Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
jra at baylink.com
Thu Jan 31 03:00:47 UTC 2013
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Leo Bicknell" <bicknell at ufp.org>
> In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 08:27:27PM -0500, Jay
> Ashworth wrote:
> > You're assuming there, I think, that residential customers will have
> > mini-GBIC ports on their routers, which has not been my experience.
> > :-)
> They don't today because there is no demand for such a feature. My
> point is that if people deployed FTTH in this way, there would be demand
> for such products. Many of the chipsets inside these boxes already
> support SFP PHY, they just don't put an SFP connector on them to save
> a couple of bucks. If there was demand vendors would have a product out
> in months not years, probably within $10 of current prices (not
> counting optics).
There are still lots of people without routers, don't forget.
> > Understand that I'm not concerned with minimizing the build cost to
> > the
> > muni; I'm interested in *maximizing the utility of the build*, both
> > to the
> > end-user customers, *and* to local businesses who might/will serve
> > them.
> Yes, which is why you want to remove anything electronic possible,
> and to large extent any prismatic devices. Single mode from the
> 1990's will carry 10GE today, if unfettered. Today's single mode
> will carry 100GE+ for a 50+ year lifespan, if properly installed.
> Electronics last 5-10, and then must be replaced, at a cost passed
> on to consumers. The GigE GPON isn't cutting it anymore? Fine,
> let's replace all the electronics and update the splitters to 10GE,
> at great cost!
Have you missed, Leo, all the places wherein I've likened GPON to the
AntiChrist? :-) That said, anyone for whom GiGE handoff is *not*
good enough is a Layer 1 customer anyway.
> By having a direct fiber pair to the home ISP's could run 100Mbps to
> one customer, GigE to another customer, and 10x10GE WDM to a third customer,
> just for the cost of equipment. Own two business locations? You don't
> even contract with an ISP; you pay the Muni $10/month for fiber to
> each prem, and $2/month for a cross connect and light it up however you
We are in violent agreement, then. But *that's not the statistical majority
of the customer base*. At least not at first.
> Plug in a GigE LAN switch on each end and off you go. It's the ultimte
> empowerment, fiber for everyone!
If necessary, yes. The city itself will certainly be a Layer 1 customer.
> > Based also on the point Owen makes about reducing truck rolls by
> > having
> > netadmin controlled hardware at the customer end, I'm not at all
> > sure
> > I agree; I think it depends a lot on what you're trading it off
> > *against*.
> That can be fixed in other ways. It would be easy to make a standard
> SNMP mib or something that the service provider could poll from the
> customer gateway, and service providers could require compatable
> equipment. There are ethernet OAM specs.
"Customer gateway". Isn't that the box you're denigrating? :-)
Or do you mean the "FSLAM"?
> In a message written on Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 09:24:51PM -0500, Jay
> Ashworth wrote:
> > > To put that in patch panel racks, 10,368 households * 6 fibers per
> > > house (3 pair) / 864 per rack = 72 racks of patch panels. Using a
> > > relatively generous for 2-post patch panels 20sq feet per rack it
> > > would be 1,440 sq feet of colo space to house all of the patch
> > > panels to homes.
> > Oh, I hope to ghod we can get higher density that that.
> I'm sure it's possible. I would be there is an LC solution by now, and
> this is also discounting direct fusion splicing which would be 20-40x
> smaller in footprint.
> That said, the fiber MMR I'm proposing is of similar size to the telco
> CO's serving the same size towns today; except of course the Telco CO
> is filled with expensive switches, generators, battery banks, etc.
> I don't want to understate the fiber management problem in the MMR, it's
> real. Some thought and intelligence would have to go into the design of
> how patches are made, making heavy use of fusion splice trays rather
> than connectors, high density panels, and so on. That said, Telcos did
> a fine job of this with copper for hundreds of years when every line
> ran back to a central frame. There are fiber providers doing similar things
> today, not quite on the same scale but in ways that could easily scale
I have at least 24 months to watch the industry go by, probably longer.
> I would like to build an infrastrucutre that could last 50-100 years,
> like the telephone twisted pair of the last century. The only tech I
> can see that can do that is home run single mode fiber to the home.
> Anything with electronics has no chance of that lifespan. Anything
> with splitters and such will be problematic down the road. Simpler is
IMO, what has to last 50 years is *the plant*. You and I are both putting
terminal equipment on each end, we just differ on what it does, and who
pays for it.
I will, however, shoot anyone who proposes GPON. :-)
-- jr 'please, no gun control threadjacks :-)' a
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra at baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
More information about the NANOG