> 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
