Muni fiber: L1 or L2?

Sun Feb 10 00:03:34 UTC 2013

Robert E. Seastrom wrote:

>> Then, with the otherwise same assumptions of my previous mail,
>> total extra drop cable length for PON will be 204km, four times
>> more than the trunk cable length.
>>
>> Thus, it is so obvious that SS is better than PON.
> 
> You're confusing fiber architecture with what gets laid on top of it.
> Where the splitters go is entirely irrelevant.

If you ignore so lengthy drop cables.

> Rule of thumb in the US is that 80% of the costs of a fiber build are
> in engineering, planning, RoW acquisition, lawyers, etc.

That's obviously because of your madogiwazoku quality of
engineering.

> Of the
> remaining 20%, more of it is labor than materials.  Price per fiber
> strand in the bundle is noise in the larger equation.

Drop cables increase the length of the bundle and labor for it.

>> 	http://itpro.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/COLUMN/20080619/308665/
> 
> Having actually been involved in building a business plan surrounding
> this,

As a person who have been involved in  building a business plan
surrounding this several times, it is obvious to me that you
have no or little experience on FTTH.

> I don't need to read Japanese to be able to tell you that the
> outside plant engineering was clearly assigned to the madogiwazoku if
> they're only getting a 4:1 split on average.

Of course, anyone who try to use PON for FTTH is madogiwazoku like
you.

						Masataka Ohta