Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
597 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 132


  Reply # 1100703 2-Aug-2014 16:47
Send private message

sbiddle:
charsleysa:
While I don't agree that we should be trying to push out 1Gbps to everyone and that CIR doesn't matter, I do agree that the government should have gone with a better technology for fibre by utilizing 10G-EPON from the get go.


So you'd be happy that UFB would still be stuck in the design phase (rather than having been deployed for 3 years) and that both deployment and end user costs would be significantly higher?




Why would it still be stuck in the design phase? EPON has a simpler design with compatibility using existing Ethernet gear.




Regards
Stefan Andres Charsley

27270 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6699

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1100717 2-Aug-2014 17:00
Send private message

charsleysa:
sbiddle:
charsleysa:
While I don't agree that we should be trying to push out 1Gbps to everyone and that CIR doesn't matter, I do agree that the government should have gone with a better technology for fibre by utilizing 10G-EPON from the get go.


So you'd be happy that UFB would still be stuck in the design phase (rather than having been deployed for 3 years) and that both deployment and end user costs would be significantly higher?




Why would it still be stuck in the design phase? EPON has a simpler design with compatibility using existing Ethernet gear.


Because 10G EPON hasn't yet his mass market. It's no good using a technology that is realistically a year or two away from being deployed on any large scale. That's 4-5 years after UFB started being deployed.

10G EPON network architecture would also require significantly more ducting and fibre to be laid, not to mention a significant increase of cost of the equipment over regular GPON which has a very straight forward upgrade path to 10GPON when the need arises.


 
 
 
 


50 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 22

Trusted

  Reply # 1100765 2-Aug-2014 18:13
Send private message

Isn't the real issue here the data cap on a 1Gbps plan?

There's no point offering users a 20GB plan at that speed, but the risk of offering unlimited data at 1Gbps is huge. Sure there are terms and conditions, but ISPs would need to cover themselves against someone leaving the tap on at full bore for 31 days and downloading the theoretical maximum of 2.62974e6 (seconds in a month) x 1Gb - I think that would run to Exabytes. 





Bill Bennett www.billbennett.co.nz @billbennettnz


597 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 132


  Reply # 1100775 2-Aug-2014 18:25
Send private message

sbiddle:
charsleysa:
sbiddle:
charsleysa:
While I don't agree that we should be trying to push out 1Gbps to everyone and that CIR doesn't matter, I do agree that the government should have gone with a better technology for fibre by utilizing 10G-EPON from the get go.


So you'd be happy that UFB would still be stuck in the design phase (rather than having been deployed for 3 years) and that both deployment and end user costs would be significantly higher?




Why would it still be stuck in the design phase? EPON has a simpler design with compatibility using existing Ethernet gear.


Because 10G EPON hasn't yet his mass market. It's no good using a technology that is realistically a year or two away from being deployed on any large scale. That's 4-5 years after UFB started being deployed.

10G EPON network architecture would also require significantly more ducting and fibre to be laid, not to mention a significant increase of cost of the equipment over regular GPON which has a very straight forward upgrade path to 10GPON when the need arises.



Those are good points, but what if UFB had started with 1G EPON with the ducting and fibre laid so it could be easily migrated to 10G EPON?
Wouldn't EPON have been the better solution due to its use of Ethernet and it's compatibility with Ethernet gear?




Regards
Stefan Andres Charsley

6343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1102

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1100776 2-Aug-2014 18:26
Send private message

billbennett: Isn't the real issue here the data cap on a 1Gbps plan?

There's no point offering users a 20GB plan at that speed, but the risk of offering unlimited data at 1Gbps is huge. Sure there are terms and conditions, but ISPs would need to cover themselves against someone leaving the tap on at full bore for 31 days and downloading the theoretical maximum of 2.62974e6 (seconds in a month) x 1Gb - I think that would run to Exabytes. 

It's 334.8 TB in 31 days at the full 1 Gb/s. Very few people would have the storage capacity to download that much in a month (and the likes of video streaming would still max out at about 10 Mb/s so that wouldn't chew through any more data that it does now).

charsleysa: Wouldn't EPON have been the better solution due to its use of Ethernet and it's compatibility with Ethernet gear?

It may be better for technical reasons, but it's worse when you consider cost.

674 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 79


  Reply # 1100778 2-Aug-2014 18:28
Send private message

sbiddle: 
The US has already gone this long before us. Google Fiber 1Gbps is standard 2.4Ghz GPON with 32 way splitters.
 


I think you mean 2.4Gb/s GPON, not 2.4Ghz wink




Morgan French-Stagg

 

morgan.french.net.nz

 

 


597 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 132


  Reply # 1100796 2-Aug-2014 18:58
Send private message

Behodar:
billbennett: Isn't the real issue here the data cap on a 1Gbps plan?

There's no point offering users a 20GB plan at that speed, but the risk of offering unlimited data at 1Gbps is huge. Sure there are terms and conditions, but ISPs would need to cover themselves against someone leaving the tap on at full bore for 31 days and downloading the theoretical maximum of 2.62974e6 (seconds in a month) x 1Gb - I think that would run to Exabytes. 

It's 334.8 TB in 31 days at the full 1 Gb/s. Very few people would have the storage capacity to download that much in a month (and the likes of video streaming would still max out at about 10 Mb/s so that wouldn't chew through any more data that it does now).

charsleysa: Wouldn't EPON have been the better solution due to its use of Ethernet and it's compatibility with Ethernet gear?

It may be better for technical reasons, but it's worse when you consider cost.


Is the cost higher? I thought it was lower since Ethernet gear is a fraction of the cost of ATM gear.

Here's on of the sources I used to educate myself on some of the differences
http://okiafcea.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/eponvsgpon.pdf




Regards
Stefan Andres Charsley

27270 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6699

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1100835 2-Aug-2014 19:45
2 people support this post
Send private message

naggyman:
sbiddle: 
The US has already gone this long before us. Google Fiber 1Gbps is standard 2.4Ghz GPON with 32 way splitters.
 


I think you mean 2.4Gb/s GPON, not 2.4Ghz wink


Haven't you heard of wireless GPON? smile

6343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1102

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1100836 2-Aug-2014 19:47
One person supports this post
Send private message

sbiddle: Haven't you heard of wireless GPON? smile

I hear that it gets congested in the city with too many people using it at once laughing

674 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 79


  Reply # 1100837 2-Aug-2014 19:49
Send private message

Behodar:
sbiddle: Haven't you heard of wireless GPON? smile

I hear that it gets congested in the city with too many people using it at once laughing


Also; Microwave Ovens, Baby Monitors and cordless phones can cause some GPON interference ;)




Morgan French-Stagg

 

morgan.french.net.nz

 

 


6343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1102

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1100839 2-Aug-2014 19:52
Send private message

charsleysa: Is the cost higher? I thought it was lower since Ethernet gear is a fraction of the cost of ATM gear.

Here's on of the sources I used to educate myself on some of the differences
http://okiafcea.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/eponvsgpon.pdf

I was under the impression that it requires significantly more fibre. The equipment may be cheaper but you need more of it (I'm sure that somebody will correct me if I'm wrong). I also believe that Chorus already has ATM infrastructure.

597 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 132


  Reply # 1100841 2-Aug-2014 20:04
Send private message

Behodar:
charsleysa: Is the cost higher? I thought it was lower since Ethernet gear is a fraction of the cost of ATM gear.

Here's on of the sources I used to educate myself on some of the differences
http://okiafcea.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/eponvsgpon.pdf

I was under the impression that it requires significantly more fibre. The equipment may be cheaper but you need more of it (I'm sure that somebody will correct me if I'm wrong). I also believe that Chorus already has ATM infrastructure.


I thought the GPON vs EPON network designs were physically similar and only differed in protocol, end point gear and switching / routing equipment.

Also chorus may already have ATM equipment but this is an entire new network with more LFCs than just chorus so we can't just say that a particular technology should be used because the monopoly already has that gear since it benefits the monopoly and that would be against the point of awarding other LFCs UFB contracts.




Regards
Stefan Andres Charsley

6343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1102

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1100852 2-Aug-2014 20:29
Send private message

charsleysa: Also chorus may already have ATM equipment but this is an entire new network with more LFCs than just chorus so we can't just say that a particular technology should be used because the monopoly already has that gear since it benefits the monopoly and that would be against the point of awarding other LFCs UFB contracts.

I actually forgot about the other companies; I had no intention of my comment "benefiting the monopoly".

27270 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6699

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1100954 3-Aug-2014 09:15
One person supports this post
Send private message

The UFB GPON deployments in NZ are all Ethernet based, not ATM.

ATM is only used by Chorus for legacy DSLAMs and BUBA connection, their core network and ISAMs are all Ethernet.






2478 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 888

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1100968 3-Aug-2014 09:40
One person supports this post
Send private message

sbiddle: The UFB GPON deployments in NZ are all Ethernet based, not ATM.

ATM is only used by Chorus for legacy DSLAMs and BUBA connection, their core network and ISAMs are all Ethernet.


Plus there is zero connectivity from the legacy copper network isams to the new UFB isams with GPON OLT ports.


AAnyone saying Chorus are building a substandard network has no idea what they are building.





1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.


Geekzone Live »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.