[c-nsp] LX vs. LH GBICs

[Winders, Timothy A]

Looking at my 6509, I have cisco media reporting both LX and LH as the type.  Both are working.  The media reporting LX is running over multimode fiber, the media reporting LH is running over singlemode fiber.
 
Tim Winders | Associate Dean of Information Technology | South Plains College

________________________________

From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net on behalf of Matt Stevens
Sent: Fri 3/21/2008 7:00 PM
To: Richard A Steenbergen
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] LX vs. LH GBICs



I understand the whole LX/LH concept. I was more wondering what
specifically the LX/LH GBICs report as their media type (LH?), and if
there's an older part (or non-Cisco) part that reports LX.

Our connection to a cat65k reporting LH is working, whereas a connection
reporting LX is not.

We've checked levels on this particular link, and everything looks
within spec for both pieces of equipment - so I'm slightly grasping at
straws. It's a remote site involving multiple vendors, so
troubleshooting is painful to say the least.
--
matt


Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 03:57:59PM -0500, Max Pierson wrote:
>> 1000BaseLX/LH interfaces are fully comply with the IEEE 802.3z
>> 1000BaseLX standard. However, their higher optical quality allows them
>> to reach 10 km over single-mode fiber (SMF) versus the 5 km specified in
>> the standard. This is where the LH kicks in...which allows them to
>> achieve a longer distance when used with SMF.
>
> But at this point every LX you're ever going to run across does 10km or
> better (often much better), and the use of the name "LH" is just a
> Ciscoism that only serves to confuse people. Also note that different
> vendors use the names differently, for example Juniper LH is a 70km 1550nm
> optic (what cisco calls ZX), which is different from its LX 10km 1310nm
> optic.
>
> At any rate they're all compatible with each other, all RX units are
> wide-band, so as long as you aren't trying to engineer something
> complicated (with a filter, with concerns about dispersion, etc) your only
> real concern is "do I have enough optical budget" and maybe "do I need to
> attenuate".
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/