High-radix network switch modules may support a high number of connectors on their faceplates. Network port standards allow 1-lane and wider ports (e.g., 12-lane for CXP), and wider ports use larger connectors and thus fewer connectors on the faceplate. Different applications use different port bandwidth. Traditionally, either 1-lane (e.g., Small Form-Factor Pluggable (SFP)) or 4-lane (e.g., Quad Small Form-Factor Pluggable (QSFP)) ports predominate the Ethernet industry. As the bandwidth available per lane has reached 10 Gbps and above, however, not every system can take advantage of QSFP 4-lane ports.
In the following detailed description, reference is made to the accompanying drawings which form a part hereof, and in which is shown by way of illustration specific examples in which the disclosure may be practiced. It is to be understood that other examples may be utilized and structural or logical changes may be made without departing from the scope of the present disclosure. The following detailed description, therefore, is not to be taken in a limiting sense, and the scope of the present disclosure is defined by the appended claims. It is to be understood that features of the various examples described herein may be combined, in part or whole, with each other, unless specifically noted otherwise.
Traditional network ports have a fixed number of lanes. A lane includes a pair of transmit differential signals and a pair of receive differential signals for network communications. For example, there are multiple Ethernet standard protocols where 1 GbE and 10 GbE can be 1-lane protocols, 10 GbE, 40 GbE, and 100 GbE may be 4-lane protocols, and 100 GbE may be a 10-lane protocol. Accordingly, network chips, connectors, and cables have been defined to provide a fixed number of lanes for a network port. Ethernet standards have been emerging where a port of a network chip may be configured to be a 4-lane port (e.g., 4×25 G for 100 GbE), a 2-lane port (e.g., 2×25 G for 50 GbE), or a 1-lane port (e.g., 1×25 G for 25 GbE).
Existing connectors and cables for network ports are defined for a fixed number of lanes. This is not a problem for 1-lane ports or for multi-lane ports as long as the application calls for fixed lane-count ports (e.g., QSFP for a 4-lane port). When a multi-lane port of a chip in a network switch system, however, needs to be connected by network interface chips in computer systems having a varying number of lanes (e.g., 1-lane, 2-lane, 4-lane), the fixed lane-count connectors and cables will force certain lanes on a network chip port to be unusable, thus resulting in wasted or stranded lanes. A network chip may be a switch ASIC, a NIC (network interface controller) chip, an electrical transceiver chip (e.g., retimer, redriver), an optical transceiver chip, or a combination of these chips interconnected.
To minimize product models, many switches include QSFP ports. Using only one lane or two lanes out of the available four lanes, however, is wasteful. Therefore, users may buy switches with QSFP 4-lane ports for future proofing, and use break-out cables to fan-out four SFP 1-lane ports for every QSFP port. This approach is expensive and can introduce signal integrity issues. A fan-out cable may also be difficult to provide appropriate cable lengths, resulting installations with coiled up cables. The cable fan-out joint as well as cable coils can significantly introduce cable bulk that can impede air flow behind datacenter equipment racks.
Accordingly, this disclosure describes cable connectors to allow receptacles on the system side to accept a plurality of 1-lane cable assemblies so that switch manufacturers can design one system with one set of connectors on each faceplate that will allow varying lane-count cable assemblies by conjoining the plurality of 1-lane cable assemblies. Switch port signals may be connected to specific receptacle connector bays in a way that all the lanes of the network chips can be used. Therefore, the disclosure provides for high connector density and lower solution costs by enabling simple and compact connector designs. As will be further described, cable connectors of 1-lane cable assemblies may be conjoined to form multi-lane connectors and/or cable assemblies (e.g., 2-lane or 4-lane). Similarly, when it is desirable, the conjoined cable assemblies may be easily disjoined to be used as separate 1-lane cable assemblies.
Each network port connection is provided on a switch in the form of a receptacle for an external cable to be connected. Although the receptacles may be implemented on the front or the rear side of a switch, this disclosure uses the term “faceplate” to generically describe where the receptacles are located for cables to be installed.
Referring to the figures,
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
Similarly, interlocking geometries on the left side of the first cable connector may couple with a reverse geometry on the right side of second cable connector. More specifically, tabs 208 and recesses 206 on the left side of the first cable connector may couple with recesses 212 and tabs 214 on the right side of the second cable connector, respectively. The arrangement of the recesses and tabs on the connector cable 106 may vary, and are not limited to what is illustrated. Upon using the interlocking geometries to conjoin or couple cable connectors of 1-lane cable assemblies, pins 220 may be insertable through the holes 210 of the interlocking geometries (e.g., the tabs), in order to secure the conjoined 1-lane cable assemblies to each other, as illustrated in the following figures.
In addition to conjoining cable connectors of 1-lane cable assemblies, for example, via the interlocking geometries and pins described above, the multi-lane cable assembly may include cable joining devices to conjoin the multiple cables of the multi-lane cable assembly (e.g., see cable joining devices 110 in
The materials used for forming the cable joining device may vary. For example, the 4-way c-clip cluster 500 may be made of plastic, rubber, or metal. In addition, the c-shaped clips 502 may have various sizes for accommodating different diameters of cables. The cluster 500 illustrated may be appropriate for temporarily conjoining cables, since cables may be easily snapped in and out from the c-shaped clips 502 (e.g., when it is desirable to disjoin the cables 104 from the cluster 500). However, the c-shaped clips 502 may be enclosed (e.g., o-clip) for applications that require permanently conjoined cables. In addition to the c-shaped clips 502, the cluster 500 may include a number of holes 504 to retain spacer devices for keeping multiple clusters 500 a chosen or fixed distance from each other. Examples of various spacer devices are illustrated in
Based on whether cable connectors (e.g., cable connector 106) are fixed on either end of the cables 104, the cables 104 may be snapped onto a corresponding circlip (c-shaped clip 502) of the cluster, or the cluster 500 may be slipped onto the cables 104. For example, if there are cable connectors 106 on both ends of the cables 104, the clusters 500 may be placed between or among the cables 104, and the cables may snap on the circlips 502. Alternatively, if there are no cable connectors 106 on at least one end of the cables 104, the clusters may be slipped onto the cables 104.
Each network port connection is provided on a network switch module in the form of a receptacle for an external cable assembly to be connected. As an example, receptacles on the system side may be configured to accept the multi-lane cable assemblies described above, which include the plurality of conjoined 1-lane cable assemblies. The multiple receptacles to accept the plurality of conjoined 1-lane cable assemblies may be referred to as a single receptacle. As an example, the multi-lane cable assembly may include latching features for coupling the multi-lane cable assembly to the receptacle.
Although specific examples have been illustrated and described herein, a variety of alternate and/or equivalent implementations may be substituted for the specific examples shown and described without departing from the scope of the present disclosure. This application is intended to cover any adaptations or variations of the specific examples discussed herein. Therefore, it is intended that this disclosure be limited only by the claims and the equivalents thereof.
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/US2015/017964 | 2/27/2015 | WO | 00 |
| Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| WO2016/137485 | 9/1/2016 | WO | A |
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3521332 | Kramer | Jul 1970 | A |
| 4386752 | Pavlak | Jun 1983 | A |
| 4767338 | Dennis | Aug 1988 | A |
| 4797123 | Weber | Jan 1989 | A |
| 5263671 | Baum | Nov 1993 | A |
| 5386487 | Briggs | Jan 1995 | A |
| 5559590 | Arai et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
| 5564939 | Maitani et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
| 5586906 | Staros et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5669590 | Przewodek | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5993237 | Kern, Jr. et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 6062516 | Rizzo | May 2000 | A |
| 6175080 | Nightingale | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6216410 | Haberman | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6219479 | Madden | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6364721 | Stewart, III | Apr 2002 | B2 |
| 6378811 | Potter | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6669150 | Benoit | Dec 2003 | B2 |
| 6808116 | Eslambolchi | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6887091 | Wu | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6926237 | Shereyk | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 7044802 | Chiou et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7055784 | Stigler | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7119280 | Ray | Oct 2006 | B1 |
| 7134908 | Wu | Nov 2006 | B2 |
| 7241163 | Ray et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
| 7294789 | Watthanasintham | Nov 2007 | B1 |
| 7318740 | Henry et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
| 7494353 | Choi | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7494363 | Wu | Feb 2009 | B1 |
| 7605707 | German | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7622682 | Malin | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7648392 | Chambers et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7654831 | Wu | Feb 2010 | B1 |
| 7661979 | Hughes | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7789718 | Desard | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7841889 | Gerard et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7845859 | Roth et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
| 8212145 | Nagai | Jul 2012 | B2 |
| 8340123 | Barbieri | Dec 2012 | B2 |
| 8370704 | Ganga et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
| 8475197 | Zerebilov et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
| 8506176 | Daikuhara et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
| 8585426 | Zerebilov | Nov 2013 | B2 |
| 8596882 | Smrha et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
| 8636544 | Briant | Jan 2014 | B1 |
| 8639082 | Haley | Jan 2014 | B2 |
| 8645747 | Buckland et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
| 8668525 | Tu et al. | Mar 2014 | B1 |
| 8770990 | Sytsma et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
| 8867883 | Crain | Oct 2014 | B2 |
| 8882514 | Enge | Nov 2014 | B2 |
| 8910912 | Child | Dec 2014 | B2 |
| 8926339 | Houtz | Jan 2015 | B2 |
| 9088119 | Baker | Jul 2015 | B2 |
| 20040048506 | Chung et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040115997 | Scherer | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20050098688 | Miarka | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050224585 | Durrant | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050271328 | Ohtsu | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060148279 | German | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060189180 | Lang | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20070111598 | Quilici | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070232132 | Ling | Oct 2007 | A1 |
| 20100062627 | Ambo | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100065327 | Lin | Mar 2010 | A1 |
| 20100130063 | Lang et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
| 20110034082 | Zhu | Feb 2011 | A1 |
| 20110165785 | Lindner | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110168423 | Hagi | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110179728 | Cerny | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| 20110237112 | Wu | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110300735 | Wu | Dec 2011 | A1 |
| 20120129382 | Regnier | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120251064 | Crain | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20130005173 | Reed et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
| 20130183846 | Kappla et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
| 20130231011 | Sytsma | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20140038447 | Brown | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140041937 | Lloyd et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
| 20140205243 | Baker | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140363171 | Tang et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
| 20150244109 | Byczkiewicz et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 101789575 | Jul 2010 | CN |
| 102210065 | Oct 2011 | CN |
| 2007317434 | Dec 2007 | JP |
| 2009076375 | Apr 2009 | JP |
| 1020100068002 | Jun 2010 | KR |
| I267238 | Nov 2006 | TW |
| M430018 | May 2012 | TW |
| WO-2014043426 | Mar 2014 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Accessories for Retaining Helawrap Open Cable Cover HWCLIP08; 3 pages; Retrieved from Internet Sep. 1, 2015, <http://www.hellermanntyton.co.uk/site/products/protective-tubing-and-spiral-binding/hwclip08/161-64002>. |
| “8 Channel Dula Multi-lane Sata2 Enclosure Device Bracket Scsi Opening,” Retrieved from Internet Sep. 15, 2014, http://www.satacable.com/8-channel-dula-multi-lane-sata2-enclosure-device-bracket-scsi-opening.html. |
| “LC Right Angle Clip” Feb. 22, 2013, <http://www.senko.com/fiber/pdf_brochure/FeaturesBrochure_2013-v5.pdf >. |
| Dennis Martin, “Demartek Storage Networking Interface Comparison,” May 9, 2014, http://www.demartek.com/Demartek_Interface_Comparison.html. |
| Neer, et al.; “Advanced SAS Connections Converge at 3.0,” Retrieved form Internet Sep. 15, 2014; 5 pages; http://www.serialstoragewire.net/Articles/2009_12/molex.html. |
| PCT/ISA/KR, International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Nov. 11, 2015, PCT/US2015/016283, 9 pps. |
| PCT/ISA/KR, International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Jun. 19, 2015, PCT/US2014/057858, 12 pps. |
| PCT/ISA/KR, International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Nov. 20, 2015, PCT/US2015/017964, 10 pps. |
| Fiberstore, “QSFP+ in the 40 Gigabit Ethernet Fiber Optic Media Systems” available online at <http://www.fiber-optic-equipment.com/tag/qsfp-cables>, Jun. 30, 2014, 6 pages. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20180034192 A1 | Feb 2018 | US |