Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!gatech!udel!burdvax!gvlv2!kleonard From: kleonard@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM (Ken Leonard) Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: One aspect of bandwidth (backplane bus) Keywords: Backplane Message-ID: <206@gvlv2.GVL.Unisys.COM> Date: 21 Apr 89 13:13:44 GMT References: <407@bnr-fos.UUCP[ <17500@obiwan.mips.COM[ <607@geovision.UUCP> <710@ultb.UUCP> Distribution: usa Organization: Unisys Great Valley Laboratory Lines: 32 * [stuff deleted] * Is anyone out there actually doing work with fiber optic busses? --well, our so-called VHSLAN (now building prototype) can be run can be run as a "bus" (sort of ring-like) as well as a "net" (sort of crossbar-like.) * I remember reading that the bandwidth of current fiber optic --true, but watch out for what "bandwidth" really means * cables is in the 3500 _Gigahertz_ range in the IR band alone. --let's say that the channel bandpass is 3500 gigabits max with present technology but not forget that by the time we're almost economically reasonable and have gotten the error rate really under control, we're talking about 2000 to 2400 gigabaud at approx 1/2 bit information per baud (yes, I typed it right, about 2 line state times per INFORMATION bit) * This would seem to be adequate for the next generation of * computers (but probably not the generation after that....), esp --well, it just about fits the current generation top-end systems with one fiber-wavelength-channel per data channel * considering that fiber optic cables were meant for multiplexing. --OUCH--that word again--_multiplexing_--multiple frequencies/wavelengths per fiber is NOT MULTIPLEXING--unless you regard the common case of umpteen zillion radio and TV stations sharing the same luminiferous aether to be also a case of multiplexing --so-called frequency- or wavelength-division multiplexing is NOT AT ALL SIMILAR TO time-division or contention or code-division multiplexing and is almost an entirely separate discussion --FDM/WDM is really PROPAGATION MEDIUM SHARING --TDM/CM/CDM etc is SIGNAL CHANNEL SHARING, at best, and is often (usually at the present?) more like DATA CHANNEL SHARING * Each board could have it's own frequency range, allowing * multiple boards to talk at the same time. Any comments? --and let's not forget ((decision) engine sharing?) and (switch space sharing?) and (information sharing?) and (?) --ain't this fun?