<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 24/02/2016 14:18, Md. Abdul Awal
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:%3CCAEpui+v-Mo-+Um1k7-ogHAJxSBGVCVdrSMUhNTECeaRyOA-CkQ@mail.gmail.com%3E"
type="cite">
<div>We have a probable link to provision with a SM-MM-SM fiber
combination shown below:<br>
<br>
<img moz-do-not-send="true" shrinktofit="true"
src="imap://brian%40mail%2Ensrc%2Eorg@mail.nsrc.org:143/fetch%3EUID%3E/Trash%3E59970?part=1.3.1.1.2&filename=SM-MM-Combination.png"
height="107" width="498"><br>
<br>
</div>
Wondering if there is any issue in terms of QoS, data flow or any
other service related problem in the long run. I'd appreciate your
comments on that.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I would strongly recommend you don't do this: the amount of light
which can get from the MM into the much narrower SM is very low, and
the majority will be reflected back.<br>
<br>
What interfaces are you using at each end? A 1000baseLX SFP is
capable of running over either MM or SM, so if you simply use SM
patch cords at both ends then it's SM end-to-end, and all the
problems go away.<br>
<br>
If you are using 100baseFX media convertors then it might work, but
media convertors are unmanaged and notoriously unreliable. Putting
an SFP in a managed switch will be a much more robust solution.<br>
<br>
Something like the Netgear GS110TP costs about $150 and gives you
two SFP ports, 8 gigabit copper ports (with PoE!), and is fully
manageable (SNMP, HTTP, and telnet on port 60000)<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Brian.<br>
<br>
P.S. There are special "mode conditioning patch cords" you can get,
but these are used for the opposite situation - i.e. where the long
link is multi-mode and the tails are single-mode. (The idea is to
get slightly longer reach from existing MM plant)<br>
</body>
</html>