[AusNOG] Seeking GPON hardware supplier

Thu Apr 21 08:30:16 EST 2016

Hi,

It's worth also noting that your deployment model has a big impact here. If
you are delivering Ultra Fast broadband under the current AU CLC, and only
interested in single service per tenancy with a single RSP, then Copper or
Active Fibre will always be cheaper due to the many ways you can cut it.

If you need to deliver multiple circuits (e.g. you were wanting to adopt a
similar wholesale model to NBN) then you would need to look at smarter CPE
for the access port(s) and/or multiple cables. In these cases, a lot of the
advantages you get in terms of cost reduction from active/direct CPE can be
quickly eroded by more expensive switching fabric in the access layer or
the cost of delivering multiple cables. Similar argument to what happens
when MATV is added to the PON fabric.

The other issue to consider if you decide to put an access switch in the
tenancy to seperate circuits is how you handle "interference" from one port
to the other; e.g. one circuit impacting the circuit for another RSP. Again
this is completely possible on active ethernet or Copper, but the hardware
to do this is typically getting much more expensive than your cheap edge
switches. (Bearing in mind that typically you would need to police ports to
a particular criteria, and a lot of cheap switches do not support policing
or any sort of rate limiting).

Typically I've found the Core/Edge switch topology to quickly get a lot
more expensive than the OLT/ONT deployment model, and also infinitely more
headachy to manage, but each to their own.

Andrew

On 21 April 2016 at 08:09, Ben Thompson <ben.thompson at 3play.com.au> wrote:

> What you're saying (Greg) matches my experience. Most cable runs in this
> context are <50m, it's only the riser backbone that can be >100m in 30+
> story buildings.
>
> Craig makes a few good points. The lack of active equipment does reduce
> maintenance costs (however the MTTF of even lower-grade managed copper
> switches is good) and install costs. The economies of scale seem to be
> where GPON really shines, as well as support CATV/RF for greenfields.
>
> In short, since we're just wanting IP there are the three approaches that
> can meet our needs:
>  - Direct copper (switches in risers)
>  - Direct fibre (switches in risers)
>  - GPON (OLT in basement)
>
> Direct copper seems to beat fibre - it's cheaper, and at these distances
> we're still upgradeable to 10Gb. Maintenance is about the same.
> I'm waiting for the sales guys to confirm pricing ballparks, but it's
> looking like direct copper beats GPON based on price. Maintenance with GPON
> is lower, but perhaps a mute point with an apparently higher equipment cost
> (read: OLT). It would make sense if the scale was larger, or there was a
> need for CATV/RF of course.
>
> Ben Thompson
>
> *3**Play Networks*
> *p:* 1300 301 946
> <jarrod at 3playnetworks.com.au>
>
> ben.thompson at 3play.com.au
>
>  This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended for use by the Addressee only. The confidential nature of the
> information contained in the email and/or file is not waived, lost or
> destroyed if it is sent in error to other than the Addressee. Use or
> dissemination of the information contained in the email and/or files by a
> recipient other than the Addressee may cause commercial damage to
> both/either the Sender and/or Addressee.If you are not the Addressee of
> this email/files please immediately contact the Sender and delete this
> email/files.
>
> On 20 April 2016 at 16:07, Greg Anderson <ganderson at raywhite.com> wrote:
>
>> This sounds right to me - I am no expert but expect GPON is intended to
>> deliver savings over considerably long distances, with sacrifices to
>> performance (sharing fibre) and increased complexity (use of ONT, OLT,
>> splitters etc).  If your solution is within a high rise, distances are
>> likely to be short (<200m?) so I guess the saving on fibre length and
>> diameter is going to be quite minimal versus the extra complexity.  I have
>> never seen a bundle of 1-2k fibres going up a riser, maybe there you would
>> see the economies of scale (or just plain lack of options depending on the
>> diameter at the bottom of the building and space in the riser).
>>
>> I expect you would need an NTU of some kind anyway, but couldn't imagine
>> GPON would be particularly effective for ~50-100 endpoints, especially
>> considering the limitations imposed.
>>
>> Happy to be corrected on anything I have wrong here (again, not an
>> expert) but I am interested in where this thread goes.
>>
>> On 20 April 2016 at 15:31, Ben Thompson <ben.thompson at 3play.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Really good question, that's an option I had missed.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, when it comes to deliver 1Gb services in a high-rise
>>> context, GPON is proving to be the most expensive (!!), followed by your
>>> suggestion of direct-fibre, followed by direct-copper.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ben Thompson
>>>
>>> *3**Play Networks*
>>> *p:* 1300 301 946
>>> <jarrod at 3playnetworks.com.au>
>>>
>>> ben.thompson at 3play.com.au
>>>
>>>  This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
>>> intended for use by the Addressee only. The confidential nature of the
>>> information contained in the email and/or file is not waived, lost or
>>> destroyed if it is sent in error to other than the Addressee. Use or
>>> dissemination of the information contained in the email and/or files by a
>>> recipient other than the Addressee may cause commercial damage to
>>> both/either the Sender and/or Addressee.If you are not the Addressee of
>>> this email/files please immediately contact the Sender and delete this
>>> email/files.
>>>
>>> On 20 April 2016 at 14:14, Matthew Moyle-Croft <mmc at mmc.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does it _have_ to be GPON?  (ie. is the fibre plant architected that
>>>> way?)
>>>>
>>>> For that kind of scale simple point-to-point can be easier and probably
>>>> cheaper and more flexible - just use normal switches (with a few caveats).
>>>> I know Cisco at one point sold a Cat4500 for doing this.  I’m sure other
>>>> people are more up on what’s cool with GigE SFP switches these days than me.
>>>>
>>>> MMC
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 19 Apr 2016, at 7:31 PM, Ben Thompson <ben.thompson at 3play.com.au>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm seeking a supplier for small-scale GPON hardware and advice.
>>>> Looking to provide 1Gb services to facilities with 50 to 1000 endpoints.
>>>>
>>>> Any recommendations?
>>>>
>>>> Ben Thompson
>>>> *3**Play Networks*
>>>> *p:* 1300 301 946
>>>> <jarrod at 3playnetworks.com.au>
>>>> ben.thompson at 3play.com.au
>>>>
>>>>  This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
>>>> intended for use by the Addressee only. The confidential nature of the
>>>> information contained in the email and/or file is not waived, lost or
>>>> destroyed if it is sent in error to other than the Addressee. Use or
>>>> dissemination of the information contained in the email and/or files by a
>>>> recipient other than the Addressee may cause commercial damage to
>>>> both/either the Sender and/or Addressee.If you are not the Addressee of
>>>> this email/files please immediately contact the Sender and delete this
>>>> email/files.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AusNOG mailing list
>>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Regards,Greg Anderson*
>> Senior Network Administrator   |   Ray White Group [image: Ray White]
>>
>> T(07) 32312121
>> Whttps://www.raywhite.com
>> ALevel 26, 111 Eagle Street, BRISBANE QLD 4000
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20160421/047b2d42/attachment-0001.html>