Re: U.S. test of national alerts on Oct. 4 at 2:20pm EDT (1820 UTC)

[Fred Baker]

It’s been absurd for a while now…Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...On Oct 6, 2023, at 1:15 PM, Warren Kumari  wrote:On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 2:58 PM, Sean Donelan  wrote:
The Disability Advocacy Community has been extensively involved with 
CMAS/WEA since President Bush signed the WARN Act, passed by a republican 
house and republican senate, in 2006.

The dozens of disability groups helped design the sound and vibration 
cadence (which is different than EAS), and the policies for alerting.

Nation-wide testing (EAS) has been conducted since 2011.  And nation-wide 
testing (WEA) since 2014.  National tests were conducted almost every 
between 2011 and 2020, suspended during the pandemic.

The national tests are announced at least 60 days in advance by the FCC 
and FEMA. News media have multiple stories.  Most state and many local 
goverments also had notifications.

If you haven't been involved with the disability community for a decade, 
and your school office didn't notify special education teachers about the 
news releases and government advance notifications, perhaps that's room 
for improvement with local school communications.  Fire drills, tornado 
drills, etc. often involve loud sounds and flashing lights.Fine! In that case I *demand* that we stop having fires and tornados and similar. It's super-disruptive to have to go and hide in my basement *every single time* there is a tornado, or pull over every time a fire engine comes barreling down the road…. and those sirens!... and the flashy lights! Wake up people, fire truck and police sirens are *specifically designed* to disrupt! It's all part of their plan to, erm…. well, something something….Ok, now that we have reached the absurdum part of reductio ad absurdum can we get back to network engineering?W

Re: U.S. test of national alerts on Oct. 4 at 2:20pm EDT (1820 UTC)

[Warren Kumari]

On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 2:58 PM, Sean Donelan  wrote:

> The Disability Advocacy Community has been extensively involved with
> CMAS/WEA since President Bush signed the WARN Act, passed by a republican
> house and republican senate, in 2006.
>
> The dozens of disability groups helped design the sound and vibration
> cadence (which is different than EAS), and the policies for alerting.
>
> Nation-wide testing (EAS) has been conducted since 2011. And nation-wide
> testing (WEA) since 2014. National tests were conducted almost every
> between 2011 and 2020, suspended during the pandemic.
>
> The national tests are announced at least 60 days in advance by the FCC
> and FEMA. News media have multiple stories. Most state and many local
> goverments also had notifications.
>
> If you haven't been involved with the disability community for a decade,
> and your school office didn't notify special education teachers about the
> news releases and government advance notifications, perhaps that's room for
> improvement with local school communications. Fire drills, tornado drills,
> etc. often involve loud sounds and flashing lights.
>


Fine! In that case I *demand* that we stop having fires and tornados and
similar. It's super-disruptive to have to go and hide in my basement *every
single time* there is a tornado, or pull over every time a fire engine
comes barreling down the road…. and those sirens!... and the flashy lights!
Wake up people, fire truck and police sirens are *specifically designed* to
disrupt! It's all part of their plan to, erm…. well, something something….

Ok, now that we have reached the absurdum part of reductio ad absurdum can
we get back to network engineering?

W

RE: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Tim Burke]

I'll throw another in the hat for SmartOptics... great products and support. We 
have a good deal of their stuff for local regional deployments and it's super 
reliable, even at over 100km on a mediocre dark fiber span.

From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Joe Freeman
Sent: Friday, October 6, 2023 9:01 AM
To: Dave Bell ; Mark Tinka 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

I have several of the Smart Optics DCP-M40's in place. If you are using 
coherent 100G DWDM optics, you can push the M40-ZR's to 100-120km. The exact 
reach depends, of course, on the quality of the fiber plant in use.


From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+joe=netbyjoe@nanog.org>>
 on behalf of Dave Bell mailto:m...@geordish.org>>
Date: Friday, October 6, 2023 at 9:54 AM
To: Mark Tinka mailto:mark@tinka.africa>>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Subject: Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms
Smartoptics?

https://smartoptics.com/

Regards,
Dave

On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 14:43, Mark Tinka 
mailto:mark@tinka.africa>> wrote:


On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:

> I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple 
> different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of 
> platform.
>
> In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long distances 
> of glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60 miles.
>
> In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.
>
> What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30 
> terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to learn 
> more about what features I need and what features I don't need from somewhere 
> other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at the least 
> cost as well.

400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km -
100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support.

The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be
your cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the
open market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example),
which will now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next
to nothing for a start-up with considerable capacity value.

There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or
thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different
approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me,
cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to
me back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in
business.

Mark.

Re: U.S. test of national alerts on Oct. 4 at 2:20pm EDT (1820 UTC)

[Sean Donelan]

The Disability Advocacy Community has been extensively involved with 
CMAS/WEA since President Bush signed the WARN Act, passed by a republican 
house and republican senate, in 2006.


The dozens of disability groups helped design the sound and vibration 
cadence (which is different than EAS), and the policies for alerting.


Nation-wide testing (EAS) has been conducted since 2011.  And nation-wide 
testing (WEA) since 2014.  National tests were conducted almost every 
between 2011 and 2020, suspended during the pandemic.


The national tests are announced at least 60 days in advance by the FCC 
and FEMA. News media have multiple stories.  Most state and many local 
goverments also had notifications.



If you haven't been involved with the disability community for a decade, 
and your school office didn't notify special education teachers about the 
news releases and government advance notifications, perhaps that's room 
for improvement with local school communications.  Fire drills, tornado 
drills, etc. often involve loud sounds and flashing lights.

Weekly Global IPv4 Routing Table Report

[Routing Table Analysis Role Account]

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Global
IPv4 Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.

The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG
UKNOF, TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.

Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net.

For historical data, please see https://thyme.apnic.net.

If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith .

IPv4 Routing Table Report   04:00 +10GMT Sat 07 Oct, 2023

  BGP Table (Global) as seen in Japan.

Report Website: https://thyme.apnic.net
Detailed Analysis:  https://thyme.apnic.net/current/

Analysis Summary


BGP routing table entries examined:  932315
Prefixes after maximum aggregation (per Origin AS):  353915
Deaggregation factor:  2.63
Unique aggregates announced (without unneeded subnets):  453446
Total ASes present in the Internet Routing Table: 74914
Prefixes per ASN: 12.45
Origin-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   64301
Origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   26472
Transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   10613
Transit-only ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:456
Average AS path length visible in the Internet Routing Table:   4.2
Max AS path length visible:  55
Max AS path prepend of ASN (265020)  50
Prefixes from unregistered ASNs in the Routing Table:   995
Number of instances of unregistered ASNs:   997
Number of 32-bit ASNs allocated by the RIRs:  42780
Number of 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   35222
Prefixes from 32-bit ASNs in the Routing Table:  176100
Number of bogon 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:34
Special use prefixes present in the Routing Table:1
Prefixes being announced from unallocated address space:526
Number of addresses announced to Internet:   3053552128
Equivalent to 182 /8s, 1 /16s and 130 /24s
Percentage of available address space announced:   82.5
Percentage of allocated address space announced:   82.5
Percentage of available address space allocated:  100.0
Percentage of address space in use by end-sites:   99.5
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  310516

APNIC Region Analysis Summary
-

Prefixes being announced by APNIC Region ASes:   247120
Total APNIC prefixes after maximum aggregation:   71004
APNIC Deaggregation factor:3.48
Prefixes being announced from the APNIC address blocks:  240693
Unique aggregates announced from the APNIC address blocks:98970
APNIC Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   13692
APNIC Prefixes per ASN:   17.58
APNIC Region origin ASes announcing only one prefix:   4112
APNIC Region transit ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:   1816
Average APNIC Region AS path length visible:4.4
Max APNIC Region AS path length visible: 27
Number of APNIC region 32-bit ASNs visible in the Routing Table:   9019
Number of APNIC addresses announced to Internet:  772799872
Equivalent to 46 /8s, 15 /16s and 253 /24s
APNIC AS Blocks4608-4864, 7467-7722, 9216-10239, 17408-18431
(pre-ERX allocations)  23552-24575, 37888-38911, 45056-46079, 55296-56319,
   58368-59391, 63488-64098, 64297-64395, 131072-153913
APNIC Address Blocks 1/8,  14/8,  27/8,  36/8,  39/8,  42/8,  43/8,
49/8,  58/8,  59/8,  60/8,  61/8, 101/8, 103/8,
   106/8, 110/8, 111/8, 112/8, 113/8, 114/8, 115/8,
   116/8, 117/8, 118/8, 119/8, 120/8, 121/8, 122/8,
   123/8, 124/8, 125/8, 126/8, 133/8, 150/8, 153/8,
   163/8, 171/8, 175/8, 180/8, 182/8, 183/8, 202/8,
   203/8, 210/8, 211/8, 218/8, 219/8, 220/8, 221/8,
   222/8, 223/8,

ARIN Region Analysis Summary


Prefixes being announced by ARIN Region ASes:273510
Total ARIN prefixes after maximum aggregation:   123860
ARIN Deaggregation factor: 2.21
Prefixes being announced from the ARIN address blocks:   277244
Unique aggregates announced from the ARIN address blocks:131906
ARIN Region origin ASes present in the Internet Routing Table:19090
ARIN Prefixes per ASN: 

Re: Using RFC1918 on Global table as Loopbacks

[Warren Kumari]

On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 1:42 PM, Niels Bakker 
wrote:

> * gutierr...@westmancom.com (Javier Gutierrez) [Thu 05 Oct 2023, 19:25
> CEST]:
>
> I have recently encountered some operational differences at my new
> organization that are not what I have been exposed to before, where the
> loopback of the core network devices is being set from RFC1918 while on the
> global routing table. I'm sure this is not a major issue but I have mostly
> seen that ISPs use global IPs for loopbacks on devices that would and hold
> global routing.
>
> My question is, what is the most used or recommended way to do this, if I
> continue to use RFC1918 I will save some very much desired public address
> space, but would this come back to bite me in the future?
>
> The recommendation is to make Router-IDs globally unique. They're used in
> collision detection. What if you and a peer pick the same non globally
> unique address? Any session will never come up.
>


Yes, Router-IDs should be unique within a domain, but that doesn't mean
that 1: they need to the the same as the loopback address and 2: if they
are not talking to (external) peers, they don't even have to be
**globally** unique.

If I choose to number "core" devices from 192.168.0.0/24, and ensure that I
don't give multiple devices the same (e.g 192.168.0.42) address, everything
works just fine. Note that you have the same problem with non-RFC1918 space
— giving multiple devices the same "public" address ends equally poorly.

At one point, it was viewed by some as a feature to not use globally
reachable addresses for loopbacks - the thought being that if you cannot
target packets towards e.g. SSH / Telnet / whatever, you cannot attack /
DoS the box as easily.

However, just because you *can* use RFC1918 space for loopbacks (and in
many cases Router-IDs), it doesn't mean that you *should*. Eventually
you'll decide to convert some purely iBGP speaker into an eBGP device, and
will discover that both you and your peer decided to do this, and both
chose 10.117.236.17 for the loopback and Router-ID….


> You need globally unique IP addresses on routers anyway, to send ICMP
> error packets from.
>


Weell… "Need" might be a bit strong; it seems to have decreased over
time, but it used to be fairly common to see 1918 space show up in
traceroute. I suspect that a fair number of ICMPs are still being sourced
from 1918 space, but BCP38 and similar filters are dropping them, leading
to '* * *'. Perhaps "Assuming you don't want to be a jackass, you need …"?

w



> -- Niels.
>

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Mike Hammett]

Well, and that's kinda where I was going. 

I've used FS passive systems for years. FS has an active platform or two (that 
I understand, they just whitebox). Does it really do everyone one would need to 
do? How much of a step is it to get something more? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "David Bass"  
To: "Dave Bell"  
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Friday, October 6, 2023 8:55:21 AM 
Subject: Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms 


On the same topic, anyone have experience with the stuff from fs.com ? 



On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 9:53 AM Dave Bell < m...@geordish.org > wrote: 



Smartoptics? 


https://smartoptics.com/ 



Regards, 
Dave 


On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 14:43, Mark Tinka  wrote: 




On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote: 

> I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple 
> different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of 
> platform. 
> 
> In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long distances 
> of glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60 miles. 
> 
> In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves. 
> 
> What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30 
> terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to learn 
> more about what features I need and what features I don't need from somewhere 
> other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at the least 
> cost as well. 

400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km - 
100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support. 

The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be 
your cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the 
open market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example), 
which will now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next 
to nothing for a start-up with considerable capacity value. 

There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or 
thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different 
approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me, 
cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to 
me back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in 
business. 

Mark. 

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/6/23 15:53, Dave Cohen wrote:

My experience is primarily with the traditional carrier-grade folks 
like Ciena, Infinera, etc. but over the last decade all of those 
vendors have focused on improving how they scale down without 
sacrificing (most of the) quality and functionality - to varying 
degrees of success. There are also some more recent entrants that 
built their products to target the DCI market but rather than focusing 
on bandwidth density have focused on cost per bit for a mid-range 
solution. There are almost definitely multiple quality options out 
there without having to buy the full 88 channel n-degree ROADM Ciena 
6500 that takes up a full rack - although given the stated 
requirements, there may not be a one-size-fits-all solution that's 
ideal for all of the OP's projects.


There are two markets driving the major vendors right now - DCI and subsea.

The regular longhaul terrestrial gear is mostly the same, bar for 
upgrades to the latest CMOS. For these vendors, the same gear is also 
re-used for their subsea solutions, although with "submarine" versions 
of their terrestrial line cards.


Adva's TeraFlex is a bit different in that it is optimized both for DCI 
and longhaul terrestrial. We are currently looking at it for a 700km 
deployment in one of our markets. Very impressive!


Another entrant into the market is Acacia, now known as the Cisco 
NCS1000. They also use the same platform for both terrestrial and subsea:


https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/optical-networking/network-convergence-system-1000-series/index.html

Mark.

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/6/23 15:52, Dave Bell wrote:

Smartoptics?

https://smartoptics.com/


Not them.

I want to say they had an "X" in their name, but memory is fuzzy.

Mark.

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Joe Freeman]

I have several of the Smart Optics DCP-M40’s in place. If you are using 
coherent 100G DWDM optics, you can push the M40-ZR’s to 100-120km. The exact 
reach depends, of course, on the quality of the fiber plant in use.


From: NANOG  on behalf of Dave Bell 

Date: Friday, October 6, 2023 at 9:54 AM
To: Mark Tinka 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms
Smartoptics?

https://smartoptics.com/

Regards,
Dave

On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 14:43, Mark Tinka  wrote:


On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:

> I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple 
> different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of 
> platform.
>
> In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long distances 
> of glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60 miles.
>
> In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.
>
> What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30 
> terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to learn 
> more about what features I need and what features I don't need from somewhere 
> other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at the least 
> cost as well.

400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km -
100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support.

The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be
your cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the
open market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example),
which will now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next
to nothing for a start-up with considerable capacity value.

There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or
thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different
approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me,
cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to
me back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in
business.

Mark.

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Ryan Hamel]

Solid Optics? -- 
https://www.solid-optics.com/product/edfamux-multiplexer-amplifier-dispersion-compensation-dwdm-mux-edfa/

Ryan


From: NANOG  on behalf of Dave Bell 

Sent: Friday, October 6, 2023 6:52 AM
To: Mark Tinka 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

Caution: This is an external email and may be malicious. Please take care when 
clicking links or opening attachments.

Smartoptics?

https://smartoptics.com/

Regards,
Dave

On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 14:43, Mark Tinka  wrote:


On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:

> I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple 
> different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of 
> platform.
>
> In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long distances 
> of glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60 miles.
>
> In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.
>
> What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30 
> terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to learn 
> more about what features I need and what features I don't need from somewhere 
> other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at the least 
> cost as well.

400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km -
100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support.

The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be
your cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the
open market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example),
which will now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next
to nothing for a start-up with considerable capacity value.

There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or
thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different
approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me,
cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to
me back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in
business.

Mark.

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[David Bass]

On the same topic, anyone have experience with the stuff from fs.com?

On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 9:53 AM Dave Bell  wrote:

> Smartoptics?
>
> https://smartoptics.com/
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 14:43, Mark Tinka  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:
>>
>> > I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple
>> different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of
>> platform.
>> >
>> > In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long
>> distances of glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60
>> miles.
>> >
>> > In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.
>> >
>> > What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a
>> 30 terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to
>> learn more about what features I need and what features I don't need from
>> somewhere other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at
>> the least cost as well.
>>
>> 400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km -
>> 100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support.
>>
>> The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be
>> your cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the
>> open market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example),
>> which will now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next
>> to nothing for a start-up with considerable capacity value.
>>
>> There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or
>> thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different
>> approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me,
>> cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to
>> me back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in
>> business.
>>
>> Mark.
>>
>>
>>

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Mel Beckman]

One of my clients is Calient Technologies:

https://www.calient.net/

Their S320 optical switch is entirely photonic — no electrical transceivers in 
any optical path at all — using 3D MEMS technology. It’s great for reliable 
multi-lambda provisioning, and sports built-in power monitoring and passive 
network diagnostics. It doesn’t do DMDM itself, but it is a great way to 
automate DWDM traffic engineering with real-time optical path provisioning.  
It’s essentially a zero-latency 400 Mbps matrix switch.

 -mel

On Oct 6, 2023, at 6:44 AM, Mark Tinka  wrote:



On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:

I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple 
different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of 
platform.

In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long distances of 
glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60 miles.

In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.

What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30 
terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to learn 
more about what features I need and what features I don't need from somewhere 
other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at the least 
cost as well.

400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km - 100km. 
So your main cost there will be routers that will support.

The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be your 
cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the open market, 
you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example), which will now be 
EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next to nothing for a 
start-up with considerable capacity value.

There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or thereabouts. 
They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different approach to DWDM 
from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me, cannot remember their 
name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to me back then. Maybe he can 
remember :-). Not sure if they are still in business.

Mark.


https://www.calient.net/

Their S320 optical switch is entirely photonic — no electrical transceivers 
in any optical path at all — using 3D MEMS technology. It’s great for 
reliable multi-lambda provisioning, and sports built-in power monitoring and 
passive network diagnostics. It doesn’t do DMDM itself, but it is a great way 
to automate DWDM traffic engineering with real-time optical path provisioning.  
It’s essentially a zero-latency 400 Mbps matrix switch.

 -mel

> On Oct 6, 2023, at 6:44 AM, Mark Tinka  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:
>> 
>> I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple 
>> different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of 
>> platform.
>> 
>> In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long distances 
>> of glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60 miles.
>> 
>> In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.
>> 
>> What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30 
>> terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to learn 
>> more about what features I need and what features I don't need from 
>> somewhere other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at 
>> the least cost as well.
> 
> 400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km - 
> 100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support.
> 
> The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be your 
> cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the open 
> market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example), which will 
> now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next to nothing for 
> a start-up with considerable capacity value.
> 
> There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or 
> thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different 
> approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me, 
> cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to me 
> back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in business.
> 
> Mark.
> 
> 

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Dave Cohen]

My experience is primarily with the traditional carrier-grade folks like
Ciena, Infinera, etc. but over the last decade all of those vendors have
focused on improving how they scale down without sacrificing (most of the)
quality and functionality - to varying degrees of success. There are also
some more recent entrants that built their products to target the DCI
market but rather than focusing on bandwidth density have focused on cost
per bit for a mid-range solution. There are almost definitely multiple
quality options out there without having to buy the full 88 channel
n-degree ROADM Ciena 6500 that takes up a full rack - although given the
stated requirements, there may not be a one-size-fits-all solution that's
ideal for all of the OP's projects.

On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 9:43 AM Mark Tinka  wrote:

>
>
> On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> > I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple
> different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of
> platform.
> >
> > In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long
> distances of glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60
> miles.
> >
> > In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.
> >
> > What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30
> terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to
> learn more about what features I need and what features I don't need from
> somewhere other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at
> the least cost as well.
>
> 400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km -
> 100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support.
>
> The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be
> your cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the
> open market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example),
> which will now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next
> to nothing for a start-up with considerable capacity value.
>
> There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or
> thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different
> approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me,
> cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to
> me back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in
> business.
>
> Mark.
>
>
>

-- 
- Dave Cohen
craetd...@gmail.com
@dCoSays
www.venicesunlight.com

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Dave Bell]

Smartoptics?

https://smartoptics.com/

Regards,
Dave

On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 14:43, Mark Tinka  wrote:

>
>
> On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:
>
> > I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple
> different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of
> platform.
> >
> > In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long
> distances of glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60
> miles.
> >
> > In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.
> >
> > What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30
> terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to
> learn more about what features I need and what features I don't need from
> somewhere other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at
> the least cost as well.
>
> 400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km -
> 100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support.
>
> The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be
> your cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the
> open market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example),
> which will now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next
> to nothing for a start-up with considerable capacity value.
>
> There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or
> thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different
> approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me,
> cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to
> me back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in
> business.
>
> Mark.
>
>
>

Re: Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Mark Tinka]

On 10/6/23 15:07, Mike Hammett wrote:


I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple 
different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of 
platform.

In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long distances of 
glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60 miles.

In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.

What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30 
terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to learn 
more about what features I need and what features I don't need from somewhere 
other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at the least 
cost as well.


400G-ZR pluggables will get you 400Gbps on a p2p dark fibre over 80km - 
100km. So your main cost there will be routers that will support.


The smallest DCI solution from the leading DWDM vendors is likely to be 
your cheapest option. Alternatively, if you are willing to look at the 
open market, you can find gear based on older CMOS (40nm, for example), 
which will now be EoL for any large scale optical network, but cost next 
to nothing for a start-up with considerable capacity value.


There is a DWDM vendor that showed up on the scene back in 2008 or 
thereabouts. They were selling a very cheap, 1U box that had a different 
approach to DWDM from other vendors at the time. I, for the life of me, 
cannot remember their name - but I do know that Randy introduced them to 
me back then. Maybe he can remember :-). Not sure if they are still in 
business.


Mark.

Low to Mid Range DWDM Platforms

[Mike Hammett]

I've been using various forms of passive WDM for years. I have a couple 
different projects on my plate that require me to look at the next level of 
platform.

In some projects, I'll be looking for needing to have someone long distances of 
glass without any electronics. Some spans could be over 60 miles.

In some projects, I'll need to transport multiple 100-gig waves.

What is the landscape like between basic passive and something like a 30 
terabit Ciena? I know of multiple vendors in that space, but I like to learn 
more about what features I need and what features I don't need from somewhere 
other than the vendor's mouth. Obviously, the most reliability at the least 
cost as well.

Thanks.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com

Midwest-IX
http://www.midwest-ix.com