<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/5/23 10:54, Vasilenko Eduard
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:98e83b0ca07247ba9ca5be6e2b79e6b6@huawei.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style>@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}span.gmailsignatureprefix
{mso-style-name:gmail_signature_prefix;}span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}</style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">50GE is better
just because it is half of the cost of 100GE and it is
enough now for the great majority of cases. Money is very
important these days for this industry. 100GE single mode is
more expensive than the best router port itself. Routers
have been deprecated 10x for the decade (almost 100x for 2
decades). Pluggable optics is not that much deprecated.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Not sure where your pricing is coming from, but if I look at
Flexoptix's 50Gbps QSFP28 optics pricing, I am getting:<br>
<ul>
<li>EUR724 @ 10km.</li>
<li>EUR1,246 @ 40km.</li>
</ul>
<p>They are also selling an SFP56 LR for EUR925.</p>
<p>Juxtapose that against 100Gbps pricing:</p>
<ul>
<li>EUR473 @ 10km.</li>
<li>EUR1,300 @ 25km.<br>
</li>
<li>EUR1,500 @ 30km.<br>
</li>
<li>EUR2,600 @ 40km.</li>
<li>EUR3,925 @ 80km.</li>
</ul>
<p>Doesn't immediately seem to me that 50Gbps is cheaper than
100Gbps. There also don't seem to be as many deployments of 50Gbps
in the metro (same could be said for 25Gbps and 40Gbps), but
others on the list can chime in with what they are seeing/doing.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:98e83b0ca07247ba9ca5be6e2b79e6b6@huawei.com">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span><span
style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">I do not think
that content provider guys call their DCI “Metro”, not very
often.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well, whatever they call it, the concept is the same - move lots of
traffic across town between data centres.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:98e83b0ca07247ba9ca5be6e2b79e6b6@huawei.com">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">I agree that
100GE for DCI is the minimum, 400GE is probably already
needed in some places.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">IMHO: it is a
different story. Very interested too.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Most content providers have no choice but to run DWDM, for even very
short spans between data centres. That is because it is just cheaper
and simpler to pack Tbps of capacity in DWDM for the price than you
can in a router. And besides, most routers don't need to carry Tbps
of traffic in a single line card, which would be a waste of a fibre
pair over that distance.<br>
<br>
In such cases, better to use DWDM and drop capacity on individual
routers and/or line cards as you see fit.<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:98e83b0ca07247ba9ca5be6e2b79e6b6@huawei.com">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">PS: By the way,
even if some ISP has 50% of revenue from Enterprise services
(it is probably the biggest number, typically 30%-40%), it
is still just 5% compare to residential traffic. Traffic to
enterprises is still sold 4x-10x (depending on the country).</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
That is why residential Access networks tend to be 2nd class
citizens :-).<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:98e83b0ca07247ba9ca5be6e2b79e6b6@huawei.com">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Hence,
Enterprise does not make sense to mention in the traffic
discussion. It is a “rounding error”.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">Enterprise
business created a huge demand for oversubscribed ports to
connect Enterprises. And QoS/QoE. Not traffic.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well, not all operators that offer enterprise services also do
consumer broadband, or vice versa. To a network doing only one or
the other, whatever traffic they are carrying means the world to
them. It's not ours to decide what is high or low traffic... that
priviledge always remains with the network operator.<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
</body>
</html>