Splice a Fibre
73 points
9 hours ago
| 9 comments
| react-networks-lib.rackout.net
| HN
It's interactive, try and splice one!

Written in react, it's moderately heavy and not entirely mobile optimised.

sathackr
4 hours ago
[-]
The hardest thing about splicing fiber is not splicing fiber(at least not anymore)

It's cable management and routing to keep things from kinking and breaking while accounting for cable flexing, thermal expansion, and unforseen circumstances like another company lashing their cables to yours for vertical support.

All while maintaining future serviceability

reply
summa_tech
57 minutes ago
[-]
Can always go splice some PCF or PMF if you like to feel appreciated for your splicing. I swear I'd rather splice 100 SM fibers than 1 PMF.
reply
vasco
4 hours ago
[-]
And avoiding the NSA submarine taps!
reply
candiddevmike
7 hours ago
[-]
I was a fiber installer once upon a time in the 00s. A guy I worked with who was "the splicer" for our team and has years of experience using the little easy bake oven thing swore by going off the smell to know when it's "ready". Probably not the greatest thing for your health considering he did at least 10-12 of these a day.
reply
bcrl
5 hours ago
[-]
The old manual tools were extremely slow. Modern fibre splicers mean that a dozen fibres can be spliced in maybe a bit more half an hour, although cable prep cam take a significant amount of time depending on the cable type, number of cables and splice closure. Even more if you're using a ribbon splicer that fuses 12 fibres per burn.
reply
Sesse__
6 hours ago
[-]
Modern fiber splicers are fully automatic, so you don't need to smell :-) The only thing that's still mostly by hand is the cutting (mostly stripping away the various layers of insulation).
reply
duskwuff
2 hours ago
[-]
Modern fusion splicers are also shockingly cheap. You can get one for under $600.
reply
Sesse__
44 minutes ago
[-]
Yup, I have one from AliExpress :-) Only done ~50 splices or so, though, but works really well.
reply
dboreham
41 minutes ago
[-]
Plus tariff.
reply
Hikikomori
1 hour ago
[-]
Even 20 years ago when i was learning they were automatic.
reply
ndom91
8 hours ago
[-]
This would be a perfect plugin for Netbox! (https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox)
reply
Already__Taken
7 hours ago
[-]
I've always had stuff like this turned down by Netbox, they argue they want to model the logical topology as a source to trust, not the physicality, but then they model rack U placement. I'm always puzzled by their stance.

Like you can't model 1 cat5 split into two 100mb terminations, patch panels are kinda of hack, I think you can now but forever you couldn't just swap a termination direction because logically why would you (but their UI gets messy when 44 are done A-B and the 45th B-A)

Anyway that's thoughts as of maybe v2 or 3? Before the new UI when it was all jquery.

reply
dfc
3 hours ago
[-]
Netbox project used to go on and on about the philosophical justifications for not including n-type connections or different types of LMR. But the most recent release notes that I read had a blurb about all the new coax cable types they are supporting. I understand having limited time but instead of saying "no" they always had to make lofty philosophical arguments. It's weird.
reply
wkat4242
7 hours ago
[-]
> Like you can't model 1 cat5 split into two 100mb terminations

Ugh I don't really blame them there, that's really a dirty hack. Sure I've done in a pinch but not for permanent stuff.

I wouldn't call that professional network management. If you really wanna do it, just split the pairs over two patch ports IMO.

reply
bc569a80a344f9c
6 hours ago
[-]
One of the achievements in my career I’m lowkey proudest of is sneaking in the rewire of about 45,000 ports on a campus that were split pair after an explicit project to do so was shot down.
reply
toast0
3 hours ago
[-]
> Ugh I don't really blame them there, that's really a dirty hack.

I certainly wouldn't do it today, but using two pair for a connection designed for two pair isn't a dirty hack, it's as designed.

Today, using 4 pair for 1G or more and a small switch on the host side to get more ports is probably a better plan.

reply
wkat4242
2 hours ago
[-]
Oh I wasn't aware of this actually being an intended usecase. And yes like the other poster said, pairing it with a phone infrastructure was more common (in the days before these went all IP of course).

It was a bit of my OCD being triggered as well. I love neat cabling at work (at home it is chaos funnily enough).

reply
matt-p
6 hours ago
[-]
Of course, but a splitter in a PON network or a WDM device are perhaps better examples of things that are hacky to model. Multi-fibre cables and splices are another. Netbox is great for some simple applications, and it's fantastic OSS, but in practice falls short for many use cases.
reply
wkat4242
2 hours ago
[-]
I understand, my cabling OCD got a bit triggered, sorry :)
reply
pbh101
6 hours ago
[-]
Any links to PRs or discussions?
reply
richvos
4 hours ago
[-]
This looks really nifty, matt. I might be in the minority here, but would you consider making a similar model for PBX‘s? I’m having the hardest time visualizing all of the phone lines I have to deal with. This could be a really nice tool.
reply
dtgriscom
6 hours ago
[-]
Are fiber splices really only a 0.02dB drop? That only a 0.23% reduction in signal (if I have my math right). Impressive.
reply
fsh
6 hours ago
[-]
Fiber splicers are marvels of technology. They align the fiber cores with sub-micrometer accuracy and produce just the right amount of heat and pressure to melt the ends together. They are also usually very rugged, fully automated, and surprisingly cheap (a few thousand euros). It is remarkable what is possible when the entire internet relies on a technology.
reply
matt-p
6 hours ago
[-]
That is probably the very best case scenario, but possible yes. Typically you'd accept anything less than 0.1dB.
reply
cycomanic
5 hours ago
[-]
I did my PhD on fibre lasers, 0.1 DB would have been considered a ver bad splice and I would have recut and respliced (if you have 1-10W in your cavity that 0.1 dB loss would risk burning and the fuse propagating through your cavity destroying everything in its path (as a side not look up Videos of fibre fuse, looks fascinating). In my experience 0.01-0.02 is much more typical than 0.1 dB loss.
reply
matt-p
4 hours ago
[-]
I’m speaking mainly within the context of telecom field splicing - the numbers I mentioned are typical for that application in my experience. You’re only sending on the order of 5 mW down a fiber, so none of those high-power concerns apply. Obviously, different networks have different thresholds: if you’re building a greenfield, low-latency long-haul route, you want to minimize loss and it’s reasonable to spend the extra time and use higher-end equipment. For FTTH, with something like a 30 dB overall budget, nobody really cares whether a splice is 0.03 dB or 0.1 dB.
reply
eru
2 hours ago
[-]
What am I supposed to do?
reply
maartenh
7 hours ago
[-]
Nice! You might want to fix your GitHub link in the footer though, it 404's for me right now :)
reply
matt-p
7 hours ago
[-]
Thanks! Sorry, looks like I made the repo private at some point I'll take a look later but for now I've fixed the link.
reply
kotaKat
2 hours ago
[-]
Are there a set of controls I'm missing? I'm confused on how to work with this.
reply
matt-p
2 hours ago
[-]
Click a unused fibre and drag it to an empty 'splice holder' then do the same on the other side. You can also use double tap on mobile I think.

Sorry! In practice manual usage is normally very rare, these are typically auto generated!

reply
zwnow
8 hours ago
[-]
We were splicing some fiberglass in job training a few years back and it was honestly pretty cool! The website is also really nice, I remember seeing the color codes on the splicing machine. Mesmerizing piece of technology.
reply
matt-p
7 hours ago
[-]
Definitely mesmerising the first time! We have ribbon fibre these days as well which is very cool too.

Thank you :)

reply