> 19 dec. 2017 kl. 19:24 skrev Sabri Berisha <sa...@cluecentral.net>:
> 
> ----- On Dec 18, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Fredrik Korsbäck hu...@nordu.net wrote:
> 
>> This is the "failure" of us (the business) choosing QSFP as the de-factor
>> formfactor for 100G, there is not power in
>> that cage to make 10km+ optics in an easy way. If we would have pushed for 
>> CFP4
>> as the "last" formfactor in 100G land we
>> would be much better off.
> 
> How about OSFP? The OSFP MSA has a large number of backers, including 
> Juniper, Arista, Finisar and Google. 

Yes, on OSFP we have the possbility of making this right again for 400G. It 
will not have the same backward compability as QSFP-DD and not the same 
faceplate density (but close enough i would say). But in return we would most 
likely see longrange optics MUCH earlier in the lifecycle of 400G


> 
> It's the vendors that chose to go for QSFP due to the density options in a 
> single RU chassis.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sabri


Reply via email to