I'm still waiting for mine ordered it last week. Thinking it won't make
it here.
On 3/28/2017 5:37 PM, Gino Villarini wrote:
Yes with 1
From: Af <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf
of Jason McKemie <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:33 PM
To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
Does it come with the optics?
*//*
*/Gino Villarini/*
President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Gino Villarini <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
From: Af <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> on
behalf of PE R <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[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
