> From a standards perspective keep in mind that > http://www.stupi.se/Standards/100G-long-haul4.pdf is not approved - > but we are working hard on it. OTOH having a reference > implementation at hand, is an accelerator that helps a lot.
There is a whole industry that do not want it to be plug and play... (The ones that do not make routers or switches..) > Let me also add some color to your email as the current > interoperability situation in WDM is quite funny. Sometimes > transceivers of the same vendor can't talk to each other, as they > are based on a different generation of ASICs and therefore FEC > implementations. In other words, vendors typically have more than > only one secret sauce they cook with, and different sauces do not > blend well :-) . Perhaps transport folks are already too used to > deal with such kind of issues that no one laments anymore. On the > other hand perhaps, the networking industry is already so used to > Ethernet where interopera bility is a no-brainer, that it is > difficult to imagine what it means to deal with a technology that > prevents multi-vendor interop. All vendors have secret souce for 100G SD-FEC, and just the fact that you can wire the wire the differential encoding eight ways.. That;s why we settled on a HD-FEC that can be inside the DSP-Asic or inline after it. All to us known DSP implementations supports this with more, less or no extra logic. And the logic is free and fully documented. > To confirm your final point: > Interoperability is on the top of the shopping lists for the > networking industry. Amen! -P