[AusNOG] Copper versus fibre in the DC

[Skeeve Stevens]

I try to buy LX optics as much as possible so I don't have to worry about
Single Mode or Multi-Mode... under a few hundred metres it's same same.


...Skeeve

*Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
skeeve at eintellegonetworks.com ; www.eintellegonetworks.com

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/eintellegonetworks ;  <http://twitter.com/networkceoau>
linkedin.com/in/skeeve

twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com


The Experts Who The Experts Call
Juniper - Cisco - Cloud


On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 6:56 PM, Peter Tiggerdine <ptiggerdine at gmail.com>wrote:

> SMF for carrier to rack but I don't see any problems with MMF inter rack.
> The delta between SFP cost is well worth it.
> On 12/10/2013 5:51 PM, "James Braunegg" <james.braunegg at micron21.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Alastair,****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I would recommend ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Single mode Fibre for any rack to rack communications , or rack to
>> carrier communication . ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Today the same single mode fibre will run 1gbit, 10gbit, 40gbit and
>> 100gbit … and I’m sure it will run 400gbit in years to come and that’s
>> before you look at wavelength technology.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I also find fibre has an placebo effect on people thinking it’s more
>> important than copper so they take more care when touching it….****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I would only use copper for Switch to Server communication within a rack*
>> ***
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Kindest Regards****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *James Braunegg
>> **P:*  1300 769 972  |  *M:*  0488 997 207 |  *D:*  (03) 9751 7616****
>>
>> *E:*   james.braunegg at micron21.com  |  *ABN:*  12 109 977 666
>> *W:*  www.ddosprotection.com.au  *T:* @micron21****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>>
>> [image: Description: Description: Description: Description: M21.jpg]
>> This message is intended for the addressee named above. It may contain
>> privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended
>> recipient of this message you must not use, copy, distribute or disclose it
>> to anyone other than the addressee. If you have received this message in
>> error please return the message to the sender by replying to it and then
>> delete the message from your computer.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Alastair
>> Waddell
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 11, 2013 9:13 PM
>> *To:* ausnog at ausnog.net
>> *Subject:* [AusNOG] Copper versus fibre in the DC****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Hi AusNOG,****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I expect there's strong opinions about this.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> As I'm relocating DCs, its an opportunity to re-assess carrier
>> interconnect terminations. ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I've been reading how copper (CAT7) is still valid with 10Gb/s ethernet
>> and at the same time how the transceiver is a point of latency where the
>> optics must be converted to electrical signal.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I figure the transceiver is also a point of failure that's absent in
>> copper although such an argument must surely factor the qualify of the
>> cable/RJ and it's subsequent handling (but how hard can it be!)****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> So: ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> * Is copper a valid or even a 'better' choice to terminate carriers in
>> the DC for 1Gb/s and beyond to 10Gb/s? *****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> PS KISS and risk mitigation rule in my little world. My fallback position
>> is that fibre is still preferred as the 'safe' option especially wrt
>> 10Gb/s. I just want to canvass all options. I don't want to repeat the
>> exercise with the carriers at some future date if I can avoid it. It
>> probably means, sub 1Gb/s top-of-rack kit today (looking at 4948/4900M or
>> Juniper equivalents) and new kit at somewhere near 1Gb/s throughput with a
>> preference to avoid carrier re-cabling. ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> "With the release of the IEEE 802.3an standard, 10 Gb/s over balanced
>> twisted-pair cabling (10GBASE-T) is the fastest growing and is expected to
>> be the most widely adopted 10GbE option. "****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> "At 1 Gb/s speeds, balanced twisted-pair compatible electronics offer
>> better latency performance than fibre; however, considering latency at 10
>> Gb/s, currently fibre components perform better than balanced twisted-pair
>> compatible 10GBASE-T electronics"****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> "Since optical fibre electronics cannot autonegotiate, a move from
>> 1000BASE-xx to 10GBASE-xx requires a hardware change. In contrast, both
>> 1GbE and 10GbE can be supported by 10GBASE-T balanced twisted-pair
>> compatible equipment."****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>>
>> http://www.siemon.com/uk/white_papers/08-07-10-copper-fiber-options-data-center.asp
>> ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Regards,****
>>
>> -- ****
>>
>> Alastair Waddell
>> Legion Internet
>> Australia****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20131012/2caf8b87/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2683 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20131012/2caf8b87/attachment.jpg>