100G, input errors and/or transceiver issues

Mon Jul 19 17:19:21 UTC 2021

Saku,

I don't at this point have long term data collection compiled for the
issues that we've faced. That said, we have two 100G transport links that
have a regular background level of input errors at ranges that hover
between 0.00055 to 0.00383 PPS on one link, and none to 0.00135 PPS (that
jumped to 0.03943 PPS over the weekend). The range is often directionally
associated rather than variable behavior of a single direction. The data
comes from the last 24 hours, the two referenced links are operated by
different providers on very different paths (opposite directions). Over
shorter distances, we've definitely seen input errors that have affected
PNI connections within a datacenter as well. In the case of the last PNI
issue, the other party swapped their transceiver, we didn't even physically
touch our side; I note this only to express that I don't think this is just
a case of the transceivers that we are sourcing.

Comparatively, other than clear transport system issues, I don't recall
this sort of thing at all with 10G "wavelength" transport that we had
purchased for years prior. I put wavelengths in quotes there knowing that
it may have been a while since our transport was a literal wavelength as
compared to being muxed into a 100G+ wavelength.

On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 at 12:01, Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Jul 2021 at 19:47, Graham Johnston
> <johnston.grahamj at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Graham,
>
> > How commonly do other operators experience input errors with 100G
> interfaces?
> > How often do you find that you have to change a transceiver out? Either
> for errors or another reason.
> > Do we collectively expect this to improve as 100G becomes more common
> and production volumes increase in the future?
>
> New rule. Share your own data before asking others to share theirs.
>
> IN DC, SP markets 100GE has dominated the market for several years
> now, so it rings odd to many at 'more common'. 112G SERDES is shipping
> on the electric side, and there is nowhere more mature to go from
> 100GE POV. The optical side, QSFP112, is really the only thing left to
> cost optimise 100GE.
> We've had our share of MSA ambiguity issues with 100GE, but today
> 100GE looks mature to our eyes in failure rates and compatibility. 1GE
> is really hard to support and 10GE is becoming problematic, in terms
> of hardware procurement.
>
>
> --
>   ++ytti
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20210719/6352426b/attachment.html>