SEACOM upgrades its subsea cable to 1.5Tbps

Newsfeed

MyBroadband Newsfeed
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
6,419
SEACOM upgrades its subsea cable to 1.5Tbps

SEACOM recently upgraded its submarine network system between the southern and eastern Africa landing points and Europe.

The upgrade adds 500Gbps of capacity to the network, and follows a previous 500Gbps upgrade 18 months ago. The capacity of the cable system is now 1.5Tbps.
 

eg2505

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
15,813
what are most cables between say London and the US carrying?

is this fast? or still slow?
 

etienne_marais

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
6,522
The data travels at the speed of light so its always the same speed. The bandwidth indicates how much data can be sent at once which will dictate the overall speed of the network.
Ah, that makes sense, I now consider myself enlightened.
 

Concentric

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2017
Messages
767
The data travels at the speed of light so its always the same speed. The bandwidth indicates how much data can be sent at once which will dictate the overall speed of the network.
doea this have to do with the transmission cables or the hardware on each end?
 

ArtyLoop

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
6,568
assuming fiber cables travelling at the speed of light... what is done to increase bandwidth. Thats what im after
- Commission of more fiber pairs within the same cable run
- Implementation of WDM (wave division multiplexing) although I think SEACOM used that from the word go

As per previous cables, its about the channels it can carry, not about the speed. Multiplexing is indeed applied, with negligble time delay. This means that all the channels' data arrives more or less at the same time at either end.
 

eg2505

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
15,813
It's not fast or slow, it's not speed, it's bandwidth.
ok, to more correctly ask, what is the Bandwidth in other submarine cables around the world,

in particular, the UK and US. how does ours compare to major submarines cables around the world?
 

ArtyLoop

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
6,568
ok, to more correctly ask, what is the Bandwidth in other submarine cables around the world,

in particular, the UK and US. how does ours compare to major submarines cables around the world?
SEACOM is a pretty decent cable. I would think it compares favourably with cables all over the world.
You can compare these speeds/capacities by looking on Wikipedia, it is in there, a comparitive guide
 

Soul Assassin

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
9,314
ok, to more correctly ask, what is the Bandwidth in other submarine cables around the world,

in particular, the UK and US. how does ours compare to major submarines cables around the world?
I think the fasted one is owned by Microsoft and Facebook, that is 160Tbps, it runs from the USA to Spain.
 

Johnatan56

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
24,970
They probably swapped sections from 10G to 100G which became available commercially 2010/11 and mass-market applicable in 2012.
By 2010 to 2011, the technologies had reached a point of market maturity at which they could genuinely allow 100G coherent signals to be sent over the same (and sometimes greater) distances as 10G IM-DD
https://www.infinera.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Infinera_Coherent_Tech.pdf

Interesting paper.
1.5Tbps is not that much if you think about it.

The above paper links to super-channels, which is the evolution of DWDM
DWDM is an innovation that enables multiple optical carriers to travel in parallel in a fiber to more efficiently use the expensive fiber assets that have been installed over thousands of kilometers in the ground and on aerial poles. Many in the industry view the “state of the art” in DWDM in 2012 and 2013 to be 100 Gb/s. However, the growth in the internet is demanding additional bandwidth scale without increasing operational complexity, and asking the question, “What is beyond 100 Gb/s?” One answer is a super-channel, an evolution in DWDM in which several optical carriers are combined to create a composite line side signal of the desired capacity, and which is provisioned in one operational cycle. Later, this paper will explain why it becomes more practical to combine multiple carriers into a super-channel to move beyond 100 Gb/s than it is to simply increase the data rate of an individual carrier. However, from the point of view of the client-side services that use them, such as a 10G, 100G or 1Tb Ethernet connection from a service provider to an enterprise customer, super-channels are indistinguishable from a single carrier channel of the same data rate.

...

The first generation “split spectrum” super-channels (See: “Implementing Super-Channels”) will offer around 8 Tb/s in the C-band—between five and 10 times the spectral efficiency offered by 10G IMDD systems that use a traditional 50 GHz grid. When service providers are ready to move “ Bringing up multiple wavelengths [in the form of a super-channel] on the same card means less patching of fibers so there are fewer opportunities for something to go wrong.
Over the past few years we’ve increased our lit kilometers across Europe by a factor of four—but our OpEx costs have only risen by about one point five. Infinera has had a part to play in this success story and it creates a cost advantage we can pass on to our customers to help us win business.” Matthew FinnieCTO, Interouteoutside the current ITU DWDM fixed grid spacing (defined in ITU G.694.1), the next generation of “gridless” super-channels will offer ven higher spectral efficiency, enabling a gain of up to 25% in net fiber capacity through more efficient spectrum use. Finally, super-channels will allow service providers to support the next generations of Ethernet, video and storage area network client-side services that will one day operate at data rates in excess of 100 Gb/s (which is the highest data rate of Ethernet defined today in IEEE802.3ba). At this stage it’s not clear what that data rate will be (the two main candidates being 400 Gb/s and 1 Tb/s), so super-channels must be flexible enough to deal with this challenge when it arrives.
https://www.infinera.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SuperChannel_WhitePaper.pdf

I'd be interested when they move to flex-grid/super-channels.

EDIT:
Yep,
Microsoft and Facebook agreed to partner on the development, design and implementation of a 4,000-mile-long subsea cable connecting Virginia Beach, Virginia, and Bilbao, Spain
The most amazing part of it is how quickly they managed it.
Construction of Marea started in August 2016, and the cable began its journey across the Atlantic approximately five months ago. The physical work to manufacture and lay the cable has now been completed, and it is planned to be operational in early 2018. From design through construction, Marea was completed in less than two years — nearly three times faster than the typical subsea cable project.
https://news.microsoft.com/features/microsoft-facebook-telxius-complete-highest-capacity-subsea-cable-cross-atlantic/
EDIT2:
Google's FASTER is the second fastest I think, at 60Tbps over 5600 miles.
https://www.extremetech.com/internet/231074-googles-faster-undersea-cable-goes-online-with-60-tbps-of-bandwidth
 
Last edited:

Dude486

New Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2019
Messages
1
It does not travel at the speed of light.
The data travels at the speed of light so its always the same speed. The bandwidth indicates how much data can be sent at once which will dictate the overall speed of the network.
 

Soul Assassin

Executive Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
9,314
It does not travel at the speed of light.
What's 100000 kilometre per second between friends.

Also I like how you just needed to correct him so bad you registered on a forum you've probably never been on, on a post from 2018 and then you didn't even add the information you're correcting him on.
 

cavedog

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
14,029
Interesting to note and not sure if the capacity is still the same but 1500 x 1Gbps users all maxing their line is equal to the capacity of the whole cable.

Obviously it's more complex than that depending on the providers transit capacity ect ect but it's interesting nonetheless.
 
Top