nanog mailing list archives

Re: Standards for last mile performance


From: Josh Reynolds <josh () kyneticwifi com>
Date: Sun, 1 May 2016 03:55:33 -0500

No. Active has higher initial and ongoing plant costs (cabinet power,
cabinet wear and tear, more battery banks, chargers, etc). You also end up
using far, far less fiber strands.
On May 1, 2016 3:46 AM, "Mark Tinka" <mark.tinka () seacom mu> wrote:



On 30/Apr/16 20:36, Josh Reynolds wrote:

For us (FTTH) we had/have enough aggressive foresight to do smaller
splits.. 1x16. Some are doing 1x2's or 1x4's at the corner somewhere into
1x16's or 1x8's, so at the point where you start to hit decent saturation
you can just shrink the upstream split and fuse onto a new upstream
strand
/ optic. Once that gets overused, thankfully you can overlay NG-PON2.

If you're being this aggressive, and then having to re-invest in the
next PON standard, isn't the case for Active-E being made more and more?

Mark.



Current thread: