Low cost WDM gear

Sat Feb 7 20:30:50 UTC 2015

Kenneth, 

I am sorry, but it sounds like you made a mistake in not calculating loss of the devices in the path, and are blaming a Mfg for the mistake... They clearly list the insertion loss for the different muxes in the specs on their website.

Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kenneth McRae" <kenneth.mcrae at me.com>
> To: "Rodrigo 1telecom" <rodrigo at 1telecom.com.br>
> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog at nanog.org>
> Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2015 2:04:10 PM
> Subject: Re: Low cost WDM gear
> 
> Hi Enviado,
> 
> I cannot recommend FiberStore as I had a bad experience with them.  I needed
> to cover only 3km from A to B side.  When using 10km optics, I saw a loss of
> over 5db  with their passive mux inserted into the path which created a
> total loss of over -20db which is outside of the tolerances for our
> equipment with 10km SFP+.  Using another vendors low insertion loss mux
> corrected our issue.  I am sure if you are using an 80km optic, you may be
> able to tolerate a higher insertion loss to cover < 60km.  I also notice
> that their CDWM optics averaged about 3db less in power output when compared
> to other vendors.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Kenneth
> 
> On Feb 07, 2015, at 10:33 AM, Rodrigo 1telecom <rodrigo at 1telecom.com.br>
> wrote:
> 
> Hi kenneth... which the distance do you have from side A to side B when you
> using passive solutions from fiberstore( mux and demux)?
> I buy this mux and demux(4 channels single fiber) and only make a test about
> 60km( mux side A and demux on side B) with sfp+10gb for 80km... ( only see
> ddm on my ex3300( about -19db for 60km). Test switch access with ssh and
> pinging tests...
> What kind os issue do you have? For distances less than 60km is this solution
> good?
> Thanks!!!
> 
> Enviado via iPhone 
> Grupo Connectoway
> 
> Em 07/02/2015, às 14:55, Kenneth McRae <kenneth.mcrae at me.com> escreveu:
> Mike,
> I just replaced a bunch of FiberStore WDM passive muxes with OSI Hardware
> equipment. The FiberStore gear was a huge disappointment (excessive loss,
> poor technical support, refusal to issue refund without threatening legal
> action, etc.). I have had good results from the OSI equipment so far. I run
> passive muxes for CWDM (8 - 16 channels).
> On Feb 07, 2015, at 09:51 AM, Manuel Marín <mmg at transtelco.net> wrote:
> Hi Mike
> I can recommend a couple of vendors that provide cost effective solutions.
> Ekinops & Packetlight.
> On Saturday, February 7, 2015, Mike Hammett <nanog at ics-il.net> wrote:
> I know there are various Asian vendors for low cost (less than $500) muxes
> to throw 16 or however many colors onto a strand. However, they don't work
> so well when you don't control the optics used on both sides (therefore
> must use standard wavelengths), obviously only do a handful of channels and
> have a distance limitation.
> What solutions are out there that don't cost an arm and a leg?
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
> --
> TRANSTELCO| Manuel Marin | VP Engineering | US: *+1 915-217-2232* | MX: *+52
> 656-257-1109*
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the use
> of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure
> under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this
> information, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or
> copying of the communication is strictly prohibited.
> AVISO DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: Esta comunicación es sólo para el uso de la
> persona o entidad a la que se dirige y puede contener información
> privilegiada, confidencial y exenta de divulgación bajo la legislación
> aplicable. Si no es el destinatario de esta información, se le notifica que
> cualquier uso, difusión, distribución o copia de la comunicación está
> estrictamente prohibido.