nanog mailing list archives
Re: FTTH Active vs Passive
From: Dan White <dwhite () olp net>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 14:13:53 -0600
On 01/12/09 14:33 -0500, Paul Wall wrote:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Dan White <dwhite () olp net> wrote:All valid points. Deploying a strand to each customer from the CO/Cabinet is a good way to future proof your plant.I would argue that every customer is entitled to duplex fiber.
In the case of PON, WDM is used to dedicate wavelengths on the strand for different purposes - ingress, egress, RF overlay (as someone else mentioned), TDM voice etc. You could deploy 2 or 3 strands and get more bandwidth to the customer, using perhaps less expensive hardware, or you could maintain fewer strands in the ground and depend on equipment manufactures to maintain an adequate growth in bandwidth capabilities. Neither approach is going to work for everyone. -- Dan White
Current thread:
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive, (continued)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Michael Holstein (Dec 02)
- RE: FTTH Active vs Passive Holmes,David A (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Jack Bates (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Alexander Harrowell (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Delian Delchev (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Fletcher Kittredge (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Robert Mathews (OSIA) (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Randy Bush (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Dan White (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Scott Brown/Clack/ESD (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive bmanning (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Jared Mauch (Dec 01)