Nope...

On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it
>
> From: Af <[email protected]> on behalf of Josh Reynolds <
> [email protected]>
> Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>
> No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.
>
>
>
> *Gino Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.
>>
>> *From:* Gino Villarini
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Af <[email protected]> on behalf of PE R <
>> [email protected]>
>> Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>> Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> OLT subscriber ranges can actually range to 512 (vs 256) per OLT or
>> higher, or, mix with XGS in the same shelf.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Gino Villarini*
>> President
>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Josh Reynolds <[email protected]>
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 27, 2017 5:06 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> Put it this way, for each connection on AE you have two SFP optics and a
>> port on a switch. You also probably want to battery back that.
>>
>> For gpon you just push your 8 or 16 or 32 subs to a splitter that can fit
>> inside someone's pocket and then single strand to your OLT with your non-
>> $800 or so from what I remember Calix Pon optic :P
>>
>> Battery back the OLT, sure, but that's anywhere from 64 to 256 subs per,
>> and a lot lower battery requirements.
>>
>> I think your Calix experience has really skewed you to what's out there,
>> to be fair.
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2017 4:58 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Yes and no.  Pretty much the same amount of fiber depending on where you
>> locate the splitters or switches.
>>
>> On AE you battery back the switch.
>> On GPON you battery back the OLT/OIM.
>>
>> At the remote cabinet, you either have a cheap switch and SFPs.
>> -or-
>> You have an expensive OLT/OIM and splitter.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Josh Reynolds
>> *Sent:* Monday, March 27, 2017 3:53 PM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> AE requires a lot more electronics and optics. And fiber. And battery
>> backup. Etc.
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2017 4:33 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Years ago, there was a break even point on active vs PON.  If you had 16
>> or more in an area that could take a PON it was worth doing the PON.
>> But that was comparing Calix AE vs Calix PON.  If you do AE like Sterling
>> I don't think PON is ever cost effective compared to Calix PON.
>>
>> With PON you still have to have a drop to each home.  The cost of  the
>> cable is in the placement, not in the cable itself.
>> So the question is, where do you place the splitter vs where do you place
>> the switch and SFPs.  Personally, I would do it Sterling style on new
>> greenfield.  The ONLY reason I do it with the expensive PON is we are a
>> regulated common carrier with provider of last resort obligations.  I have
>> to give POTS that is battery backed up, legally required to do this.
>>
>> Cannot risk a 911 call not going through due to a power outage etc.
>> Cannot trust the customer to not unplug a UPS.
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Moffett
>> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 3:11 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> Yeah, so PON vs AE was actually the next research project for me to
>> tackle.
>>
>> It seems like there ought to be savings with PON because of lower fiber
>> count.....lower fiber count ought to lead to smaller/cheaper enclosures.
>> Less junk at the head end too.  I haven't gotten that far yet, but I
>> was thinking I might "scrimp" with PON.  You're saying maybe not?
>>
>>
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>> From: "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: 3/27/2017 4:54:08 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> I would be worried that it will go the way of some of  their other ideas.
>> Cheap... you get what you pay for.
>>
>> FTTH, I would rather pay more and know it will be solid and be around in
>> the years to come.
>> Not an area where you want to scrimp.  If you want to scrimp go active
>> ethernet.
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Adam Moffett
>> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 12:56 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> Well....I have to build with what's available today.  If I delay to wait
>> for the next hot product, I'll always be waiting.
>>
>> Besides, I honestly don't know what Ubiquiti brings to the table that
>> other vendors don't.  I suppose it will be cost competitive, but that's
>> less important to me than having it just work.
>>
>> -Adam
>>
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>> From: "Jon Langeler" <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: 3/27/2017 2:52:03 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> With ubiquiti shipping real soon, you might want to wait
>>
>> Jon Langeler
>> Michwave Technologies, Inc.
>>
>>
>> On Mar 27, 2017, at 2:47 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I asked the Alphion sales rep about this.  He says the optics are coded,
>> yes.  As far as mixing ONT from one vendor with an OLT from another he said
>> in essence GPON is a standard, but it isn't usually tested across vendors
>> so whether it works fine, works with bugs, or doesn't work at all is going
>> to be a matter of chance.
>>
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>> From: [email protected]
>> To: [email protected]
>> Sent: 3/23/2017 2:54:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> No, generally speaking there is no crossvendor compatibility with GPON.
>>
>> Jared
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Reply via email to