I'm on board with that as far as it goes, but has the scenario of adjustable launch powers so that you don't ever need attenuators plus the economy of scale that would come from having *one* type of interface for 1m-10km runs been considered? It seems to me based on what I've seen of the optics market that once you make something a mass-produced commodity the price falls awfully far - suppose the price difference was $250 vs. $375, that's a big difference on a percentage basis but pocket change on an absolute basis.

I'm inclined to agree that when we are talking about unit numbers between 10km >> 40km optics, the marginal price change of a few bucks per optic (vs the human time to go and fix/groom/find/reduce optical losses) is pretty minimal. For that 1% of customers that finds their total cost significantly impacted (vs, say the cost of the equipment these are going into, etc).... would force 10% of us to have to engineer bypass cross-connect panels with fewer physical connections (and spliced ones at that) to get the job done. Just my guess... but no one has really complained about 10km reach optics being so expensive after the first 5 minutes they've been on the market. Personally, I wish this much cost could be cut out of the 80/120km optics market... but hey, no one is asking me. Deepak

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:

Ted Seely and I are of the same mind on this. 2 dB sounds like plenty for connector loss right up until you have to deal with multiple patch bays in a structured system with amateurishly applied mechanical splices. The difference between noting that the loss is a little high but the link still works so you roll with it, and having to spend time on the phone arguing with someone who thinks 24 dB link loss is A-OK, will make the slight additional up front cost for the better grade optics look very inexpensive indeed... This is somewhat interesting subject. The optical margins for "short-haul" optics are getting tighter. The number of crossconnects in a structural wiring system is getting larger. Given the specified SC connector insertion loss of .75dB, it is not uncommon to see loss within a facility for "working" crossconnects of 3-4dB.

Is anyone giving thought to going forward to connectors like MU/E2000 for structured wiring (which have much lower specified loss - I believe .1dB), or the installed base makes it prohibitive? -alex [not mlc anything]