Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Eric Kuhnke]

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"  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  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" 
> > 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 
> >> 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"  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 
> >>> 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 
>  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 a

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Josh Reynolds]

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  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"  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  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" 
>> > 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 
>> >> 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"  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 
>> >>> 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 
>>  wrote:
>>  > I did forget to mention that I'm firmly on the side of activeE

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Chris Fabien]

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"  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 
> 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"  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 
> 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 
> >> >> 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" 
> 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 

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Lewis Bergman]

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  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"  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 
>> 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"  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 
>> 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 
>> >> >> Date: 2016-02-12 10:21 PM (GMT-05:00)
>> >> >> To: af@afmug.com
>> >> >> Su

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Sterling Jacobson]

I agree. Start active, then if you like, scale up to GPON.

You can go from active to GPON in that outdoor cabinet that started as Active.

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Chris Fabien
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 5:29 AM
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" 
mailto: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 
mailto: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" 
> mailto: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 
>> mailto: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" 
>> > mailto: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 mailto: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" 
>> >> mailto: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 

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Andreas Wiatowski]

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 
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" 
mailto: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 
mailto: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" 
> mailto: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 
>> mailto: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 

[AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

[Ryan Mano]

have a question...rookie question

why would the BH all of a sudden start rereg out of the blue? session counts 
are 1500+ in a couple of hours

what can cause this? I have ideas why but want to hear from you guys

Saturday mornings are fun!

?

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Chris Fabien]

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  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 
> 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"  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

Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

[Andreas Wiatowski]

Maybe the extreme cold today Or interference



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: Ryan Mano 
Date: 2016-02-13 8:40 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "'af@afmug.com'" 
Subject: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7


have a question...rookie question

why would the BH all of a sudden start rereg out of the blue? session counts 
are 1500+ in a couple of hours

what can cause this? I have ideas why but want to hear from you guys

Saturday mornings are fun!

?

Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

[Ryan Mano]

?we know what extreme cold is..it only -30C outside not that bad...lol...never 
had issues with cold before and my other 230 links are not doing that...spectum 
is the same nothing new popped up

strange



From: Af  on behalf of Andreas Wiatowski 

Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:50 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

Maybe the extreme cold today Or interference



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: Ryan Mano 
Date: 2016-02-13 8:40 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "'af@afmug.com'" 
Subject: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7


have a question...rookie question

why would the BH all of a sudden start rereg out of the blue? session counts 
are 1500+ in a couple of hours

what can cause this? I have ideas why but want to hear from you guys

Saturday mornings are fun!

?

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Gino Villarini]

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  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 <
> 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 
>> 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"  wrote:
>>
>>> Eric it doesn't matter. That's 1024 strands, 1024

[AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

Ok, everyone.

I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with
which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec
conformance The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the
middle, since it's really about testing the injector's performance instead
of a cable.

Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to
run the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical
continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable
electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any
continuity to the far end.

Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or are
willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?

-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
  

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Mike Hammett]

The best cable tester I've found is iPerf. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)"  
To: "af"  
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit 
PoE Injector? 





Ok, everyone. 

I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with which 
will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec conformance The 
catch? It has to work with a gigabit injector in the middle, since it's really 
about testing the injector's performance instead of a cable. 

Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to run 
the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical 
continuity. Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable 
electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any continuity 
to the far end. 

Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE? Or are 
willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens? 






-- 





Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. 

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com 

Re: [AFMUG] Source for surplus / used power or light poles

[Adam Moffett]

Yeah, I was gonna say.  50 foot poles are practically free compared to 
transport and installation.


Just find a utility contractor who does poles.  I can get a 50' pole 
100% installed for around $1500.


On 2/12/2016 6:24 PM, Chris Fabien wrote:
New ones are not terribly expensive if you find the right supplier. 
Shipping/moving them can be tricky.


On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Jason McKemie 
> wrote:


Looking for something 40-50' to use for small cell and ptp
deployments - not much wind Ioading. Any suggestions on suppliers? 

Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

[Ryan Mano]

anyone can figure this out?


02/13/2016 : 08:48:18 EST : : Bridge/OS Core : user=root; *System Log Cleared*;
:RF Core:?FatalError()
Stack Dump information:
Current Stack size: 808 bytes
Stack Dump:
0x14031cd8: 01369033 005a 0320 0003
0x14031ce8: 0328 14031cf4 00164500 003b50c8
0x14031cf8: 0354 01369000 0032 94020070
0x14031d08: 0001 14031d14 001645e8 003b50c8
0x14031d18: 0354 0001 0001 0001
0x14031d28: 00021a6c  80d666c0 0b14
0x14031d38: 0001  006fac64 0bd0
0x14031d48:  00020001 00573e78 
0x14031d58: 80b11200 0001 0012 
0x14031d68: 0001 0001 f0008240 00057e50
0x14031d78: 01353000 0044  0001
0x14031d88: 2f6c 00573e64 0180 0001
0x14031d98: 0012 0139497c 01394800 0001
0x14031da8: 0142 000581dc  
0x14031db8:  80b11200 01394972 0001
0x14031dc8: 0b14 0001 f0001010 0009
0x14031dd8: 14031df8  14031df0 01353000
0x14031de8: f0001114 0005709c 5000 03360331
0x14031df8: 05200412 0012 0001 f00010d8
0x14031e08:

?


From: Af  on behalf of Ryan Mano 

Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:55 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7


?we know what extreme cold is..it only -30C outside not that bad...lol...never 
had issues with cold before and my other 230 links are not doing that...spectum 
is the same nothing new popped up

strange



From: Af  on behalf of Andreas Wiatowski 

Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:50 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

Maybe the extreme cold today Or interference



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: Ryan Mano 
Date: 2016-02-13 8:40 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "'af@afmug.com'" 
Subject: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7


have a question...rookie question

why would the BH all of a sudden start rereg out of the blue? session counts 
are 1500+ in a couple of hours

what can cause this? I have ideas why but want to hear from you guys

Saturday mornings are fun!

?

Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

[Ken Hohhof]

My first guesses would be RF issues or firmware.

My PTP230 links are on the original FW, I seem to remember people who upgraded 
had problems.


From: Ryan Mano 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:40 AM
To: mailto:af@afmug.com 
Subject: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

have a question...rookie question


why would the BH all of a sudden start rereg out of the blue? session counts 
are 1500+ in a couple of hours

what can cause this? I have ideas why but want to hear from you guys

Saturday mornings are fun!


​

Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

[Ken Hohhof]

Sounds like a job for Cambium support.

From: Ryan Mano 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:27 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

anyone can figure this out?



02/13/2016 : 08:48:18 EST : : Bridge/OS Core : user=root; *System Log Cleared*;
:RF Core:□FatalError()
Stack Dump information:
Current Stack size: 808 bytes 
Stack Dump:
0x14031cd8: 01369033 005a 0320 0003 
0x14031ce8: 0328 14031cf4 00164500 003b50c8 
0x14031cf8: 0354 01369000 0032 94020070 
0x14031d08: 0001 14031d14 001645e8 003b50c8 
0x14031d18: 0354 0001 0001 0001 
0x14031d28: 00021a6c  80d666c0 0b14 
0x14031d38: 0001  006fac64 0bd0 
0x14031d48:  00020001 00573e78  
0x14031d58: 80b11200 0001 0012  
0x14031d68: 0001 0001 f0008240 00057e50 
0x14031d78: 01353000 0044  0001 
0x14031d88: 2f6c 00573e64 0180 0001 
0x14031d98: 0012 0139497c 01394800 0001 
0x14031da8: 0142 000581dc   
0x14031db8:  80b11200 01394972 0001 
0x14031dc8: 0b14 0001 f0001010 0009 
0x14031dd8: 14031df8  14031df0 01353000 
0x14031de8: f0001114 0005709c 5000 03360331 
0x14031df8: 05200412 0012 0001 f00010d8 
0x14031e08: 

​





From: Af  on behalf of Ryan Mano 

Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:55 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7 

​we know what extreme cold is..it only -30C outside not that bad...lol...never 
had issues with cold before and my other 230 links are not doing that...spectum 
is the same nothing new popped up


strange






From: Af  on behalf of Andreas Wiatowski 

Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:50 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7 

Maybe the extreme cold today Or interference 



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: Ryan Mano  
Date: 2016-02-13 8:40 AM (GMT-05:00) 
To: "'af@afmug.com'"  
Subject: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7 

have a question...rookie question


why would the BH all of a sudden start rereg out of the blue? session counts 
are 1500+ in a couple of hours

what can cause this? I have ideas why but want to hear from you guys

Saturday mornings are fun!


​

Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

[Andreas Wiatowski]

I would try downgrade then upgrade your firmware.



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: Ryan Mano 
Date: 2016-02-13 9:27 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7


anyone can figure this out?


02/13/2016 : 08:48:18 EST : : Bridge/OS Core : user=root; *System Log Cleared*;
:RF Core:?FatalError()
Stack Dump information:
Current Stack size: 808 bytes
Stack Dump:
0x14031cd8: 01369033 005a 0320 0003
0x14031ce8: 0328 14031cf4 00164500 003b50c8
0x14031cf8: 0354 01369000 0032 94020070
0x14031d08: 0001 14031d14 001645e8 003b50c8
0x14031d18: 0354 0001 0001 0001
0x14031d28: 00021a6c  80d666c0 0b14
0x14031d38: 0001  006fac64 0bd0
0x14031d48:  00020001 00573e78 
0x14031d58: 80b11200 0001 0012 
0x14031d68: 0001 0001 f0008240 00057e50
0x14031d78: 01353000 0044  0001
0x14031d88: 2f6c 00573e64 0180 0001
0x14031d98: 0012 0139497c 01394800 0001
0x14031da8: 0142 000581dc  
0x14031db8:  80b11200 01394972 0001
0x14031dc8: 0b14 0001 f0001010 0009
0x14031dd8: 14031df8  14031df0 01353000
0x14031de8: f0001114 0005709c 5000 03360331
0x14031df8: 05200412 0012 0001 f00010d8
0x14031e08:

?


From: Af  on behalf of Ryan Mano 

Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:55 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7


?we know what extreme cold is..it only -30C outside not that bad...lol...never 
had issues with cold before and my other 230 links are not doing that...spectum 
is the same nothing new popped up

strange



From: Af  on behalf of Andreas Wiatowski 

Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:50 AM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7

Maybe the extreme cold today Or interference



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: Ryan Mano 
Date: 2016-02-13 8:40 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: "'af@afmug.com'" 
Subject: [AFMUG] ptp230 5.7


have a question...rookie question

why would the BH all of a sudden start rereg out of the blue? session counts 
are 1500+ in a couple of hours

what can cause this? I have ideas why but want to hear from you guys

Saturday mornings are fun!

?

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Lewis Bergman]

I have a fluke DTX 1800 I can run a test on. It does gig e but I don't
remember what it does with a poe in the middle.

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 8:09 AM Mike Hammett  wrote:

> The best cable tester I've found is iPerf.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
> *To: *"af" 
> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through*
> aGigabit PoE Injector?
>
>
> Ok, everyone.
>
> I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with
> which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec
> conformance The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the
> middle, since it's really about testing the injector's performance instead
> of a cable.
>
> Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to
> run the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical
> continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable
> electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any
> continuity to the far end.
>
> Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or are
> willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] xG Technology - Public Safety and Telemedicine Private Mobile Broadband Wireless Networks

[Jaime Solorza]

Ha..   he did say something about replacing LTE.He had some 5GHz gear
on his mast made by them along with 900.my wife went me to meeting and
afterwards thought he avoided my question on 4.9 because I told him his
three 5Gig links were causing problems for some WISPs located above him.
Damn great place to test my Force 200hum...BTW. maybe we can have lunch
or dinner during Tessco event.  I enrolled in several classes.
On Feb 12, 2016 10:18 PM, "Jaime Solorza"  wrote:

> http://www.xgtechnology.com/
>
> These guys are running communication for state and other agencies during
> the papal visit next week.   They are using 902-928 MHz and 5GHz along with
> some other licensed bands but at 5.8GHz they are knocking some Wisps off
> the air.  I attended a meeting a local Amateur radio hut as they are
> involved as well.  Too dark to get clear pictures... will go by tomorrow
> and check gear out.
>

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Darin Steffl]

Gino,

Where is that pricing from? Everywhere I've found is higher

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Gino Villarini  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  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 <
>> 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 
>>> 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 

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Gino Villarini]

bizayscom has them at $1600
i can get them for lower
ping me offlist if interested

Sent from Outlook Mobile




On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM -0800, "Darin Steffl"  
wrote:










Gino,
Where is that pricing from? Everywhere I've found is higher
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Gino Villarini  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  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  
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  
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 st

Re: [AFMUG] Source for surplus / used power or light poles

[Jason McKemie]

Is that a standard wood pole, or metal/fiberglass?

On Saturday, February 13, 2016, Adam Moffett  wrote:

> Yeah, I was gonna say.  50 foot poles are practically free compared to
> transport and installation.
>
> Just find a utility contractor who does poles.  I can get a 50' pole 100%
> installed for around $1500.
>
> On 2/12/2016 6:24 PM, Chris Fabien wrote:
>
> New ones are not terribly expensive if you find the right supplier.
> Shipping/moving them can be tricky.
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Jason McKemie <
> j.mcke...@veloxinetbroadband.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Looking for something 40-50' to use for small cell and ptp deployments -
>> not much wind Ioading. Any suggestions on suppliers?
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Chuck McCown]

Don’t overlook the expense and complexity of large splices.  Strand may be 
cheap but splice cases, splicing and handhole and manhole are not cheap.  In a 
dense environment you need PON.  The few power users that need active  can 
still get it as long as each drop goes to a splitter in a cabinet.  

From: Lewis Bergman 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 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  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"  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  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"  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  
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" 

>> > 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

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Chuck McCown]

We have multiple 1:32 splitters in each cabinet in our residential areas.  

From: Chris Fabien 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:48 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

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  
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  
  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"  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
severa

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* aGigabit PoE Injector?

[Chuck McCown]

Once you figure it out, please let me know.  

From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:02 AM
To: af 
Subject: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* aGigabit 
PoE Injector?

Ok, everyone.


I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with which 
will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec conformance The 
catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the middle, since it's really 
about testing the injector's performance instead of a cable.


Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to run 
the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical 
continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable 
electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any continuity 
to the far end.


Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or are 
willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?


-- 

  Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.

  Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
  forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com

 

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* aGigabit PoE Injector?

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

Well I could tell you what to buy with an unlimited budget ;)


On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

> Once you figure it out, please let me know.
>
> *From:* Forrest Christian (List Account) 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:02 AM
> *To:* af 
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through*
> aGigabit PoE Injector?
>
> Ok, everyone.
>
> I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with
> which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec
> conformance The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the
> middle, since it's really about testing the injector's performance instead
> of a cable.
>
> Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to
> run the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical
> continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable
> electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any
> continuity to the far end.
>
> Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or are
> willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>


-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
  

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

I'm already doing that, but it doesn't help to verify things like near end
crosstalk, insertion loss, etc. etc. etc.

It's just a 'everything is fine' vs 'what does the cable look like' test.

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

> The best cable tester I've found is iPerf.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
> *To: *"af" 
> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through*
> aGigabit PoE Injector?
>
>
> Ok, everyone.
>
> I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with
> which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec
> conformance The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the
> middle, since it's really about testing the injector's performance instead
> of a cable.
>
> Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to
> run the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical
> continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable
> electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any
> continuity to the far end.
>
> Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or are
> willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>
>


-- 
*Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
  

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Mike Hammett]

The only thing that matters to me is iPerf. :-) Granted, I'm not creating 
components and troubleshooting why when they're in place they may not be 
getting full throughput anymore. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)"  
To: "af"  
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:33:30 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a 
Gigabit PoE Injector? 



I'm already doing that, but it doesn't help to verify things like near end 
crosstalk, insertion loss, etc. etc. etc. 

It's just a 'everything is fine' vs 'what does the cable look like' test. 



On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




The best cable tester I've found is iPerf. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 






From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" < li...@packetflux.com > 
To: "af" < af@afmug.com > 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit 
PoE Injector? 







Ok, everyone. 

I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with which 
will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec conformance The 
catch? It has to work with a gigabit injector in the middle, since it's really 
about testing the injector's performance instead of a cable. 

Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to run 
the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical 
continuity. Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable 
electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any continuity 
to the far end. 

Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE? Or are 
willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens? 






-- 





Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. 

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com 









-- 





Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. 

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com 

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* aGigabit PoE Injector?

[Chuck McCown]

I could split a 2 month lease with you!

From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 9:33 AM
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* 
aGigabit PoE Injector?

Well I could tell you what to buy with an unlimited budget ;)



On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 9:32 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:

  Once you figure it out, please let me know.  

  From: Forrest Christian (List Account) 
  Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:02 AM
  To: af 
  Subject: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* aGigabit 
PoE Injector?

  Ok, everyone.


  I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with 
which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec conformance 
The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the middle, since it's 
really about testing the injector's performance instead of a cable.


  Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to run 
the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical 
continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable 
electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any continuity 
to the far end.


  Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or are 
willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?


  -- 

Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com

   






-- 

  Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.

  Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
  forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com

 

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Josh Reynolds]

In each cabinet? Please say you mean ped? :)

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Chuck McCown  wrote:
> We have multiple 1:32 splitters in each cabinet in our residential areas.
>
> From: Chris Fabien
> Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:48 AM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?
>
> 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
>  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 
>> 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"  wrote:
>>>
>>> Eric it doesn't matter. That's 1024 strands, 1024 SFPs, more power
>>> usage, more cooling, in multiple bigass

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Ken Hohhof]

Well, then you’ve never done a wiring job for a business or school or govt that 
requires documented qualification tests on every drop.

But yeah, I assume Forrest is trying to test that his GbE POE doesn’t degrade 
any of the specs like crosstalk, attenuation, return loss, etc., or to quantify 
how much you have to derate the 100 meter distance to compensate for inserting 
the POE?

I used to have a Pentascanner, but the Fluke website says that line was EOM in 
2004 and EOS in 2008.  Way to make me feel old!  No idea if the current 
DSX-5000 can test through the transformers in a gigabit POE, or be convinced to 
run the qualification tests even if the DC tests fail.


From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:36 AM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a 
Gigabit PoE Injector?

The only thing that matters to me is iPerf.  :-)  Granted, I'm not creating 
components and troubleshooting why when they're in place they may not be 
getting full throughput anymore.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions

Midwest Internet Exchange

The Brothers WISP








From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
To: "af" 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:33:30 AM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a 
Gigabit PoE Injector?


I'm already doing that, but it doesn't help to verify things like near end 
crosstalk, insertion loss, etc. etc. etc.


It's just a 'everything is fine' vs 'what does the cable look like' test.


On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:

  The best cable tester I've found is iPerf.




  -
  Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions

  Midwest Internet Exchange

  The Brothers WISP






--

  From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
  To: "af" 
  Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM
  Subject: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a
Gigabit PoE Injector? 



  Ok, everyone.


  I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with 
which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec conformance 
The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the middle, since it's 
really about testing the injector's performance instead of a cable.


  Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to run 
the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical 
continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable 
electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any continuity 
to the far end.


  Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or are 
willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?


  -- 

Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com

   







-- 

  Forrest Christian CEO, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.

  Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
  forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com

 

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Jay Weekley]

I've wondered why I rarely, if ever, see any cable testers at the 
conferences given the work we do.


Ken Hohhof wrote:
Well, then you’ve never done a wiring job for a business or school or 
govt that requires documented qualification tests on every drop.
But yeah, I assume Forrest is trying to test that his GbE POE doesn’t 
degrade any of the specs like crosstalk, attenuation, return loss, 
etc., or to quantify how much you have to derate the 100 meter 
distance to compensate for inserting the POE?
I used to have a Pentascanner, but the Fluke website says that line 
was EOM in 2004 and EOS in 2008.  Way to make me feel old!  No idea if 
the current DSX-5000 can test through the transformers in a gigabit 
POE, or be convinced to run the qualification tests even if the DC 
tests fail.

*From:* Mike Hammett 
*Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:36 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates 
*through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?
The only thing that matters to me is iPerf.  :-)  Granted, I'm not 
creating components and troubleshooting why when they're in place they 
may not be getting full throughput anymore.




-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 





*From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
*To: *"af" 
*Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:33:30 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates 
*through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?


I'm already doing that, but it doesn't help to verify things like near 
end crosstalk, insertion loss, etc. etc. etc.


It's just a 'everything is fine' vs 'what does the cable look like' test.
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mike Hammett > wrote:


The best cable tester I've found is iPerf.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 


Midwest Internet Exchange 


The Brothers WISP 





*From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" mailto:li...@packetflux.com>>
*To: *"af" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
*Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM
*Subject: *[AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates
*through* aGigabit PoE Injector?


Ok, everyone.

I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test
product with which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link
for spec conformance The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit
injector in the middle, since it's really about testing the
injector's performance instead of a cable.

Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely
refuse to run the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't
pass electrical continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a
gigabit injector the cable electrically looks like all 4 pairs are
shorted, and there isn't any continuity to the far end.

Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a
PoE?   Or are willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to
see what happens?

-- 
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com  |
http://www.packetflux.com 

 





--
*Forrest Christian* /CEO//, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc./
Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
forre...@imach.com  | 
http://www.packetflux.com 
 
 

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Forrest Christian (List Account)]

Yep that's what I'm looking for.

I can do it old school style with a vector analyzer but as an example,
just the NEXT testing requires twelve different connection arrangements.
You have to inject a signal on one pair then test a different pair for
signal crosstalk.   Repeat for all combinations of pairs.   And that's just
one test.

Most of the testers I found require DC connectivity to the remote end,
mainly to operate the relays in the remote end.Ones which can test
without a remote by plugging both ends into the tester are rare.   And so
on.

It's just frustrating that these testers are so close to what I need yet
can't work because of what I need to test.
On Feb 13, 2016 11:33 AM, "Ken Hohhof"  wrote:

> Well, then you’ve never done a wiring job for a business or school or govt
> that requires documented qualification tests on every drop.
>
> But yeah, I assume Forrest is trying to test that his GbE POE doesn’t
> degrade any of the specs like crosstalk, attenuation, return loss, etc., or
> to quantify how much you have to derate the 100 meter distance to
> compensate for inserting the POE?
>
> I used to have a Pentascanner, but the Fluke website says that line was
> EOM in 2004 and EOS in 2008.  Way to make me feel old!  No idea if the
> current DSX-5000 can test through the transformers in a gigabit POE, or be
> convinced to run the qualification tests even if the DC tests fail.
>
>
> *From:* Mike Hammett 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:36 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates
> *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?
>
> The only thing that matters to me is iPerf.  :-)  Granted, I'm not
> creating components and troubleshooting why when they're in place they may
> not be getting full throughput anymore.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
> *To: *"af" 
> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:33:30 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates
> *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?
>
> I'm already doing that, but it doesn't help to verify things like near end
> crosstalk, insertion loss, etc. etc. etc.
>
> It's just a 'everything is fine' vs 'what does the cable look like' test.
>
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> The best cable tester I've found is iPerf.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>>
>>
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
>> *To: *"af" 
>> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM
>> *Subject: *[AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through*
>> aGigabit PoE Injector?
>>
>>
>> Ok, everyone.
>>
>> I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with
>> which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec
>> conformance The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the
>> middle, since it's really about testing the injector's performance instead
>> of a cable.
>>
>> Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to
>> run the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical
>> continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable
>> electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any
>> continuity to the far end.
>>
>> Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or
>> are willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?
>>
>> --
>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>> 
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Paul Stewart]

That assumes you want to work on Zhone gear :(… 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 mailto: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" mailto: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 mailto: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"   > 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 >  > 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" > >  >
>> > 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

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Paul Stewart]

It's also a matter of experience in the field - I mean this in general, not in 
direct response...

What I mean is ... I've seen/used "cheap GPON gear" ... some of it had no 
english lettering on it.  Complete shit - high failure rates, buggy software, 
support that didn't exist ...   even names like Zhone get dropped and the first 
thing people say is "wow, that stuff is so cheap!" and then you actually talk 
to the technical people who have to troubleshoot issues, do interop testing 
with Metaswitch or other voice platforms, try and push multicast video through 
it for IPTV and everything starts to go to hell ... 

Then Calix, Adtran etc gear ... pretty good stuff, limited bugs, and support 
that is pretty solid.

My experience to date...  obviously as mentioned everyone has a different 
need/want/budget ...

Paul


-Original Message-
From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 11:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

The cost is stupid. I know some of the other platforms don't have all of the 
same bells and whistles, but if you're still able to do the same features to 
end users, they don't know and won't care.

You also said something very, very important. "They are the biggest gpon vendor 
*in the US*". Calix made a very important acquisition a few years back when 
they bought Occam, which was a smart move.

Some people buy PMP4xx. Some people buy UBNT (and more units are sold).

Some people buy Calix. Some people buy Huawei, or $vendor (and more units are 
sold).

All have their places.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Craig Schmaderer  
wrote:
> If you are thinking about GPON, I would totally go with Calix.  They 
> are the biggest gpon vendor in the US, and they have a tone of new 
> onts that came out.  Indoor units with just Ethernet, or built in ac 
> routers.  Their stuff is the bomb.
>
>
>
> Craig R. Schmaderer
>
> CEO | Skywave Wireless, Inc.
>
> Ph: 402-372-1975 | Fax: 402-372-1058
>
> Direct: 402-372-1052
>
>
>
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Wiatowski
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 9:31 PM
>
>
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?
>
>
>
> 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 
>
> 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"  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  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  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 
>> 

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Paul Stewart]

Andreas – are you talking about Active ONT or Active Ethernet?

 

Just Internet across it or other services?  Ie. Voice, Video etc (by Voice, I 
mean providing POTS services via fiber)

 

Personally – much prefer Calix .. let me know if you need a contact here in 
Ontario…

 

Cheers,

Paul

 

 

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Wiatowski
Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 7:53 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

 

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 +1.519.449.5656Extension-600|Fax +1.519.449.5536 
  |Toll Free +1.866.727.4138  

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Josh Reynolds]

You're absolutely right...

For clarification, what I mean by that is experienced network
operators know the process. Feature testing, budgeting, support test,
lab interop, etc - all to meet the budget for the business use case.

No vendor should be immune to this methodology, and best is often the
enemy of good.

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Paul Stewart  wrote:
> It's also a matter of experience in the field - I mean this in general, not 
> in direct response...
>
> What I mean is ... I've seen/used "cheap GPON gear" ... some of it had no 
> english lettering on it.  Complete shit - high failure rates, buggy software, 
> support that didn't exist ...   even names like Zhone get dropped and the 
> first thing people say is "wow, that stuff is so cheap!" and then you 
> actually talk to the technical people who have to troubleshoot issues, do 
> interop testing with Metaswitch or other voice platforms, try and push 
> multicast video through it for IPTV and everything starts to go to hell ...
>
> Then Calix, Adtran etc gear ... pretty good stuff, limited bugs, and support 
> that is pretty solid.
>
> My experience to date...  obviously as mentioned everyone has a different 
> need/want/budget ...
>
> Paul
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Josh Reynolds
> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 11:53 PM
> To: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?
>
> The cost is stupid. I know some of the other platforms don't have all of the 
> same bells and whistles, but if you're still able to do the same features to 
> end users, they don't know and won't care.
>
> You also said something very, very important. "They are the biggest gpon 
> vendor *in the US*". Calix made a very important acquisition a few years back 
> when they bought Occam, which was a smart move.
>
> Some people buy PMP4xx. Some people buy UBNT (and more units are sold).
>
> Some people buy Calix. Some people buy Huawei, or $vendor (and more units are 
> sold).
>
> All have their places.
>
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 10:37 PM, Craig Schmaderer  
> wrote:
>> If you are thinking about GPON, I would totally go with Calix.  They
>> are the biggest gpon vendor in the US, and they have a tone of new
>> onts that came out.  Indoor units with just Ethernet, or built in ac
>> routers.  Their stuff is the bomb.
>>
>>
>>
>> Craig R. Schmaderer
>>
>> CEO | Skywave Wireless, Inc.
>>
>> Ph: 402-372-1975 | Fax: 402-372-1058
>>
>> Direct: 402-372-1052
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of Andreas Wiatowski
>> Sent: Friday, February 12, 2016 9:31 PM
>>
>>
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?
>>
>>
>>
>> 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 
>>
>> 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"  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  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 ev

Re: [AFMUG] Source for surplus / used power or light poles

[Adam Moffett]

That's wood.  For 50' and light loads, I'd stick with wood.

Steel and fiberglass are both more expensive than wood, but they start 
to look attractive when you look at the transport and erection costs of 
poles > 50'
Steel and fiberglass also can be purchased in larger diameters and wall 
thicknessesyou're only going to find wooden poles so big.


Certain people here have a prejudice against steel because if a car 
bumps it and dents it, then it's permanently weakened.  Fiberglass in 
theory will bounce a little.  I think they all get wiped out if the car 
is going fast enough.



On 2/13/2016 11:13 AM, Jason McKemie wrote:

Is that a standard wood pole, or metal/fiberglass?

On Saturday, February 13, 2016, Adam Moffett > wrote:


Yeah, I was gonna say. 50 foot poles are practically free compared
to transport and installation.

Just find a utility contractor who does poles.  I can get a 50'
pole 100% installed for around $1500.

On 2/12/2016 6:24 PM, Chris Fabien wrote:

New ones are not terribly expensive if you find the right
supplier. Shipping/moving them can be tricky.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Jason McKemie
>
wrote:

Looking for something 40-50' to use for small cell and ptp
deployments - not much wind Ioading. Any suggestions on
suppliers? 

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Eric Kuhnke]

If you're leasing per strand you don't even need two, use single strand
10GbE BiDi optics (1490/1550). Fiberstore has them for reasonable prices.

Or keep both strands and use bidi optics on both in parallel to achieve 20
Gbps in a 802.3ad, without the need to install a 1U passive prism cwdm 2 or
4 channel mux/demux.
On Feb 13, 2016 4:28 AM, "Chris Fabien"  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"  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 
>> 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"  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 
>> 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 
>> >> >> 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" 
>> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Key part there is, is going to be...  is 

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Eric Kuhnke]

"AE doesn't provide that much info end to end"

Umm, it provides all the info you can get from the Ethernet snmpv2c MIB on
your switching or routing platform. And DOM signal level monitoring on the
optics, again through the snmp mib for your network gear, if you're using
the correct SFPs.
On Feb 13, 2016 5:13 AM, "Lewis Bergman"  wrote:

> 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  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"  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 
>>> 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"  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 
>>> 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,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> __
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> And

Re: [AFMUG] Active or GPon?

[Lewis Bergman]

I believe because the focus was on cost.

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 2:01 PM Paul Stewart  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  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"  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 
> 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"  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 
> 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.
> >> >>
> >> >

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Lewis Bergman]

Now that I think of it, I beloved my fluke dtx 1800 asks if you want to
continue testing if the map fails.
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016, 12:34 PM Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> Well, then you’ve never done a wiring job for a business or school or govt
> that requires documented qualification tests on every drop.
>
> But yeah, I assume Forrest is trying to test that his GbE POE doesn’t
> degrade any of the specs like crosstalk, attenuation, return loss, etc., or
> to quantify how much you have to derate the 100 meter distance to
> compensate for inserting the POE?
>
> I used to have a Pentascanner, but the Fluke website says that line was
> EOM in 2004 and EOS in 2008.  Way to make me feel old!  No idea if the
> current DSX-5000 can test through the transformers in a gigabit POE, or be
> convinced to run the qualification tests even if the DC tests fail.
>
>
> *From:* Mike Hammett 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:36 AM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates
> *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?
> The only thing that matters to me is iPerf.  :-)  Granted, I'm not
> creating components and troubleshooting why when they're in place they may
> not be getting full throughput anymore.
>
>
>
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> 
> 
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
> 
>
>
> 
> --
> *From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
> *To: *"af" 
> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:33:30 AM
> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates
> *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?
>
> I'm already doing that, but it doesn't help to verify things like near end
> crosstalk, insertion loss, etc. etc. etc.
>
> It's just a 'everything is fine' vs 'what does the cable look like' test.
>
> On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
>
>> The best cable tester I've found is iPerf.
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>>
>>
>> 
>> --
>> *From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" 
>> *To: *"af" 
>> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM
>> *Subject: *[AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through*
>> aGigabit PoE Injector?
>>
>>
>> Ok, everyone.
>>
>> I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with
>> which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec
>> conformance The catch?  It has to work with a gigabit injector in the
>> middle, since it's really about testing the injector's performance instead
>> of a cable.
>>
>> Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to
>> run the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical
>> continuity.   Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable
>> electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any
>> continuity to the far end.
>>
>> Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE?   Or
>> are willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens?
>>
>> --
>> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
>> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
>> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>> 
>>   
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Forrest Christian* *CEO**, PacketFlux Technologies, Inc.*
> Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602
> forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com
>   
>   
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[George Skorup]

I was looking at getting a Fluke LRAT-2000. Maybe that does the stuff 
you want? It does work with, identifies and can load test POE. Maybe it 
wouldn't work with passive POE though. I have no idea. There's a really 
good deal on it at Amazon right now: 
http://www.amazon.com/Fluke-Networks-LRAT-2000-LinkRunner-Ethernet/dp/B007B60FGU


On 2/13/2016 12:52 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) wrote:


Yep that's what I'm looking for.

I can do it old school style with a vector analyzer but as an 
example,  just the NEXT testing requires twelve different connection 
arrangements.   You have to inject a signal on one pair then test a 
different pair for signal crosstalk.   Repeat for all combinations of 
pairs.   And that's just one test.


Most of the testers I found require DC connectivity to the remote end, 
mainly to operate the relays in the remote end.Ones which can test 
without a remote by plugging both ends into the tester are rare.   And 
so on.


It's just frustrating that these testers are so close to what I need 
yet can't work because of what I need to test.


On Feb 13, 2016 11:33 AM, "Ken Hohhof" > wrote:


Well, then you’ve never done a wiring job for a business or school
or govt that requires documented qualification tests on every drop.
But yeah, I assume Forrest is trying to test that his GbE POE
doesn’t degrade any of the specs like crosstalk, attenuation,
return loss, etc., or to quantify how much you have to derate the
100 meter distance to compensate for inserting the POE?
I used to have a Pentascanner, but the Fluke website says that
line was EOM in 2004 and EOS in 2008.  Way to make me feel old! 
No idea if the current DSX-5000 can test through the transformers

in a gigabit POE, or be convinced to run the qualification tests
even if the DC tests fail.
*From:* Mike Hammett 
*Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:36 AM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates
*through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?
The only thing that matters to me is iPerf.  :-) Granted, I'm not
creating components and troubleshooting why when they're in place
they may not be getting full throughput anymore.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 


Midwest Internet Exchange 


The Brothers WISP 





*From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)" mailto:li...@packetflux.com>>
*To: *"af" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
*Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:33:30 AM
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates
*through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

I'm already doing that, but it doesn't help to verify things like
near end crosstalk, insertion loss, etc. etc. etc.

It's just a 'everything is fine' vs 'what does the cable look
like' test.
On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mike Hammett mailto:af...@ics-il.net>> wrote:

The best cable tester I've found is iPerf.



-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions 


Midwest Internet Exchange 


The Brothers WISP 





*From: *"Forrest Christian (List Account)"
mailto:li...@packetflux.com>>
*To: *"af" mailto:af@afmug.com>>
*Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM
*Subject: *[AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates
*through* aGigabit PoE Injector?


Ok, everyone.

I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test
product with which will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit
link for spec conformance The catch? It has to work with a
gigabit injector in the midd

Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit PoE Injector?

[Mike Hammett]

Yeah, no certification going on here. I do some government stuff, but usually 
passing 900+ megabit from my laptop over their network to an iPerf server is 
good enough. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Ken Hohhof"  
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 12:33:57 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a 
Gigabit PoE Injector? 




Well, then you’ve never done a wiring job for a business or school or govt that 
requires documented qualification tests on every drop. 

But yeah, I assume Forrest is trying to test that his GbE POE doesn’t degrade 
any of the specs like crosstalk, attenuation, return loss, etc., or to quantify 
how much you have to derate the 100 meter distance to compensate for inserting 
the POE? 

I used to have a Pentascanner, but the Fluke website says that line was EOM in 
2004 and EOS in 2008. Way to make me feel old! No idea if the current DSX-5000 
can test through the transformers in a gigabit POE, or be convinced to run the 
qualification tests even if the DC tests fail. 





From: Mike Hammett 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:36 AM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a 
Gigabit PoE Injector? 


The only thing that matters to me is iPerf. :-) Granted, I'm not creating 
components and troubleshooting why when they're in place they may not be 
getting full throughput anymore. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




- Original Message -

From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)"  
To: "af"  
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 10:33:30 AM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a 
Gigabit PoE Injector? 



I'm already doing that, but it doesn't help to verify things like near end 
crosstalk, insertion loss, etc. etc. etc. 

It's just a 'everything is fine' vs 'what does the cable look like' test. 



On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Mike Hammett < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




The best cable tester I've found is iPerf. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 






From: "Forrest Christian (List Account)" < li...@packetflux.com > 
To: "af" < af@afmug.com > 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:02:30 AM 
Subject: [AFMUG] Gigabit "cable validator" which validates *through* a Gigabit 
PoE Injector? 







Ok, everyone. 

I'm looking for one or more Gigabit Ethernet testers to test product with which 
will actually test (signal-wise) a gigabit link for spec conformance The 
catch? It has to work with a gigabit injector in the middle, since it's really 
about testing the injector's performance instead of a cable. 

Most of the gigabit cable validators I've seen will completely refuse to run 
the signal validation tests on a cable which doesn't pass electrical 
continuity. Unfortunately, once you insert a gigabit injector the cable 
electrically looks like all 4 pairs are shorted, and there isn't any continuity 
to the far end. 

Does anyone have a CAT5 cable tester which works *through* a PoE? Or are 
willing to test theirs on a (unpowered) injector to see what happens? 






-- 






Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. 

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com 









-- 






Forrest Christian CEO , PacketFlux Technologies, Inc. 

Tel: 406-449-3345 | Address: 3577 Countryside Road, Helena, MT 59602 
forre...@imach.com | http://www.packetflux.com 

[AFMUG] First attempt

[Chuck McCown]

Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of problems, 
but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.

https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Faisal Imtiaz]

Very interesting... 

suggestion:- 
Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses 
Need some more diffused light. 
You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a bit chopped 
off). 
Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades... 

Having said that... 

Do these POE work with the following radios ? 

SAF Lumina's ? 

Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ? 

Regards. 

Faisal Imtiaz 
Snappy Internet & Telecom 
7266 SW 48 Street 
Miami, FL 33155 
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net 

> From: "Chuck McCown" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
> Subject: [AFMUG] First attempt

> Too long. Almost usable audio. Need to work on lighting. Lots of problems, 
> but I
> do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.
> https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Chuck McCown]

Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more light.  
And incorporate your other suggestions too.  
I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as long as 
they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they should be OK.  

From: Faisal Imtiaz 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

Very interesting...

suggestion:-
   Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
   Need some more diffused light.
   You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a bit chopped 
off).
   Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...

Having said that... 

Do these POE work with the following radios ? 

SAF Lumina's ?

Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?


Regards.


Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net




  From: "Chuck McCown" 
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
  Subject: [AFMUG] First attempt

  Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of problems, 
but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.

  https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Jaime Solorza]

But you never said "copacetic kool katsyay..." and then cue in the
bongos
On Feb 13, 2016 6:17 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

> Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more
> light.  And incorporate your other suggestions too.
> I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as long
> as they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they should be
> OK.
>
> *From:* Faisal Imtiaz 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] First attempt
>
> Very interesting...
>
> suggestion:-
>Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
>Need some more diffused light.
>You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a bit
> chopped off).
>Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...
>
> Having said that...
>
> Do these POE work with the following radios ?
>
> SAF Lumina's ?
>
> Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?
>
> Regards.
>
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 7266 SW 48 Street
> Miami, FL 33155
> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
>
> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Chuck McCown" 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] First attempt
>
> Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of
> problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.
>
> https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Mathew Howard]

I feel like there's something wrong with me that I watched that whole
thing, and found it interesting :P

I agree with what Faisal about segments starting too quickly, it seemed
like you cut yourself off a bit a few times. But overall, it wasn't bad at
all.

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Jaime Solorza 
wrote:

> But you never said "copacetic kool katsyay..." and then cue in the
> bongos
> On Feb 13, 2016 6:17 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more
>> light.  And incorporate your other suggestions too.
>> I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as
>> long as they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they should
>> be OK.
>>
>> *From:* Faisal Imtiaz 
>> *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] First attempt
>>
>> Very interesting...
>>
>> suggestion:-
>>Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
>>Need some more diffused light.
>>You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a bit
>> chopped off).
>>Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...
>>
>> Having said that...
>>
>> Do these POE work with the following radios ?
>>
>> SAF Lumina's ?
>>
>> Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>>
>> Faisal Imtiaz
>> Snappy Internet & Telecom
>> 7266 SW 48 Street
>> Miami, FL 33155
>> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
>>
>> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
>>
>> --
>>
>> *From: *"Chuck McCown" 
>> *To: *af@afmug.com
>> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
>> *Subject: *[AFMUG] First attempt
>>
>> Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of
>> problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.
>>
>> https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo
>>
>>

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Chuck McCown]

Some of it was fixing some problems where a phone rang in the background and I 
did a cut and splice job etc.  Total neophyte with the editing.  Last time I 
did much editing was in college where we had multiple synched VTRs and you did 
everything by frame count.  Fun machine to run.  
Thanks for watching.  

From: Mathew Howard 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:41 PM
To: af 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

I feel like there's something wrong with me that I watched that whole thing, 
and found it interesting :P


I agree with what Faisal about segments starting too quickly, it seemed like 
you cut yourself off a bit a few times. But overall, it wasn't bad at all.


On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Jaime Solorza  
wrote:

  But you never said "copacetic kool katsyay..." and then cue in the bongos 

  On Feb 13, 2016 6:17 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more 
light.  And incorporate your other suggestions too.  
I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as long 
as they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they should be OK.  

From: Faisal Imtiaz 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

Very interesting...

suggestion:-
   Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
   Need some more diffused light.
   You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a bit 
chopped off).
   Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...

Having said that... 

Do these POE work with the following radios ? 

SAF Lumina's ?

Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?


Regards.


Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net




  From: "Chuck McCown" 
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
  Subject: [AFMUG] First attempt

  Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of 
problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.

  https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[George Skorup]

Great video Professor McCown. I watched the whole thing. Some of the 
clips are black and white. Maybe you meant to do that on purpose and I 
just didn't get it.


The beauty of Chuck's design is that it should work with anything 
imaginable via the pair polarity jumpers. Obviously minus the split pair 
crap like the PMP320 and 430. I've used the GigE-POE-APC on numerous 
things. Canopy, Trango, ePMP, UBNT Rockets, AFs, etc. and Exalt 
ExtendAir G2.


That special radio he talks about that requires the same polarity on all 
8 wires (-48) and return on sheild would be the Trango ApexPlus and 
ApexLynx. I've tested it on the bench with the GigE-POE-APC and it does 
indeed work. None in the field yet. If I have another Trango GigE POE+SS 
injector box die, then I'll have to use a GigE-POE-APC or SS box. 
Chuck's stuff is smaller and cheaper. The only thing the Trango box 
gives you is T1/E1 capability (which is on the management port), but we 
do not use it.


On 2/13/2016 7:17 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more 
light.  And incorporate your other suggestions too.
I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as 
long as they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they 
should be OK.

*From:* Faisal Imtiaz 
*Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] First attempt
Very interesting...
suggestion:-
   Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
   Need some more diffused light.
   You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a 
bit chopped off).

   Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...
Having said that...
Do these POE work with the following radios ?
SAF Lumina's ?
Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?

Regards.
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net


*From: *"Chuck McCown" 
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
*Subject: *[AFMUG] First attempt

Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots
of problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than
GoPro Studio.
https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Ken Hohhof]

With the lab coat, it reminds me of the “Will It Blend?” videos.  Is that 
intentional?

BTW, one of my unfulfilled ambitions was to have a job where I wear a lab coat.

On the topic of lab coats, how about this old photo from Bell Labs Holmdel?


From: George Skorup 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:56 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

Great video Professor McCown. I watched the whole thing. Some of the clips are 
black and white. Maybe you meant to do that on purpose and I just didn't get it.

The beauty of Chuck's design is that it should work with anything imaginable 
via the pair polarity jumpers. Obviously minus the split pair crap like the 
PMP320 and 430. I've used the GigE-POE-APC on numerous things. Canopy, Trango, 
ePMP, UBNT Rockets, AFs, etc. and Exalt ExtendAir G2.

That special radio he talks about that requires the same polarity on all 8 
wires (-48) and return on sheild would be the Trango ApexPlus and ApexLynx. 
I've tested it on the bench with the GigE-POE-APC and it does indeed work. None 
in the field yet. If I have another Trango GigE POE+SS injector box die, then 
I'll have to use a GigE-POE-APC or SS box. Chuck's stuff is smaller and 
cheaper. The only thing the Trango box gives you is T1/E1 capability (which is 
on the management port), but we do not use it.


On 2/13/2016 7:17 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:

  Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more light.  
And incorporate your other suggestions too.  
  I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as long as 
they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they should be OK.  

  From: Faisal Imtiaz 
  Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

  Very interesting...

  suggestion:-
 Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
 Need some more diffused light.
 You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a bit 
chopped off).
 Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...

  Having said that... 

  Do these POE work with the following radios ? 

  SAF Lumina's ?

  Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?


  Regards.


  Faisal Imtiaz
  Snappy Internet & Telecom
  7266 SW 48 Street
  Miami, FL 33155
  Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

  Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net


--

From: "Chuck McCown" mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
Subject: [AFMUG] First attempt

Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of 
problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.

https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[George Skorup]

Did you watch the last minute of the video?

On 2/13/2016 8:33 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
With the lab coat, it reminds me of the “Will It Blend?” videos.  Is 
that intentional?
BTW, one of my unfulfilled ambitions was to have a job where I wear a 
lab coat.
On the topic of lab coats, how about this old photo from Bell Labs 
Holmdel?

*From:* George Skorup 
*Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:56 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] First attempt
Great video Professor McCown. I watched the whole thing. Some of the 
clips are black and white. Maybe you meant to do that on purpose and I 
just didn't get it.


The beauty of Chuck's design is that it should work with anything 
imaginable via the pair polarity jumpers. Obviously minus the split 
pair crap like the PMP320 and 430. I've used the GigE-POE-APC on 
numerous things. Canopy, Trango, ePMP, UBNT Rockets, AFs, etc. and 
Exalt ExtendAir G2.


That special radio he talks about that requires the same polarity on 
all 8 wires (-48) and return on sheild would be the Trango ApexPlus 
and ApexLynx. I've tested it on the bench with the GigE-POE-APC and it 
does indeed work. None in the field yet. If I have another Trango GigE 
POE+SS injector box die, then I'll have to use a GigE-POE-APC or SS 
box. Chuck's stuff is smaller and cheaper. The only thing the Trango 
box gives you is T1/E1 capability (which is on the management port), 
but we do not use it.


On 2/13/2016 7:17 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more 
light.  And incorporate your other suggestions too.
I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as 
long as they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they 
should be OK.

*From:* Faisal Imtiaz 
*Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] First attempt
Very interesting...
suggestion:-
   Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
   Need some more diffused light.
   You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a 
bit chopped off).

   Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...
Having said that...
Do these POE work with the following radios ?
SAF Lumina's ?
Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?

Regards.
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net


*From: *"Chuck McCown" mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com
*To: *af@afmug.com
*Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
*Subject: *[AFMUG] First attempt

Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots
of problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than
GoPro Studio.
https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Ken Hohhof]

Nope, got called for dinner, I guess I should finish watching.

From: George Skorup 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:38 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

Did you watch the last minute of the video?


On 2/13/2016 8:33 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

  With the lab coat, it reminds me of the “Will It Blend?” videos.  Is that 
intentional?

  BTW, one of my unfulfilled ambitions was to have a job where I wear a lab 
coat.

  On the topic of lab coats, how about this old photo from Bell Labs Holmdel?


  From: George Skorup 
  Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:56 PM
  To: af@afmug.com 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

  Great video Professor McCown. I watched the whole thing. Some of the clips 
are black and white. Maybe you meant to do that on purpose and I just didn't 
get it.

  The beauty of Chuck's design is that it should work with anything imaginable 
via the pair polarity jumpers. Obviously minus the split pair crap like the 
PMP320 and 430. I've used the GigE-POE-APC on numerous things. Canopy, Trango, 
ePMP, UBNT Rockets, AFs, etc. and Exalt ExtendAir G2.

  That special radio he talks about that requires the same polarity on all 8 
wires (-48) and return on sheild would be the Trango ApexPlus and ApexLynx. 
I've tested it on the bench with the GigE-POE-APC and it does indeed work. None 
in the field yet. If I have another Trango GigE POE+SS injector box die, then 
I'll have to use a GigE-POE-APC or SS box. Chuck's stuff is smaller and 
cheaper. The only thing the Trango box gives you is T1/E1 capability (which is 
on the management port), but we do not use it.


  On 2/13/2016 7:17 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:

Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more 
light.  And incorporate your other suggestions too.  
I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as long 
as they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they should be OK.  

From: Faisal Imtiaz 
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

Very interesting...

suggestion:-
   Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
   Need some more diffused light.
   You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a bit 
chopped off).
   Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...

Having said that... 

Do these POE work with the following radios ? 

SAF Lumina's ?

Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?


Regards.


Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net




  From: "Chuck McCown" mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
  Subject: [AFMUG] First attempt

  Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of 
problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.

  https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Lewis Bergman]

In a different thread he mentioned his desire to have something like "will
it bled"

On Sat, Feb 13, 2016 at 8:46 PM Ken Hohhof  wrote:

> Nope, got called for dinner, I guess I should finish watching.
>
> *From:* George Skorup 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 8:38 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] First attempt
> Did you watch the last minute of the video?
>
> On 2/13/2016 8:33 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>
> With the lab coat, it reminds me of the “Will It Blend?” videos.  Is that
> intentional?
>
> BTW, one of my unfulfilled ambitions was to have a job where I wear a lab
> coat.
>
> On the topic of lab coats, how about this old photo from Bell Labs Holmdel?
>
>
> *From:* George Skorup 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:56 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] First attempt
>
> Great video Professor McCown. I watched the whole thing. Some of the clips
> are black and white. Maybe you meant to do that on purpose and I just
> didn't get it.
>
> The beauty of Chuck's design is that it should work with anything
> imaginable via the pair polarity jumpers. Obviously minus the split pair
> crap like the PMP320 and 430. I've used the GigE-POE-APC on numerous
> things. Canopy, Trango, ePMP, UBNT Rockets, AFs, etc. and Exalt ExtendAir
> G2.
>
> That special radio he talks about that requires the same polarity on all 8
> wires (-48) and return on sheild would be the Trango ApexPlus and ApexLynx.
> I've tested it on the bench with the GigE-POE-APC and it does indeed work.
> None in the field yet. If I have another Trango GigE POE+SS injector box
> die, then I'll have to use a GigE-POE-APC or SS box. Chuck's stuff is
> smaller and cheaper. The only thing the Trango box gives you is T1/E1
> capability (which is on the management port), but we do not use it.
>
> On 2/13/2016 7:17 PM, Chuck McCown wrote:
>
> Thanks for the feedback.  I will diffuse the window and add some more
> light.  And incorporate your other suggestions too.
> I have used them on SAF.  I don’t know about the other radios, but as long
> as they are not passing some special signals like a PTP600 they should be
> OK.
>
> *From:* Faisal Imtiaz 
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 13, 2016 6:13 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] First attempt
>
> Very interesting...
>
> suggestion:-
>Cover the Window / it is shining on your glasses
>Need some more diffused light.
>You are starting your segments too quickly (beginning audio is a bit
> chopped off).
>Consider putting in a Title between the breaks/fades...
>
> Having said that...
>
> Do these POE work with the following radios ?
>
> SAF Lumina's ?
>
> Cambium 820's and or Ceragon IP20's ?
>
> Regards.
>
>
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 7266 SW 48 Street
> Miami, FL 33155
> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
>
> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
>
> --
>
> *From: *"Chuck McCown" mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com 
> *To: *af@afmug.com
> *Sent: *Saturday, February 13, 2016 7:34:24 PM
> *Subject: *[AFMUG] First attempt
>
> Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of
> problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.
>
> https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo
>
>
>
>

Re: [AFMUG] First attempt

[Chris Fabien]

Really enjoyed the video, quite educational and easy to follow with an
engineering background. For a more general audience maybe little too deep
of a dive.

Would it be easy to set up a test of yours vs a competitor showing ethernet
errors due to saturation? That could drive the point home in a way most
could understand without needing so much background.

Some better close-up would help when trying to show the jumpers etc. Even a
still image would be fine.
On Feb 13, 2016 7:34 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

> Too long.  Almost usable audio.  Need to work on lighting.  Lots of
> problems, but I do like Microsoft Movie Maker much better than GoPro Studio.
>
> https://youtu.be/j7RP8fnbJQo
>