SC vs other connectors, optical budgets decreasing (was Re: IEEE 40GE & 100GE)

Alex Pilosov alex at
Thu Dec 13 04:54:31 UTC 2007

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:

> Ted Seely and I are of the same mind on this.  2 dB sounds like plenty
> for connector loss right up until you have to deal with multiple patch
> bays in a structured system with amateurishly applied mechanical
> splices.  The difference between noting that the loss is a little high
> but the link still works so you roll with it, and having to spend time
> on the phone arguing with someone who thinks 24 dB link loss is A-OK,
> will make the slight additional up front cost for the better grade
> optics look very inexpensive indeed...
This is somewhat interesting subject. The optical margins for "short-haul"  
optics are getting tighter. The number of crossconnects in a structural
wiring system is getting larger. Given the specified SC connector
insertion loss of .75dB, it is not uncommon to see loss within a facility 
for "working" crossconnects of 3-4dB. 

Is anyone giving thought to going forward to connectors like MU/E2000 for
structured wiring (which have much lower specified loss - I believe .1dB),
or the installed base makes it prohibitive?

-alex [not mlc anything]

More information about the NANOG mailing list