<<When multiple OC-48s are created and each is mapped to its own lambda, effectively, at these 'relatively low' speeds, it has a tendency of creating an unnecessary and burdensome level of administrative 'make work.' >>
<<Why deliver 28 individual T-1s, when a T-3 does the trick? Why deliver 12 individual T-3s to a location, each over their own fiber strands or coaxial feeds, when an OC-12 pipe does it all within a 7 to 9 micron silica core?>>
<<And keep in mind that after all is said and done, these assumptions are all predicated on the hypothesis that this stuff actually works. [grin]>>
OK. We all can understand the concept that simpler is usually better and as you say if it works will probably win out in the long run.
BUT, my DWDM question has to do more with the concept of the cost-effectiveness of increasing the capacity of the datastream vs increasing the number of wavelengths.
Your analogy is not quite accurate in this regard, because I'm thinking along the lines of "What if those 28 T-1s suddenly became comparable to T-3s in capacity without the corresponding increase in cost?"
Now T-1s won't become T-3s, but what stops the current DWDM technology from carrying higher capacity datastreams in each channel? What are the difficulties? What are the costs vs increasing the complexity further with even more wavelengths?
As I say, I'm not an engineer or scientist. I just want to know what the DWDM industry might be able to do to easily counter this technology in the near future. After all they have the big advantage of being the currently entrenched technology. |
