I believe because the focus was on cost. On Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 2:01 PM Paul Stewart <p...@paulstewart.org> wrote:
> That assumes you want to work on Zhone gear L… why not Calix/Adtran etc? > Personally I much prefer Calix for that kind of stuff… > > > > Paul > > > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] *On Behalf Of *Lewis Bergman > *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:14 AM > > > *To:* af@afmug.com > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon? > > > > What about somebody like Zhone? Last time I evaluated them they had a > "pizza box" GPON you could get into pretty cheap yet they still had all the > components you could want from the OLT to ONT to a pretty inexpensive TR069 > management SW platform. Making good money in this business always seems to > be about reducing truck rolls. AE doesn't provide that much info end to end > while GPON and TR069 seem to be able to drown you in whatever you want to > see. > > Like others have said, to me it is the cabinets spread over everywhere > that really turns me off. Negotiating, paying for, and maintaining all > those spaces just makes my head hurt. I don't know what the possibility to > turn 110 homes into something more are. If designed right you could always > migrate it to GPON to fold it into a unified management system. The numbers > we looked at the ONT cost savings started to catch up with active around 75 > users I think. > > On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 6:28 AM Chris Fabien <ch...@lakenetmi.com> wrote: > > 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 > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> > > >
