<<   <   Page 2 / 2
IJD 12/5/2012 | 5:05:59 PM
re: Infinera Races the Clock on 100G

Agreed 100% about what really matters -- I was only talking about 40G/100G coherent receivers for long-haul, for other applications simpler solutions may indeed be more appropriate right now.

But I'm pretty sure that Infinera's PIC solution is *not* single-carrier DP-QPSK, their own material (which Craig referred to) says that it's dual carrier like Nortel/Ciena -- though this technical information is very well hidden, and somewhat contradicted by the often-repeated "500G PIC=5*100G" marketing claims.

As far as I know, the only single-carrier 100G coherent system in the field right now is the Alcatel-Lucent one announced last year. Others on the way presumably include the Fujitsu one announced this week, since it uses their 65Gs/s ADCs:


Mark Sebastyn 12/5/2012 | 5:05:56 PM
re: Infinera Races the Clock on 100G

Deployed fiber infrastructure is the best generic term, I like that. The Chinese guys don't even use Metro WDM in some areas because the "deployed fiber infrastructure" doesn't require it.

furious_george 12/5/2012 | 5:05:56 PM
re: Infinera Races the Clock on 100G


I would modify your what really matters at the end to state something like:

"The only thing that matters is $ per bit per km per Hz. How much does it cost to send a quantity of bits (typically 100G or 10G) a given distance over the deployed fiber infrastructure a certain amount of optical spectrum."

The deployed fiber infrastructure captures the fiber differences, xOADM differences, channel mangement philosophy, amplifier differences plus the need for spectral efficiency.

I agree with most of what you commented with the exception that I have also heard that INFN is dual carrier. &nbsp;Note that for the PIC this might be the right approach even though it is not optimized for the OIF based ecosystem which supports more traditional optics packaging &amp; partitioning. &nbsp;I'm of the opinion that INFN will be on the losing end of this transition, but then I didn't believe that they would do so well at 10G.&nbsp;



sigint 12/5/2012 | 5:05:55 PM
re: Infinera Races the Clock on 100G

Craig:CEO Tom Fallon made an interesting point about 40G at the end of the earnings call. A lot of the 40G opportunity is in China and therefore closed to Infinera (he didn't specify why, but obviously it's because of Huawei and maybe ZTE).


Could it have something to do with US export restrictions?

IJD 12/5/2012 | 5:05:55 PM
re: Infinera Races the Clock on 100G

I agree with George that dual-carrier could be a good (or less bad?) way to go with a PIC, compared to non-PIC where the big advantage of single-carrier is that you only need one set of optics (including laser and MZM); these do have to be 25Gb/s (which is a lot more difficult) but I expect will eventually be cheaper/simpler/smaller than two separate sets of 12.5Gb/s optics.

If you can put everything inside a single PIC then the picture changes somewhat, you still need twice as many components inside the PIC as for single-carrier but the marginal cost of this is presumably less with a PIC, and design is easier because the bit rate is halved.

Whether this leads to lower overall cost is debateable -- and to be blunt, the reason people do 100G dual-carrier is usually because they haven't got or can't do single-carrier yet (or want to use legacy components developed for 40G) rather than any real technical/cost advantage, this is why Nortel/Ciena went this way.

I'd still like to know how Infinera propose to get 10 x 50G ADC/DSP chips close enough to their 500G PIC to avoid losses in PCB/connectors, while not ending up with a huge power density by having 500G total in a very small area -- if a single OIF 100G module has 80W power budget then the equivalent of 5 of these (or 10 x 50G, total DSP processing power needed is the same) could be up to 400W...

Pete Baldwin 12/5/2012 | 5:05:53 PM
re: Infinera Races the Clock on 100G

&gt; Could it have something to do with US export restrictions?

Actually, I wasn't thinking along those lines. I throught he was talking about in-country favoritism -- Chinese carriers tending to work with the Chinese vendors.

I do like Seven's point that the same arguments could be made for 100G.

<<   <   Page 2 / 2
Sign In