Copper 10 gigabit @ 15 metres

Deepak Jain deepak at
Thu Nov 6 00:44:02 UTC 2003

At the risk of over simplifying this.

1) Deploying anything 4x faster than what you need is not cost-effective,
ever. Even deploying GE where 2xFE would work is more expensive.

2a) If (again, thinking IXes here) you are offloading most of your locally
sourced traffic to peers at an IX, you may be able to use >OC48 connect
without needing your backbone to actually pass 20+Gb/s. Everyone has a
different network design, so it really depends. Guys who push can use 10GE
sooner (IMO) than guys that pull because of the IX case here.

  b) Cable networks and networks where most of the traffic is internal or to
a few large peers could benefit here too.

3a ) Anyone who doesn't have 5Gb/s of aggregate traffic probably doesn't
have the peer density to send more than 2Gb/s to a single IX or peer anyway.
(see #1).
  b) In the case where at a single point you need more than 1-2Gb/s per
peer, you may want to deploy 10GE or something similar because you have
sufficient capacity to handle another peering location to fail entirely for
an extended period of time without (hopefully) affecting bandwidth to your
peer. There are some assumptions here, so YMMV.

Fortunately, no one is requiring anyone to use this, yet...

Deepak Jain

  -----Original Message-----
  From: owner-nanog at [mailto:owner-nanog at]On Behalf Of
Henry Linneweh
  Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 7:03 PM
  To: deepak at; Neil J. McRae
  Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson; nanog at
  Subject: RE: Copper 10 gigabit @ 15 metres

  The backbone at the time of my original work that I participated in was
40Gits/in and 40Gbits/out unless that has changed 10GigE is not practical or
cost effective if it is limited to local area's and provate connections.
That doesn't mean from A design
  perspective that A cost effective solution has already been designed, the
  of the market and the cost per megabit for most companies is not there,
  companies now do 2.5Gbits bi-diectioonally for 5Gbits and barely use all
of that.


  Deepak Jain <deepak at> wrote:

    > > While there are some smitherings about 10GigE, there are
    > technical reasons and
    > > market reasons it is not really ready for prime yet, that is
    > not to say it's not going
    > > to happen, it is just not going happen now.
    > >
    > Some people are using it in the MAN and WAN now though.

    Exactly. At the EQIX/ASH GPF Telia and AOL both said they were using
    cross-connects for private peering. So that means at least 3-4 major
    networks are using them in production in a LAN, MAN or WAN environment.

    When you are aggregating lots of a GEs, there isn't really a great,
    cost-effective way to move all of these bits cost-effectively. nxOC48 is
    pretty cheap, but a little ugly if you need the bandwidth unchoked. 10GE
    supposed to get there, but at a 10xGE price, not a OC192 type price.

    The real advantage of Copper 10G is that eventually you can deploy it to
    the existing copper [inside] plants that people have currently deployed.
    Just like GE, it eventually just becomes tolerant enough to use existing
    wiring. I would be very happy if the first boxes that came out with
    long range xenpaks were muxes that would take 10xGE -> 1x10GE -- this
    solve the uplink problem from smaller gear in a heartbeat.

    Deepak Jain

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list