[c-nsp] [External] Re: Support for CFP2

[Rob Evans]

...and I've just re-read that you were looking for what you could use.

There's something like this:
https://www.packetlight.com/products/100g-200g-dwdm-transport/200g-single-wavelength-muxponder

I've no personal experience of it, and there may be other similar
products on the market, but that looks like it could have a
100GBASE-LR4 uplink to your router, and a CFP2-ACO transceiver facing
the provider.

Rob

On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 17:50, Rob Evans <internetplumber at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It sounds as though your provider is suggesting a CFP2-DCO, such as
> one of these:
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/transceiver-modules/datasheet-c78-743732.html
>
> They're giving you a specification that includes the entire C band
> (4.8THz), but stating that your wavelength must fit within 50GHz,
> which is a traditional ITU-T channel width for DWDM systems, so they
> should probably also specify which channel you're going to use.
>
> CFP2-DCOs tend to work because they've got the space and power for the
> DSPs, and it has been difficult to cram that into QSFP28s (coherent
> optics requires a lot of signal processing). As you've already noted,
> there are products in the pipeline, but I'm not aware of any that are
> widely supported yet.  Cisco do seem to suggest there is a QSFP-DD
> using QPSK for 100G, but I've not looked too closely at it (and note
> that QSFP-DD is different to QSFP28, having about three times the
> electrical power available):
> https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/interfaces-modules/transceiver-modules/datasheet-c78-744377.html
>
> Cheers,
> Rob
>
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 19:54, Shawn L via cisco-nsp
> <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks - we don't really understand the intricacies either.  This is our
> > first adventure in this area.
> >
> > The distances are quite large (800+ Km).  It's a dark wave service, though
> > we don't have to worry about anything in the middle, just the 2 end points.
> >
> > I'm told Adva / Adtran will be releasing a ZR+ 0dBm QSFP28 that would (or
> > should) work in Q2 2024, but I'm looking for other options.  I did check
> > out FS.com, but they're telling me the only option they have available uses
> > a 200Gig CFP2 and 2 100gig QSFP28s.
> >
> > Any idea where else we might look?  We'd be happy to engage someone to help
> > us design a solution, we're just not sure where to turn.
> >
> > Shawn
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 1:25 PM Hunter Fuller <hf0002 at uah.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > I know when we are talking about DWDM my usual expectation these days
> > > is to use a "0km optic" (aka one that is meant to launch just far
> > > enough to make it into an amp)... so one of those (from anyone, e.g.
> > > fs.com, whatever) followed by an amp might be doable? I would advise
> > > you to contract someone to work that out though (I myself don't even
> > > fully understand the intricacies).
> > >
> > > the point of the 0km optic is that it fits in QSFP+ generally. It's a
> > > lot to ask, to get a precisely tuned DWDM wave coming out of a lil
> > > QSFP+ at ZR levels.
> > >
> > > The other option of course being to send it LR and then use a
> > > transponder closer to the DWDM gear, as Nick suggested.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Hunter Fuller (they)
> > > Router Jockey
> > > VBH M-1C
> > > +1 256 824 5331
> > >
> > > Office of Information Technology
> > > The University of Alabama in Huntsville
> > > Network Engineering
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 9:07 AM Nick Hilliard via cisco-nsp
> > > <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Shawn L via cisco-nsp wrote on 19/01/2024 14:58:
> > > > > The pluggable optic must be DWDM 1530 to 1563 nm with QPSK modulation
> > > that
> > > > > fits 50Ghz (~31 to 35Gbaud) and a launch power of ZR+ 0dBm. The
> > > customer
> > > > > channel should have Rx: Max <-10 dBm/Ch and Tx: Min: >–5 dBm/Ch to
> > > Max: <+
> > > > > 6.5dBm/Ch in order to meet the GOSNR margin of 2.5dBm or more.
> > > >
> > > > right, so DWDM alien wave requirement then. That's very non-portable and
> > > > kit specific.
> > > >
> > > > Depending on the application, you might be better off ditching the
> > > > requirements that they're imposing and simply using 100G transponders
> > > > (i.e. 100G as a service).  Or something like the smartoptics open line
> > > > system with PAM4 QSFP28 transceivers.
> > > >
> > > > It really depends on what's between you and the other end.  D/F has
> > > > simple options open for single 100G. If you're connecting into something
> > > > more complicated, it can get messy and expensive.
> > > >
> > > > Nick
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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/
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/