Gino, Where is that pricing from? Everywhere I've found is higher
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Gino Villarini <[email protected]> wrote: > For such a low user count, ill go with GEPON (vsGPON) We have been > sucessfully using it in MDU locations. Planet PizzaBox OLT with 2 GEPON > Ports is about $1200, ONUS (CPE) about $40 > > Put 64 in each.. your done > > So far, no issues... > > http://www.planet.com.tw/en/product/product.php?id=45442 > > > > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 9:48 AM, Chris Fabien <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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 < >> [email protected]> 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 [email protected] >>> >>> 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 <[email protected]> >>> Date: 2016-02-13 7:28 AM (GMT-05:00) >>> To: [email protected] >>> 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" <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>> 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" <[email protected]> >>>> 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 <[email protected]> >>>> 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" < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> >> > 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 [email protected] >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> 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 <[email protected]> >>>> >> >> Date: 2016-02-12 10:21 PM (GMT-05:00) >>>> >> >> To: [email protected] >>>> >> >> 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" <[email protected]> >>>> 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 < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> >> >>> 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 < >>>> [email protected]> >>>> >> >>>> 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 >>>> >> >>>> > <[email protected]> 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 [email protected] >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> 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 >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> > >>>> >>> >> > -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com 507-634-WiFi <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
