[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Pad 1310nm cross-connects?
- Subject: Pad 1310nm cross-connects?
- From: streiner at cluebyfour.org (Justin M. Streiner)
- Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 21:24:01 -0400 (EDT)
- In-reply-to: <CAN8DL0XVDUV20-Wk6LYuuuufq22VnNznOVRvwL=_aYt90bagkg@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAN8DL0XVDUV20-Wk6LYuuuufq22VnNznOVRvwL=_aYt90bagkg@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, 19 Oct 2013, Chris Costa wrote:
> What are the opinions/views on attenuating short, 1310nm LR cross-connects.
> Assume < 20m cable length and utilizing the same vendor optics on each
> side of the link. Considering the LR transmit spec doesn't exceed the
> receiver's high threshold value do you pad the receiver closer to the
> median RX range to avoid potential receiver burnout over time, or just
> leave it un-padded?
If this is using Cisco 10GBASE-LR optics, then padding in this instance
should not be necessary. However, if SR optics (again, assuming these are
Cisco devices), would be a better fit for the distance, using an OM3 or
OM4 multimode jumper.
The reason I asked about the vendor is because things like SR and LR can
mean different things to different vendors.
jms