AE requires a lot more electronics and optics. And fiber. And battery backup. Etc.
On Mar 27, 2017 4:33 PM, "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > Years ago, there was a break even point on active vs PON. If you had 16 > or more in an area that could take a PON it was worth doing the PON. > But that was comparing Calix AE vs Calix PON. If you do AE like Sterling > I don't think PON is ever cost effective compared to Calix PON. > > With PON you still have to have a drop to each home. The cost of the > cable is in the placement, not in the cable itself. > So the question is, where do you place the splitter vs where do you place > the switch and SFPs. Personally, I would do it Sterling style on new > greenfield. The ONLY reason I do it with the expensive PON is we are a > regulated common carrier with provider of last resort obligations. I have > to give POTS that is battery backed up, legally required to do this. > > Cannot risk a 911 call not going through due to a power outage etc. > Cannot trust the customer to not unplug a UPS. > > -----Original Message----- From: Adam Moffett > Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 3:11 PM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON > > Yeah, so PON vs AE was actually the next research project for me to > tackle. > > It seems like there ought to be savings with PON because of lower fiber > count.....lower fiber count ought to lead to smaller/cheaper enclosures. > Less junk at the head end too. I haven't gotten that far yet, but I > was thinking I might "scrimp" with PON. You're saying maybe not? > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> > To: af@afmug.com > Sent: 3/27/2017 4:54:08 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON > > I would be worried that it will go the way of some of their other ideas. >> Cheap... you get what you pay for. >> >> FTTH, I would rather pay more and know it will be solid and be around in >> the years to come. >> Not an area where you want to scrimp. If you want to scrimp go active >> ethernet. >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Moffett >> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 12:56 PM >> To: af@afmug.com >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON >> >> Well....I have to build with what's available today. If I delay to wait >> for the next hot product, I'll always be waiting. >> >> Besides, I honestly don't know what Ubiquiti brings to the table that >> other vendors don't. I suppose it will be cost competitive, but that's >> less important to me than having it just work. >> >> -Adam >> >> >> ------ Original Message ------ >> From: "Jon Langeler" <jon-ispli...@michwave.net> >> To: af@afmug.com >> Sent: 3/27/2017 2:52:03 PM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON >> >> With ubiquiti shipping real soon, you might want to wait >>> >>> Jon Langeler >>> Michwave Technologies, Inc. >>> >>> >>> On Mar 27, 2017, at 2:47 PM, Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I asked the Alphion sales rep about this. He says the optics are >>>> coded, yes. As far as mixing ONT from one vendor with an OLT from another >>>> he said in essence GPON is a standard, but it isn't usually tested across >>>> vendors so whether it works fine, works with bugs, or doesn't work at all >>>> is going to be a matter of chance. >>>> >>>> >>>> ------ Original Message ------ >>>> From: fiber...@mail.com >>>> To: af@afmug.com >>>> Sent: 3/23/2017 2:54:04 PM >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON >>>> >>>> No, generally speaking there is no crossvendor compatibility with GPON. >>>>> >>>>> Jared >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >
