| Title: | FDDI - The Next Generation |
| Moderator: | NETCAD::STEFANI |
| Created: | Thu Apr 27 1989 |
| Last Modified: | Thu Jun 05 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 2259 |
| Total number of notes: | 8590 |
Hello,
We proposed a FDDI dual-ring solution to a customer, where the maximum
distance between stations and the rings never exceeds 1 Kms.
We proposed Multimode fibre, but our customer asks us, why Multimode
fibre instead of mono-mode fibre.
I know that the price is not the same, and that multimode seems to be
the standard for distance less than 2 kms, but could you give me some
advices to convince my customer that Multimode is a good choice for his
configuration.
For this kind of FDDI configuration, is there some performance
difference between Mono-mode and Multimode.
Thanks in advance for your help
Best Regards,
Yves.
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1738.1 | Lots of reasons | JUMP4::JOY | Perception is reality | Thu Jul 06 1995 18:37 | 20 |
Yves,
You have already mentioned the biggest differences between MMF and
SMF, price being the biggest. The customer won't get any better
performance by using SMF, it will cost significantly more for the
active components, it is slightly more difficult to terminate and patch
SMF due to its size, which might cause more loss, if they are
interested in using optical bypass relays they can't with SMF (they
don't exist), and for such short distances they may have to add an
attenuator to each fibre run so they don't overwhelm the receiver
(depends on active components). Does your customer have a reason they
want to use SMF? Future technologies such as ATM will run perfectly
fine over MMF (in fact, not many vendors support SMF yet in their ATM
gear), so by wanting SMF they could be limiting their future technology
choices.
For runs less than 2Km, MMF is the way to go. Hopefully your customer
won't insist on SMF.
Debbie
| |||||
| 1738.2 | Thanks a lot | ANNECY::MAIGRET_Y | Fri Jul 07 1995 06:14 | 1 | |