x
FTTx

Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s

Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ) is admitting that its 100-Mbit/s plans will come with a few caveats.

That's not to say 100 Mbit/s, even a bit diluted, is child's play. Verizon has come forward as the only major U.S. carrier to say that delivering 100 Mbit/s to the individual home is on its radar. (See Verizon Leads the Great 100-Mbit/s Bandwidth Race.) It's just that getting there won't be easy.

Luckily, Verizon won't have to saturate its network with 100-Mbit/s lines. "At any stage we don't have 32 people looking for 100-Mbit/s service," says Vincent O'Byrne, director of access technologies at Verizon. "We would do some oversubscription."

That means Verizon is betting that whenever 100 Mbit/s first becomes a reality, the demand will be minimal. "It's not likely that everyone would want it," says O'Byrne. "It would be a small percentage of people in any neighborhood."

Good thing, too. Verizon says that most of its central offices serve about 15,000 to 20,000 homes. Simple math would dictate that to bring 100 Mbit/s to each of those homes would require at least 1.5 Tbit/s of bandwidth going into each central office. That of course is not how things work now.

While Verizon's migration from BPON to GPON will play a big role in the movement towards 100 Mbit/s, traffic management will be just as significant.

"When you oversubscribe, you have aggregators behind the OLT [optical line terminal] which take advantage of the dead space of the transmission from one OLT to another," says O'Byrne. "It is taking advantage of statistical multiplexing and the fact that not everyone is accessing that 100 Mbit/s at the same time."

In the long run, Verizon is considering the possibility of upgrading its network with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM), or WDM-PON. This technology sends a full wavelength to each house, greatly increasing the potential capacity of each fiber.

"We're making sure that when we deploy our GPONs, that we have the capability when there is a need, to increase our network's output. Part of our overall strategy is to make sure our network can evolve to WDM," says O'Byrne.

For now though, O'Byrne says that Verizon is expecting GPON to have a long lifespan that won't get cut short by WDM-PON.

"There are different substantiations of WDM," O'Byrne says. "There are some variants that allow you to evolve off the present GPON, and they sort of become another GPON channel."

But even with network capacity upgrades, oversubscription, and multiplexing, signing up for 100-Mbit/s service won't mean you'll get that bandwidth all the time. "100 Mbit/s isn't guaranteed," O'Byrne says. "If you ran a test on the network, it would read 100 Mbit/s, but if enough people were demanding it at the same time, we couldn't guarantee each would get the 100 Mbit/s."

— Raymond McConville, Reporter, Light Reading

bollocks187 12/5/2012 | 2:57:21 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s Surewest in Sacra. CA deploys Active Ethernet. Also several carriers in EMEA.
jepovic 12/5/2012 | 2:57:24 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s Yes, I have been at the US east coast.

Are you so naive as to think that a company like Verizon base their decisions primarily on rational network cost calculations?

Of course they think very seriously about the regulatory aspects as well, which was one of my points.

The other point is that they may have been fooled by the vendors. This happens all the time! A couple of high-level meetings on the golf course can "make" the decision about technology and vendor from the top. Alternatively, efficient marketing towards the right technical "gurus" can "make" the decision from the bottom.

After all, these are terribly difficult questions with an endless amount of parameters to estimate. In the end, gut feelings will be more important than numbers. As has been shown in endless organizational studies, business cases and number crunching is usually done as a justification after the actual decision (but before the formal decision).
rjs 12/5/2012 | 2:57:25 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s As JEPOVIC wrote in post 19

" ....

I don't understand why this model isn't used by eg Verizon on the east coast.

In suburbs, this model is more tricky. Still, PON seems awfully complicated, poorly standardised and anything but future-proof. I still think it's a dead end. "

I believe the above was a rhetorical question, but if not my opinion is as below.

I believe the answer is that everybody will then know that technology is not the issue with 100Mbps deployment. PON gives a good barrier to entry for
monopolistic walled gardens.


Also, throughput and toggle rate should not be confused. Throughput's upper limit is defined by the toggle rate. With a 100Mbps (toggle rate) p2p ethernet, the throughput can be much lower due to statistical muxing, and once the back bone is ready to handle a throughput of 100Mbps per subscriber upgrades are easy.

Technology is not the bottleneck, FCC and monopolies are the real bottleneck.
Remember, if it were not for VoIP we would still be filling the coffers of ILECs for 10c/minute calls. ILECs will not change unless their revenue is threatened.


-RJS
Duh! 12/5/2012 | 2:57:26 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s Quote:
I don't understand why this model isn't used by eg Verizon on the east coast.

In suburbs, this model is more tricky.
End Quote:

Have you ever been to the US east coast? Do you actually think that a substantial portion of the population in Verizon's territory lives in MDUs?

More to the point, are you so naive as to think that Verizon hasn't modelled, analyzed, confidence tested and analyzed again their opex/capex model for all kinds of architectures?

What is it about this topic that brings out all kinds of people with opinions but no facts?
tailpin 12/5/2012 | 2:57:27 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s I'm trying to figure out these next-gen PON abreviations. The most common seem to be PON and lol. What's a lol-PON?
jepovic 12/5/2012 | 2:57:27 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s "* Active Ethernet does not scale for mass-market deployments in moderate-to-low density areas. Too many fibers coming in to the CO, too many fibers to fit into existing duct, too many fibers to repair quickly in event of a dig-up. And if you go to remote nodes in the field to eliminate those problems, you're back to the powering and maintenance issues that come along with VDSL and ADSL2, but without the cost avoidance of reusing copper distribution and drop."

You're talking about P2P fiber from the CO, which indeed is pretty rare except in greenfield deployments. I'm referring to fiber to the basement (FTTB). In this case, the amount of fiber is similar to PON. Yes, you will have distributed active equipment, but it is cheaper and way more powerful than the distributed PON equipment. Power is regular 220 AC, cooling is done without fans. All that is needed is a room in the basement.

There are other advantages of using Ethernet switches as well: Efficient multiplexing on packet level, simple well-known technology (easy to train support staff, field technicians), tons of vendors, simple physical interfaces etc.

I don't understand why this model isn't used by eg Verizon on the east coast.

In suburbs, this model is more tricky. Still, PON seems awfully complicated, poorly standardised and anything but future-proof. I still think it's a dead end.
bollocks187 12/5/2012 | 2:57:27 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s Answer - None !

It's all a 'media' show. Verizon does not know what it is trying to do - it is all reactionary.

BPON(ATM) then GPON..... seed the future with WDM-PON.......then BS-PON - lol





bollocks187 12/5/2012 | 2:57:28 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s 7,

What vendor makes a profit with the GPON solution ?
redface 12/5/2012 | 2:57:28 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s Actually the WDM-PON laser is just a coolerless low cost FP laser with a 0.1% AR coating on the front facet. Reflective SOA is just another name for the same thing, more or less. They are both based on laser injection locking, with a seed wavelength signal provided by a wavelength sliced broadband light source. Wavelength slicing is done using AWG. A batch AR facet cost does not increase manufacturing cost very significantly. Otherwise it is identical to a diplexer in optical path and build. The cost of manufacturing this ONT in the high volume manufacturing limit is about the same as that in diplexer, and cheaper than a triplexer which is frequently used in TDM-PON by Verizon. Of course the AWGs used in WDM-PON will increase the WDM-PON component cost significantly. However, the per channel AWG cost is getting to $30-40 these days so it is not a show-stopper either.


paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 2:57:28 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s
As said, TDM PON can be 2 wavelengths AND can be done with an FP to match the distance. If you want to do B+ distances with Novera, you are not using an FP laser.

The way to get to FP with GPON is to use a bit more aggressive rules on the ODN design AND use FEC. You will find you can use FP lasers in the ONT and meet the distances required. Of course, Verizon won't allow that small a margin in their design.

And the $30 cost for the AWG is about 1/3 the Price of an indoor diplexer ONT as shown that Novera makes in either GPON or EPON. So, yes it is significant.

seven
Duh! 12/5/2012 | 2:57:28 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s As I understand it, Novera is using a modified F-P for their incoherent injection locking scheme. The secret sauce seems to have to do with coatings on the front facet. Their cost is probably a bit more than a BPON/GEPON FP, but not significantly more.

The cost part of the equation is more that they require 2N transceivers per PON, plus a fairly powerful broadband light source, plus athermal AWGs. Certainly all of these are subject to a learning curve... but so are the DFBs and APDs in GPON implementations, which are nearing parity with volume. And the 2N thing is structural rather than being subject to learning curve.

Oh, and the diplexor vs triplexor thing is a red herring. The overlay is an additional feature that a few operators are taking advantage of for their broadcast TV services. Apples-to-apples comparison would involve just the GPON.
paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 2:57:28 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s
Sorry, but do the quotes yourself. It is a publicly available product designed in the US.

The WDM-PON for Korea is neither FP or DFB. It is a Resonant Cavity Laser. The other technology of choice is Reflective SOAs (and those little puppies are off the charts).

Remember you have to build a colorless ONT for stocking reasons. So, you can not just use an off the shelf FP. You CAN use an FP in GPON if you change the loop characteristics. The only reason that APDs and DFBs are used today is the Class B+ optics.

Just so we are ALL clear....here is the product deployed in Korea (note the 30K ONT number - about 1/3rd of Verizon's monthly volume).

http://www.noveraoptics.com/

seven
redface 12/5/2012 | 2:57:29 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s Brookseven wrote:

"No, there is no low cost solution for WDM-PONs. There will have to be a new generation of thinking before such parts could exist. Have you actually thought about the components involved? If so and you think they will be cheap anytime soon, you are on something."

I am sorry, Brookseven. But you are wrong. The reason that KT has deployed WDM-PON on a limited scale and the reason Verizon keeps mentioning WDM-PON is because WDM-PON is getting pretty close to TDM-PON in terms of price/performance. By that I mean WDM-PON is probably 2x to 3x more expensive than TDM-PON TODAY. Having done some WDM-PON development myself, I know exactly the components involved. Yes, they can be competitive to TDM-PON in terms of cost. The ONU end of the WDM-PON has a component which is almost identical to a diplexer in form factor and functionality, which means it is cheaper than a triplexer. In WDM-PON, there is no DFB laser. Low cost FP laser diodes are used instead.
Duh! 12/5/2012 | 2:57:30 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s Quote:
If you ask me, there are two possible reasons for this:
* Regulatory reasons. FTTH could easily be unbundled, PON is messy.
* Operators have been fooled by vendors. It does happen, you know. PBT, anyone?
End quote:

And if you ask me there is one and only one possible reason for this:
* Active Ethernet does not scale for mass-market deployments in moderate-to-low density areas. Too many fibers coming in to the CO, too many fibers to fit into existing duct, too many fibers to repair quickly in event of a dig-up. And if you go to remote nodes in the field to eliminate those problems, you're back to the powering and maintenance issues that come along with VDSL and ADSL2, but without the cost avoidance of reusing copper distribution and drop.

Of course, if 80% of your subs live in high rises and your duct network has a median radius of 5 or 7 km, then active Ethernet works just fine.


Didn't we have this conversation a few months ago?
jepovic 12/5/2012 | 2:57:31 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s :-)

Of course, 100 Mbit/s has been available for a couple of years now in some European and Asian countries (roughly $50/mo in Sweden). Even 1 Gbit/s services are available in some cities. Based on regular LAN switches in the basement with CAT6 cabling to each apartment, of course.

With that model, more money is spent on cabling, but far less money on equipment. It seems a whole lot more future-proof though, I mean Verizon is talking about the next upgrade even though they just started rolling out the latest generation of gear.

If you ask me, there are two possible reasons for this:
* Regulatory reasons. FTTH could easily be unbundled, PON is messy.
* Operators have been fooled by vendors. It does happen, you know. PBT, anyone?
Kreskin 12/5/2012 | 2:57:32 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s

This is outstanding PR spin by Verizon ... all the techno phoebes want to debate WDM and other technology in Korea!!!

Verizon knows it can deliver 100 mbs to any home or business at any time with fiber. The PR spin is to make sure regulators believe that there are technology obstacles.

VZ et all need more time to build out fiber before they let the cat out of the bag on this.

The last thing VZ wants is Congress back pettaling and modifying the Comm Act.

Copper is dead.
LightSentry 12/5/2012 | 2:57:32 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s So, with all the capacity and flexibility that PON provides it is amazing that some folks still try to push Active Ethernet to FTTH deployments.

paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 2:57:32 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s
OP,

Ah....at least somebody else sees the point. Now, just for the math inclined out there. Imagine a days when P2P reigned. Now, use only DSL (and heck cable) to connect to the Internet backbone. Now that we would have computer to computer driven sessions instead of human to computer driven sessions, you will see the glaring need for more fiber in the backbone. Of course, nobody gets paid more money for fiber in the backbone for High Speed Internet service. They do get paid for a higher bit rate on the access port.

Interesting to note that last bit.

seven
OldPOTS 12/5/2012 | 2:57:32 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s seven,
Glad you see the need for all that new fiber for 'long haul'.

OP
paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 2:57:33 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s
Time OUT.

The WDM PON in Korea (still very small deployment) is many times the cost of GPON and has the disadvantage that the technology chosen is stuck at 100 Mb/s. To go beyond that, Technology will have to change considerably and THAT technology, while available, is unbelievably expensive (Imagine the appetite for $5000 ONTs).

And yet, there seems no pressing need for ANYONE to introduce higher rates - again as Verizon admitted (and if you ask KT you will find the same) - there is oversubscription right at the edge. Go check out the uplink from the WDM PON box (Hint: it is NOT a dedicated 100Mb/s even through the OLT). So, it is a nice story but is NOT a dedicated 100Mb/s even out of the access box.

seven
NoCopper 12/5/2012 | 2:57:33 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s Please don't argue based on the current equipment cost. We all know that cost comes down with mass volume and that the WDM-PON technical/physical concept will allow for low cost equipment.

I guess if you refer to the overbooking in the OLT you mean the LG-Nortel OLT? Certainly some smart company can come up with an WDM-PON OLT that is none-blocking by design.
paolo.franzoi 12/5/2012 | 2:57:33 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s
NoCopper,

No, there is no low cost solution for WDM-PONs. There will have to be a new generation of thinking before such parts could exist. Have you actually thought about the components involved? If so and you think they will be cheap anytime soon, you are on something.

It is possible to build an OLT that is not oversubcribed today. Of course, nobody - including the Koreans - want to pay for it. You can do the math on your own. 500 Users @ 100 Mb/s (carry the 12...add in pi....divide by the square root of Oprah...). Yes, thats right 500 users require 50 Gb/s. Not terrible right? Of course, now go to that 25K line CO (whoops need 50 Gb/s * 500). That is why the oversubscription is present and makes the reality of this so much less important.

seven
NoCopper 12/5/2012 | 2:57:34 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s I wonder why Verizon is upgrading to GPON, while considering WDM-PON only as a future option. At least in Korea, WDM-PON with 100M per sub is deployed today:

http://www.ftthblog.com/wdm-po...

Is Korea so much different to the NA market?

If the GPON / EPON vendors will keep their promises, we'll see 10G versions of these PON variants earliest in 2009. As cost is key in the access market, it will be interesting to see how the evolved WDM-PON and those upcoming TDM PON variants will then compete in cost.
Pete Baldwin 12/5/2012 | 2:57:34 PM
re: Verizon Spells Out 100 Mbit/s > Is Korea so much different to the NA market?

Oh, come on. You know the answer to that. :)

Demand in the U.S. is probably too sparse to justify full-blown WDM-PON. Not many people need dedicated wavelengths yet, and if you believe Verizon's math (or AT&T's for that matter), even HD television won't get them there.
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE