Standards for last mile performance
josh at kyneticwifi.com
Sun May 1 08:55:33 UTC 2016
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 at 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
> > / 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?
More information about the NANOG