Andreas, the key issue we ran into was PON port utilization. You'll need to very carefully lay out your fiber routes. Our typical service area is rural roads, 5-20 houses per mile. So with PON we were excited at the prospect of being able to place a 1x8 splitter each mile and then a 1x4 at each pedestal (up to 8 peds per mile). This seemed like a great fit and would let us do up to 5 miles of road fed from a single 12F drop cable. The problem is that you end up essentially allocating a PON for each mile and never fully loading it because there's not that many houses on that mile. Since you are starting with a 70% penetration that may help, we typically see 50%-60% only after a couple years in a deployment. These are mostly unserved areas we are deploying, but most customers are suck in contract with someone.
I think a "typical" GPON deployment will have a splitter/patch cabinet out in the field where they aggregate several hundred strands from homes to one spot and then install 1x32 splitters in that cabinet as needed. Then you only need 1 fiber per splitter back to you NOC where the OLT lives. So you still need a cabinet somewhere that is susceptible to damage, you still need at least medium size cables coming back to the cabinet, you still need 10s of strands back to the NOC. It just made more sense to me to make that an active cabinet. Maybe as a WISP guy I'm more comfortable with electronics out in a cabinet than some providers. Neither is a wrong answer ultimately, and the customers won't know and will be thrilled either way. On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Andreas Wiatowski <andr...@silowireless.com > wrote: > Firstly, thankyou everyone for this amazing discussion. I have been > struggling to decide which direction to choose for quite some time. I > understand the merits of each technology, realistically we anticipate > growing this area to 600+ subs. We have multiple villages within 3 km of > each other that we will expand to. Why this entire build is exciting is > that we already own 70 percent of the market. Getting these customers on > fibre allows those that can't a much better experience as we unload the > tower sites and reduces CAPEX on those existing assets. We will be putting > the cabinet beside a carrier fiber cabinet where I will purchase a 1Gbps > tls back to my core where I can expand and provision multiple tls. I can > envision using GPon to cost effectively come back to that centralized > cabinet and remove the power requirements and maintain a single cabinet. I > understand active gives me cheap fast full GB to the home, but my guess is > that consumers will be happy with a 25 Mbps experience or better. I think > that the gpon solution is upgradeable enough... Yes, you have to change > out cards and ONT, but that is a business decision when the time comes. > > I may just do active on this project as I have a lot of pricing research > to do with the GPon vendors mentioned and their technology road map, nms > systems and capabilities. > > Wondering, do some GPon deployments bring a strand from each house back > to the centralized box into the splitter, or the splitter located near a > group of homes and strands run to it? Or a variety of both? > > Thanks! > > > > Cheers, > > ______________________________ > > Andreas Wiatowski | CEO > > Silo Wireless Inc. > > Email andr...@silowireless.com > > 19 Sage Court > > Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA) > > Tel +1.519.449.5656 Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free > +1.866.727.4138 > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Chris Fabien <ch...@lakenetmi.com> > Date: 2016-02-13 7:28 AM (GMT-05:00) > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon? > > Josh, > I don't think anyone is disputing that gpon is the right solution for an > isp with 1000s or millions of users. But Andreas asked about 110. > > That size of project is something I think a lot of WISP are likely to be > working on. Our fiber network is currently several projects of that size - > 50 to 200 homes within a few miles of a powered cabinet in a remote area. > Active was the cheapest way for me to do that and supports 1gig to each > home. > > Power for a 20u cabinet ( 288 ports in our design) will be about $30/mo > when fully loaded. And just 2 strands back to our NOC instead of 9 with PON > which is very significant if you happen to be leasing those strands, which > we are in one case. > On Feb 13, 2016 4:48 AM, "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: > >> Eric it doesn't matter. That's 1024 strands, 1024 SFPs, more power >> usage, more cooling, in multiple bigass cabinets. >> >> Does. Not. Scale. >> >> You take that into a dense suburb and that's what you end up with. >> >> This is precisely why every decent ISP of size is deploying GPON and >> not "active" fiber. The costs to get up _and_ maintain active is >> several magnitudes higher. Let's say you were comcast and you were >> rolling this out to your 22 million users on active. That's 22 million >> SFPs, 22 million ports, an asston of strands, huge cabinets, large >> batteries that have to get changed out every few years, HVAC, etc. >> Even on a relatively common GPON deployment (32 way), you're talking >> about a 32x reduction in port count, sfps, strands to pops, etc. from >> 22million ports to 687k. That's nothing to sneeze at. >> >> On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 3:24 AM, Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuh...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > That's assuming all 1024 active ports are in one central location and >> not >> > distributed around, like 96 ports in one place, accomplished with a >> pair of >> > 48-port 1u switches (fed on a 10Gbps ring) accompanied by a beefy UPS, >> in a >> > weatherproof ventilated 16U cabinet. >> > >> > Multiply by location of several network nodes each with anywhere from 1 >> to 6 >> > 1U switches. >> > >> > On Feb 12, 2016 7:47 PM, "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> If you're doing a super small project, no more than a hundred or two >> >> hundred customers in an area, then it can make sense. There comes to >> >> be a point where the port cost of active does NOT scale. >> >> >> >> 1024 subs on GPON with a modest 32 way split is done with 32 GPON >> >> SFPs, 32 ports, 32 way split per GPON SFP. 2 line cards in a 2U >> >> chassis. >> >> >> >> On active, that's 1024 active ports and SFPs. That's insane. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Chris Fabien <ch...@lakenetmi.com> >> wrote: >> >> > I am also a proponent of active. Especially for small projects like >> >> > this. >> >> > Very low cost of entry. >> >> > >> >> > We looked at gpon including Alphion and ended up with still needing >> all >> >> > the >> >> > strands home run to the cabinet to fully load up each PON or we >> ended up >> >> > with a bunch of money wasted on PONs that would never be fully >> utilized >> >> > if >> >> > we did splitting closer to the customer. >> >> > >> >> > On Feb 12, 2016 10:30 PM, "Andreas Wiatowski" < >> andr...@silowireless.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> So, I understand the benefits of GPon ... What brand would you >> >> >> consider? >> >> >> ... I have been looking at Alphion. Huawei seems like a good >> option... >> >> >> But >> >> >> much more expensive. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> >> >> >> ______________________________ >> >> >> >> >> >> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO >> >> >> >> >> >> Silo Wireless Inc. >> >> >> >> >> >> Email andr...@silowireless.com >> >> >> >> >> >> 19 Sage Court >> >> >> >> >> >> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA) >> >> >> >> >> >> Tel +1.519.449.5656 Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll Free >> >> >> +1.866.727.4138 >> >> >> >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> >> >> From: Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com> >> >> >> Date: 2016-02-12 10:21 PM (GMT-05:00) >> >> >> To: af@afmug.com >> >> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon? >> >> >> >> >> >> You realize the transport core to the gpon OLT chassis is still >> active >> >> >> fiber in many designs, right? I also am unsure if you are aware of >> the >> >> >> upgrade process to NG-PON2 - you can run it on the same fiber >> strand as >> >> >> your >> >> >> existing PON split. Add the new card into the chassis and move the >> >> >> split >> >> >> over to the new SFP. Upgrade the customers at your leisure. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 12, 2016 9:13 PM, "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuh...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Key part there is, is going to be... is it available or shipping >> now? >> >> >>> If somebody wants to start a build now, the choice is between GPON >> or >> >> >>> active. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Having an active fiber path, even with just one strand (for BiDi >> >> >>> optics) >> >> >>> gives you a nearly infinite lifespan of the installed light path >> and >> >> >>> cable >> >> >>> plant, if things are maintained correctly. With a dedicated light >> path >> >> >>> from >> >> >>> each powered network node to the customer you could upgrade to >> >> >>> active-E 10, >> >> >>> then 40, then 100Gbps someday. Yes we will see customers with >> 10GbE >> >> >>> optics >> >> >>> in the next ten years. And maybe in 20 or 30 years from now it'll >> be >> >> >>> cheap >> >> >>> and easy to connect each customer with an SFP-sized coherent QPSK >> >> >>> 100GbE >> >> >>> optic at each end. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Josh Reynolds < >> j...@kyneticwifi.com> >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> 10-40Gbps on NG-PON2 is going to be the real deal, and betting >> >> >>>> against >> >> >>>> it vs active ethernet at scale for residential service is just... >> >> >>>> dumb, to be honest (IMO). >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> The size of your backbone ends up being monstrous with active, as >> >> >>>> well >> >> >>>> as having to keep the cabinets powered, UPS+batteries, enclosurers >> >> >>>> maintained, etc. PON is simply so much cheaper are scale, and in >> >> >>>> residential every dollar counts. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Eric Kuhnke < >> eric.kuh...@gmail.com> >> >> >>>> wrote: >> >> >>>> > I did forget to mention that I'm firmly on the side of activeE >> >> >>>> > being >> >> >>>> > the >> >> >>>> > best choice, for one big reason... You can use all kinds of >> >> >>>> > SFP-based >> >> >>>> > equipment (24/48-port 1U switches) or chassis based switches and >> >> >>>> > routers >> >> >>>> > with 24/48-port blades from a huge variety of manufacturers. >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > There's a lot of 48-port SFP stuff out there on the >> >> >>>> > grey/refurb/used >> >> >>>> > market >> >> >>>> > that came out of datacenters, and no longer meets the bandwidth >> >> >>>> > needs >> >> >>>> > for >> >> >>>> > people who are doing 10GbE (or 2x10GbE) to each bare metal >> >> >>>> > hypervisor. >> >> >>>> > But >> >> >>>> > that same equipment is perfect for activeE. >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > Same idea as a Cisco 3750G-48 is no longer enough bandwidth for >> >> >>>> > 1000BaseT to >> >> >>>> > the server in colo environments, but is perfect for MDU use. >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > GPON/EPON/whateverPON is all a mess of manufacturer proprietary >> >> >>>> > CPEs >> >> >>>> > and >> >> >>>> > non-interoperable stuff. Whereas with activeE and a real >> ethernet >> >> >>>> > port >> >> >>>> > for >> >> >>>> > each customer you can use $30 media converters as your demarc. >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Andreas Wiatowski >> >> >>>> > <andr...@silowireless.com> wrote: >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> Hi all, >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> Looking to do my first ftth for about 110 homes. >> >> >>>> >> If I do active, what switch platform would you use for sfp in >> >> >>>> >> cabinet and >> >> >>>> >> in home router/cabinet. >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> If GPon, what vendor would you choose that is cost >> >> >>>> >> effective/reliable >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> I understand the full limitations of GPon.. But I feel it is an >> >> >>>> >> attractive >> >> >>>> >> proposition compared to active... And the few systems I have >> seen >> >> >>>> >> have a >> >> >>>> >> road map to faster olt access. >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> Cheers, >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> ______________________________ >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> Andreas Wiatowski | CEO >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> Silo Wireless Inc. >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> Email andr...@silowireless.com >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> 19 Sage Court >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> Brantford, Ontario N3R 7T4 (CANADA) >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> Tel +1.519.449.5656 Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 |Toll >> Free >> >> >>>> >> +1.866.727.4138 >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> > >> >
