dark fiber and sfp distance limitations

Kevin Hodle kevin.hodle at gmail.com
Mon Jan 4 16:51:47 UTC 2010

On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Martin, Paul <Paul.Martin at viatel.com> wrote:
> If you only want 1gig, then if the SP provides it, won't it be cheaper
> to simply get a 1gig circuit from them that hands off to you on a GigE
> port rather than pay for all the various higher spec equipment that
> you'd otherwise require?
> Paul.

Yes, a carrier provided lit service (wavelength, EoMPLS) would
obviously be less expensive than leasing dark for a single 1GE channel
(especially for longer spans), but I'm assuming OP has already
considered this and is going with a dark fiber option for one of the
following reasons:

A) Expected rapid growth in transfer volume, wherein a dark fiber
solution provides the OP with the flexibility to rapidly upgrade to
either a multi-channel xWDM 1GE, single channel 10GE, or xWDM 10GE
solution immediately, as opposed to a lit solution where he would be
restricted by the provisioning time line of the carrier (dark quickly
becomes a more attractive solution than lit services as bandwidth
needs increase)

B) Specific business requirements (ie security concerns) that preclude
the usage of 3rd party's network/transmission gear from carrying
traffic deemed 'sensitive', 'confidential', etc. You fill in the
blanks. The idea is laughable to many operators, but sometimes a
board's ideal model of data security is not exactly in line with
business and technical realities (Usually this means money in your

 :: :: Kevin Hodle | http://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinhodle
 PGP Key ID  | fingerprint
 0x803F24BE  | 1094 FB06 837F 2FAB C86B E4BE 4680 3679 803F 24BE

"Elegance is not a dispensable luxury but a factor that decides
between success and failure. "
-Edsgar Dijkstra

More information about the NANOG mailing list