't have evidence either way, but "show int x/y" counters would be a > great proof point of it not being an issue. It's history for now so I don't have anything handy. No increased BER though -- deejay _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
