Routed optical networks

Fri May 5 19:27:33 UTC 2023

On 5/5/23 13:04, Vasilenko Eduard wrote:

> Hi Mark,
>
> Thanks a lot for many of your valuable comments I almost always agree.
>
> 1.I agree that 50GE has not got the same popularity as 100GE. Many 
> vendors did ignore it for some time. Looks like not many ignore it now.
>
> 2.Even in your example for 40km, 100GE is about twice more expensive 
> than 50GE.
>
> 3.Hence, I have to google for the cheaper proposition in 10km. For 
> obvious reasons, I could not reference my employer (my assumption 
> about the cost is based on this comparison).
> https://opticswave.com/collections/50g-qsfp28
> https://www.compufox.com/50G_QSFP28_Transceivers_s/3036.htm
> https://www.genuinemodules.com/033030600050
> Looks like I have found twice cheaper in public information.
>
> 4.Pay attention that bidirectional is available too.
>

In the real world, a 100Gbps network is very, very different from a 
50Gbps network.

A 100Gbps optic being twice the cost of a 50Gbps optic at 40km is worth 
it for most operators, because the value from 100Gbps far outweighs the 
cost when compared against the "savings" for a 50Gbps network.

Also, most operators will buy a 40km optic yet they need something to 
cover the 11km - 30km range. With 25km and 30km optics costing as much 
as a 40km 50Gbps optic, this will satisfy many operators.

> 5.The public price is not what you get in the real tender. We are 
> talking about big networks, hence, big tenders.
>

I have zero sympathy for operators who choose to pay equipment vendors 
for their branded optics :-).

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20230505/4244786b/attachment.html>