----- Original Message ----- > From: "Leo Bicknell" <bickn...@ufp.org>
> In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 08:27:27PM -0500, Jay > Ashworth wrote: > > You're assuming there, I think, that residential customers will have > > mini-GBIC ports on their routers, which has not been my experience. > > :-) > > They don't today because there is no demand for such a feature. My > point is that if people deployed FTTH in this way, there would be demand > for such products. Many of the chipsets inside these boxes already > support SFP PHY, they just don't put an SFP connector on them to save > a couple of bucks. If there was demand vendors would have a product out > in months not years, probably within $10 of current prices (not > counting optics). XBOX 360s? There are still lots of people without routers, don't forget. > > Understand that I'm not concerned with minimizing the build cost to > > the > > muni; I'm interested in *maximizing the utility of the build*, both > > to the > > end-user customers, *and* to local businesses who might/will serve > > them. > > Yes, which is why you want to remove anything electronic possible, > and to large extent any prismatic devices. Single mode from the > 1990's will carry 10GE today, if unfettered. Today's single mode > will carry 100GE+ for a 50+ year lifespan, if properly installed. > Electronics last 5-10, and then must be replaced, at a cost passed > on to consumers. The GigE GPON isn't cutting it anymore? Fine, > let's replace all the electronics and update the splitters to 10GE, > at great cost! Have you missed, Leo, all the places wherein I've likened GPON to the AntiChrist? :-) That said, anyone for whom GiGE handoff is *not* good enough is a Layer 1 customer anyway. > By having a direct fiber pair to the home ISP's could run 100Mbps to > one customer, GigE to another customer, and 10x10GE WDM to a third customer, > just for the cost of equipment. Own two business locations? You don't > even contract with an ISP; you pay the Muni $10/month for fiber to > each prem, and $2/month for a cross connect and light it up however you > want. We are in violent agreement, then. But *that's not the statistical majority of the customer base*. At least not at first. > Plug in a GigE LAN switch on each end and off you go. It's the ultimte > empowerment, fiber for everyone! If necessary, yes. The city itself will certainly be a Layer 1 customer. > > Based also on the point Owen makes about reducing truck rolls by > > having > > netadmin controlled hardware at the customer end, I'm not at all > > sure > > I agree; I think it depends a lot on what you're trading it off > > *against*. > > That can be fixed in other ways. It would be easy to make a standard > SNMP mib or something that the service provider could poll from the > customer gateway, and service providers could require compatable > equipment. There are ethernet OAM specs. "Customer gateway". Isn't that the box you're denigrating? :-) Or do you mean the "FSLAM"? > In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 09:24:51PM -0500, Jay > Ashworth wrote: > > > To put that in patch panel racks, 10,368 households * 6 fibers per > > > house (3 pair) / 864 per rack = 72 racks of patch panels. Using a > > > relatively generous for 2-post patch panels 20sq feet per rack it > > > would be 1,440 sq feet of colo space to house all of the patch > > > panels to homes. > > > > Oh, I hope to ghod we can get higher density that that. > > I'm sure it's possible. I would be there is an LC solution by now, and > this is also discounting direct fusion splicing which would be 20-40x > smaller in footprint. > > That said, the fiber MMR I'm proposing is of similar size to the telco > CO's serving the same size towns today; except of course the Telco CO > is filled with expensive switches, generators, battery banks, etc. Sure. > I don't want to understate the fiber management problem in the MMR, it's > real. Some thought and intelligence would have to go into the design of > how patches are made, making heavy use of fusion splice trays rather > than connectors, high density panels, and so on. That said, Telcos did > a fine job of this with copper for hundreds of years when every line > ran back to a central frame. There are fiber providers doing similar things > today, not quite on the same scale but in ways that could easily scale > up. I have at least 24 months to watch the industry go by, probably longer. > I would like to build an infrastrucutre that could last 50-100 years, > like the telephone twisted pair of the last century. The only tech I > can see that can do that is home run single mode fiber to the home. > Anything with electronics has no chance of that lifespan. Anything > with splitters and such will be problematic down the road. Simpler is > better. IMO, what has to last 50 years is *the plant*. You and I are both putting terminal equipment on each end, we just differ on what it does, and who pays for it. I will, however, shoot anyone who proposes GPON. :-) Cheers, -- jr 'please, no gun control threadjacks :-)' a -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274