Am I missing something? There are already DWDM (dense wave division multiplexing) systems pushing 10Gb per channel. These systems typically support multiple channels (up to 64 on some), and have been out for some time. If they want to work on next-gen maybe they should set the bar a little higher at 20Gb/s.
I also think there's either no-news here or there's an error in this story. Did they mean 100Gbit/sec?
Core router interfaces in the big service provider and content provider networks are almost uniformly 10Gbit/sec these days; 40Gbit/sec interfaces have been available for a few years, but these interfaces are very expensive (the market is but a few companies, probably less than 100 units deployed worldwide, I'd estimate) and the DWDM systems to drive these are also still in their infancy.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Am I missing something? There are already DWDM (dense wave division multiplexing) systems pushing 10Gb per channel. These systems typically support multiple channels (up to 64 on some), and have been out for some time. If they want to work on next-gen maybe they should set the bar a little higher at 20Gb/s.
I also think there's either no-news here or there's an error in this story. Did they mean 100Gbit/sec?
Core router interfaces in the big service provider and content provider networks are almost uniformly 10Gbit/sec these days; 40Gbit/sec interfaces have been available for a few years, but these interfaces are very expensive (the market is but a few companies, probably less than 100 units deployed worldwide, I'd estimate) and the DWDM systems to drive these are also still in their infancy.