& cplSiteName &
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
<<   <   Page 7 / 9   >   >>
rjs
rjs
12/5/2012 | 3:47:08 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
If VZ and T's tentacles were not involved in the last mile the market would use good old P2P ethernet for bit transport.

Going forward (and 5M customers is not what I would consider a large user base), I see no reason why a simple P2P ethernet transceiver would not do the job.
The End user and the CO can keep upgrading the transceivers as technology improves. The fiber is the same. I believe this was very well analyzed by RJM in one of the earlier posts.

Also, as JEPOVIC mentioned in post 59, Ethernet is the defacto standard in Enterprise and large company campuses some of which are larger than an average CO.

-RJS
rjs
rjs
12/5/2012 | 3:47:08 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
fanfare (post 58):

You are absolutely right about the VZ and T not sharing there network if they invest in it.
That is why if you read the rest of my post, it is necessary to separate the bit transport from the service provider.
They HAVE to be separate companies.

Nobody is asking the last mile bit transport provider to make a loss. In fact they should have a healthy profit, say 10% and it should be CAPPED. This unchecked greed for
profit only lines the pocket of the CEOs.

Please do not tell me that this model does not work. The power companies have been reliably providing electricity to every home.

And finally, your last point in your post is dead-on. We really do not need VZ and T to provide the mile. Trust me the market will provide many competitors even at 10% gross margin. In the food industry, and in fact in most commodity business, 5% margin is the norm.

Do not listen to the nonsense spewed out by lobbyist on Wallstreet and monopolists. They are doing what they have to, but are we doing what we need to??? If I were the CEO of VZ and T, I would do things no differently because that would be what I am getting paid for.

E/GPON, and all other stuff is basically bit transport for the lastmile. Let the best man win -- and that can happen only if you let free market take its course. Even the local government and Municipalities should be allowed to compete, all being allowed a profit which is capped.

Amazingly, the requirement for this cap will vanish once real free market takes over. That is the real problem here. There is NO free market at work in the last mile.

-RJS
Luke M
Luke M
12/5/2012 | 3:47:07 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
"Support for legacy STBs (QAM etc)?
check out Verizon's FTTH PON service with RF video overlay !!"

I'm well aware of Verizon's FTTP.

"The Coax in the ground will still be used and not be replaced unless due to hugh maiantance costs and replacement is required.. thus the CMTS and cables modems will still have their places in the market..."

I'm not sure you understood. The whole point is to leverage the existing coax (cheaper than FTTP) while modernizing the network and allowing for a smooth transition to FTTP (same headend for both GPON-coax and GPON-fiber, so greenfield builds can use FTTP with no complications).

Of course there are less radical approaches to enhancing HFC, but they don't provide a service on par with GPON, or provide for seamless mixing of HFC and FTTP.
mpls2
mpls2
12/5/2012 | 3:47:07 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
"Here's an access idea for all you bright guys to ponder: "GPON over coax". No google hits for this phrase yet...

GPON OLT -> node -> coax -> gateway (analogous to ONT) -> CPE (coax/Cat5)

Requires a 2.5g down / 1.25g up coax PHY to be developed. Definitely feasible. Reach should be superior to classic deep fiber (passive) HFC. Also, it's important that the gateway support legacy STBs (IPTV -> QAM, etc).

This scheme is a bridge between today's HFC networks and FTTP.

You'll thank me later. "

-------------------------------------------------


No Go.. stupid and pointless idea.


Support for legacy STBs (QAM etc)?
check out Verizon's FTTH PON service with RF video overlay !!

The Coax in the ground will still be used and not be replaced unless due to hugh maiantance costs and replacement is required.. thus the CMTS and cables modems will still have their places in the market...
Luke M
Luke M
12/5/2012 | 3:47:07 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
RJS, your theory is that once potential profit is capped, dozens of companies will rush to spend $1000-$2000/home each to give us multiple FTTP options? Come on...try to make a little sense. You're just aimlessly ranting.

Homework assignment: find out how much money cable overbuilders have made (hint: it's a negative number).
mpls2
mpls2
12/5/2012 | 3:47:07 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
"Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Every point you make is false or irrelevant, except to some extent #3.

PON of all flavors is clearly insufficient in terms of bandwidth provided, already while being built. Of course there will be new technologies and upgrades, but how can this be seen as an advantage (except by system vendors, of course)?

Ethernet provides much much higher bandwidths for lower cost.

One question: If PON is so superior to Ethernet, why are there absolutely no enterprises deploying PON for there internal networks? Large company campuses aren't that different from CO areas actually. "

-------------------------------------------------


Three wrongs don't make a right !

BTW, PON can and is used to carry ethernet.
Why are you even comparing enterprises with carrier/providers ?
Based on your logic, why aren't enterprises deploying xDSL in their internal networks ? answer because they lay internal wiriing of cat5/6 to the desktops. ie. not fibre ..

We are talkng about a carrier/provider having to service and manage fee paying end users for FTTH. With enterprises can you track and manage all your devices connected on the RJ45 ports ? can you have a centralised control over who and what is connected? Of course you can to a certain extent, but it cannot scale as well as PON can.
One other thing, large company enterprises are more laid out like a distributied environment, grouped together into functional groups and of course with some central resource such as WAN links and central databses etc..

Your statement "Ethernet provides much much higher bandwidths for lower cost."
You have not even thought this through have you ? how many Media converters, or ethernet switches ports will you need at the CO as compared with the number of PON OLTs. At least 32 times more ! no forgetting, rack space and power requirements for them all..

stephencooke
stephencooke
12/5/2012 | 3:47:06 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
"I'm not sure you understood. The whole point is to leverage the existing coax (cheaper than FTTP) while modernizing the network and allowing for a smooth transition to FTTP (same headend for both GPON-coax and GPON-fiber, so greenfield builds can use FTTP with no complications)."

OK, I'm confused... Telcos (the guys who are looking at or doing FTTx deployment) have unshielded twisted pair in the ground, not COAX. Cable companies such as Cox, TWC, etc. have COAX and they are kicking Telcos' collective butts with DOCSIS so why would they remotely consider the CAPX required for FTTx-based technology?

Steve.
Luke M
Luke M
12/5/2012 | 3:47:04 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
"Cable companies such as Cox, TWC, etc. have COAX and they are kicking Telcos' collective butts with DOCSIS so why would they remotely consider the CAPX required for FTTx-based technology?"

The competitive pressure will come (is coming) from telco FTTP deployments. DOCSIS 3 is an excellent near term solution, but at some point the limited upstream of today's HFC networks will motivate an upgrade of some type.

Possible evolutions of HFC include:
* Change upstream/downstream split
* Add a new upstream band above 1Ghz
* Most radical: the "GPON over coax" idea
paolo.franzoi
paolo.franzoi
12/5/2012 | 3:47:02 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues

Couple of comments:

To the other thread - Don't forget NTT. They have the largest FTTH buildout and it is PON based. For the structural separation idea, it can be done BUT need to think about the right way to compensate shareholders. Also, because their is separation does not imply that the Government would choose Ethernet as the Access Layer. Finally, why push Verizon and AT&T and not Comcast?

To this thread:

GPON over Coax? Are you asking about Baseband in one direction? Are you talking about making a 2.5Gbps QAM Modem placed at the O/E point? Not sure what the gain is over reducing the splits and providing GPON (or DOCSIS 3.0) TO the split point and then delivering DOCSIS 2.0 to each segment. That would seem to be a simpler data upgrade.

Again, I think that people get caught up in the bit rate at their door and the ignore the over subscription that is occurring. Lowering the over subscription of the Access Layer would be a good start and actually might be more useful than upping the data rates.

Finally on this topic, one has to be very careful with Downstream to Upstream ratios. There was some work in WiFi that showed that anything over 8:1 or so is pretty worthless.

seven
rjs
rjs
12/5/2012 | 3:47:02 PM
re: FTTH Technology Fracas Continues
"""
RJS, your theory is that once potential profit is capped, dozens of companies will rush to spend $1000-$2000/home each to give us multiple FTTP options? Come on...try to make a little sense. You're just aimlessly ranting. """"

I should ask you the question, where did you get those numbers from? Did you get them from the retail quotes from VZ and T 8-K filings?
Financial engineering can make a toilet seat in to a $700 expense ....

One can get a P2P 1G ethernet transceiver to transport bits for much less. Separate the bit hauling from the rest for smoke and mirrors.




""""Homework assignment: find out how much money cable overbuilders have made (hint: it's a negative number).""""

And this precisely why the MSOs are trying to shove HBO down my throat and bundle it with my ISP!!
I repeat, separate the bit transport from the services. If you do that, free market will make sure that some wise guy will come up with a solution which is profitable.
This is not a new business model, the electric utilities have adopted it and they are NOT complaining.


-RJS
<<   <   Page 7 / 9   >   >>


Featured Video
Upcoming Live Events
October 22, 2019, Los Angeles, CA
November 5, 2019, London, England
November 7, 2019, London, UK
November 14, 2019, Maritim Hotel, Berlin
December 3-5, 2019, Vienna, Austria
December 3, 2019, New York, New York
March 16-18, 2020, Embassy Suites, Denver, Colorado
May 18-20, 2020, Irving Convention Center, Dallas, TX
All Upcoming Live Events