Optical Port

[Chris Forbes]

I wonder if the 3d render of the optical port shows the actual connector that will be used. Because it looks very similar to this.

http://www.tycoelectronics.com/prodimages/Comparison_Sr_Jr_Mini.jpg



http://www.tycoelectronics.com/aboutus/news/prodnews.asp?id=1038

[Charles Perkins]

your right it does. that looks very interesting stuff they have developed there.

one thing, hot linking your image might annoy the person hosting it so prehaps re-host it some where like www.imageshack.com instead.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

And you're probably right... Single mode fiber is probably the most logical. 10G copper ethernet would work too, but you don't get very long cable runs unless you go to shielded CAT-6E and/or CAT-7 wire and connectors. Even then nothing like you would get from fiber. Personally, I hope they have both fiber and 10GoC options. A lot of new network infrustructure being installed these days is using CAT-6E 10G compliant wirirng for upgradeability. So the copper solution seems logical as many new business locations will be ready for it provided they upgrade some connectors and switch hardware. Then they can keep the bulky RAID and capture systems in the noisy server room and camera with a single cable running to a wall plate in the studio/stage area. Of course, that's easily done with fiber too. I think those fiber cables have ranges close to 1.5 miles before a switch or repeater is necessary and the latency doesn't increase with distance anywhere near as fast.

[Chris Forbes]

That would make it a lot easier. Having the raid in the other room I mean. Adds to the crew list though.

I imagine that fiber and copper will be able to talk through an adapter box as long as you have the bandwidth.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Yep, as long as a fiber connection (or a copper connection for that matter) use standard protocols... Then it's just a matter of having the right router or switching hardware to change from one network topography to another. If non-standard protocols are used, it's still do-able, but RED or a third party would have to create such a product specifically for the RED system. The optical/fiber seems to be a given at this point, but I seem to recall Stuart, Rob or Graeme mentioning 10G copper as a possibility as well. The Optical port module is interchangeable and this is also where the FLASH module will attach to the camera. I could see them offering 10G copper and 10G fiber versions of the RAW port interface at some point in the future. It may be possible to incorporate both into the same module, but that may be cost-prohibitive. At this point, there really isn't much out there for 10G copper hardware anyway, so it's not like choosing fiber is asking anyone to throw away their 10G ethernet gear, nor is there any reason the two can't co-exist within someone's IT setup.

At this point, my big question is what sort of system will be required to actually communicate with the camera over this RAW interface? Will it only work with a RED-branded custom RAID box or will any PC/Mac/Linux box with an adequate storage system be able to do it? Theoretically over 10G Ethernet, a 10G connected NAS module with ample capacity and bandwidth could lock an IP channel for the camera and it could feed right over a local LAN. 10G Ethernet switches and interface boards are not exactly cheap or easy to come by right now though.

[Chris Forbes]

10G Ethernet switches and interface boards are not exactly cheap or easy to come by right now though.

You got that right. Not to mention the raid array fast enough to digest all that info. Hopefully the RED team will follow the same pricing revolution with their RED Raid that they did with the camera. That is some heavy lifting :weight_lift:

[Jeff Kilgroe]

That would make it a lot easier. Having the raid in the other room I mean. Adds to the crew list though.

Shouldn't need more crew just because it's in a different location. There should be a decent remote / network management interface for the RAID system. You can deal with it from a small computer or notebook on set, even if the RAID is in another room or across the street.

As for the 10G capable RAID systems. Not a problem, they exist already. They're not exactly cheap though, but the data rate is nothing a solid RAID-5/6/7 setup constructed of 25 to 30 decent performing HDDs couldn't handle. You may even be able to pull it off with as few as 12 fast 10K or 15K rpm drives and stick with RAID-0.

[Rocco Schult]

I think 10Gb is not such a good idea - too pricey indeed and outdated by the time released - the standards rise already. Better get infiniband or such. Cheaper architecture and intended for logical volumes - why use a network architecture for that ? To assure a proper transfer you'd have to respect many things like local buffer in case your server doens't make it due to that HD-videoconference to the R&D department. And that would make it even more expensive...
If its directly attached why then use 10Gb anyway ?

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I think 10Gb is not such a good idea - too pricey indeed and outdated by the time released - the standards rise already. Better get infiniband or such. Cheaper architecture and intended for logical volumes - why use a network architecture for that ? To assure a proper transfer you'd have to respect many things like local buffer in case your server doens't make it due to that HD-videoconference to the R&D department. And that would make it even more expensive...
If its directly attached why then use 10Gb anyway ?

Infiniband would work too, but it has it's own share of issues. Infiniband is 2.5Gb per connection, so you would need a quad-link setup to handle the RED RAW data. Infiniband is far more distance-limited than single mode fiber and 10GoC links. Not to say this is a big deal, infiniband can stretch to about 100ft in ideal situations before repeaters or switches are needed. The one issue I see with Infiniband is that at about 900MB/s for RED RAW, that's 7200mbps. A quad-link infiniband setup actually tops out at just under 8Gbps due to the 2bit per byte overhead, even for an open stream. You also lose some more data to layering overhead, so there's a good chance that a quad-link could become fully saturated. ...This would necessitate a jump to double quad-links for 16Gb throughput, which would be overkill, but cheaper and more efficient than using 5 single-links.

I was talking about 10GoC connections simply because they had been mentioned before by others. I still don't see it as a bad thing necessarily. IP / Ethernet networks are not going anywhwere anytime soon. 10G is already available although there aren't many providers and it's not cheap. Prices will fall over the next year or so. Infiniband, especially in quad-link or larger is pretty scarce as well and just as expensive as 10G ethernet, if not more so.

But I'll agree with Infiniband being a good option though... Or every bit as good as the 10GoC and possibly better as time goes on. I think the single-mode fiber is still the most logical and economical solution for now. And it provides the best performance guaranty with a lot of flexibility for cable lengths (miles, literally) as well as integration with other network topologies.