Muni fiber: L1 or L2?

Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Tue Feb 12 22:57:22 UTC 2013


Scott Helms wrote:

>>> Numbers?  Examples?

>> Greenfield SS and PON deployment costs in Japan was already shown.

> Japan has one of the highest population densities of major economies in the

The examples are in rural area and I already stated population
density in English.

>> No, the only reason to insist on PON is to make L1 unbundling
>> not feasible.

> I don't know what conspiracy theory you're ascribing to here, but this is
> incorrect.

PON being more expensive than SS, that is the only explanation.

>> No, SS is cheaper than PON without exception.

> Prove it.

See above or below.

>> If the initial density of subscribers is high, SS is fine.
>>
>> If it is not, initially, most electric equipment, OE port,
>> fibers, splitters and a large closures containing the splitters
>> of PON can not be shared by two or more subscribers, which means
>> PON incurs much more material and labor cost for each initial
>> subscriber than SS.

                                         Masataka Ohta





More information about the NANOG mailing list