nanog mailing list archives
Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 21:00:41 +0200 (CEST)
On Fri, 10 Apr 2009, Lamar Owen wrote:
This sounds pretty good, until you realize that it means you can expect 36 errors in 10 hours on a 100% utilized gigabit fiber link.
Well, it means this is still ok according to standard. In real life, if you engineer your network to be within the optical levels they should be, you get GigE links that at the highest, have single digit CRC errors per month, at the lowest, have 0 CRC errors month after month even with a lot of traffic.
BER starts happening very steeply when you approch the optical limit, it might go from 10^-20 to 10^-14 in just a few dB of optical level change.
-- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike () swm pp se
Current thread:
- Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Marshall Eubanks (Apr 10)
- Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Patrick W. Gilmore (Apr 10)
- Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Mikael Abrahamsson (Apr 10)
- [SPAM] Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Jean-Michel Planche (Apr 10)
- Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Matthew Kaufman (Apr 10)
- Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Lamar Owen (Apr 10)
- Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Matthew Kaufman (Apr 10)
- Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Mikael Abrahamsson (Apr 10)
- Re: Forward Erasure Correction (FEC) and network performance Lamar Owen (Apr 10)