To: Lazarus Vekiarides who wrote (208 ) 11/3/1999 1:50:00 PM From: Frank A. Coluccio Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1782
re: fiber-optic transmission, network management, overhead standards work Laz, James, permit me to clarify what I was saying earlier and provide some helpful links. Two of them come to mind, both from articles relating to standards work in LightWave Magazine. "Standards committees examine 1600-nm window" by William B. Gardner lw.pennwellnet.com "Overhead implementation alternatives" by John Eaveslw.pennwellnet.com The first of these by Gardner speaks only lightly to the points discussed here, and, in fact, those implementations are still proprietary ones geared to monitoring ongoing signal strength levels, breaks, and possibly some rudimentary telemetry and an order wire for talking over by the carrier's craftspeople, etc., as being the overhead channel utility that I mentioned. From what I can see, and as plainly described in the article, there is more work to be done on this approach, and it is likely "not" one that is solely intended to satisfy network management, since bearer traffic would occupy those regions, as well. The reference to network management processes here is only cursory, in fact, in comparison to what might be in store for such additional spectrum if the other issues can be resolved, as stated in the piece. The second, by Eaves, actually addresses in band sub-carriers. These are but two articles on the subject of standards-based nework management and provisioning in the optical domain. There are other approaches being kicked around at this time, as well. I would be very surprised if the vendors who reign high in this space are not fully attuned to them. CIEN, I would have to imagine, is in the thick of it, as are the others who broke ground, early on. Regards, Frank Coluccio