nanog mailing list archives
Re: FTTH Active vs Passive
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 18:59:46 +0100 (CET)
On Tue, 1 Dec 2009, Dan White wrote:
However, there are some advantages to GPON - particularly if you're deploying high bandwidth video services. PON ONTs share 2.4Gb/s of bandwidth downstream, which means you can support more than a gig of video on each PON, if deploying in dense mode.
You don't need to supply more than a gig per household, so active gige (or 100meg) is enough to feed the household with their broadcast video needs. So yes, you will need 10GE to the node and 100/1000 to each household do this this kind of video.
PON only makes sense with low take-rates and high per-truckroll costs when I did the business case last time.
Another big advantage is in CO equipment. A 4-PON blade in a cabinet is going to support on the order of 256 ONTs.
But you lose out on the CPEs, at least historically these were much more expensive than the 100FX/TX media converters available in the market.
-- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike () swm pp se
Current thread:
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Justin Shore (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Dan White (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive JC Dill (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Byron Hicks (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Chris Adams (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Byron Hicks (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Chris Hills (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Dan White (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Michael Holstein (Dec 01)
- RE: FTTH Active vs Passive Deepak Jain (Dec 01)