I've always looked at it that way. It's also like taking the entire spectrum and containing it in strands of glass.
On Aug 3, 2017 8:40 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > It is technically RF from a physics point of view. You can swamp out any > receiver with too much signal and it will lose its ability to properly > demodulate. All optical receivers have a range of powers where they will > work. Too much or too little and you have problems. Exactly like RF. > > *From:* Josh Reynolds > *Sent:* Thursday, August 3, 2017 7:36 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] UBNT OLT Transition from Active Ethernet to GPON > > We had to pad much of our gear in the Datacenter as well as the NOC in the > office on short single mode runs, including our Juniper MX960s. > > On Aug 3, 2017 8:33 AM, "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Don't forget that Sterling is doing ethernet, not PON. I've plugged in a >> pair of 40km ethernet SM SFP's at 3' away and they work fine because >> they'll turn down the tx power. >> >> With PON there's a single Tx source for the entire network, it can't turn >> down because you may have subs at 1km and other subs at 20km. >> >> >> ------ Original Message ------ >> From: "Josh Reynolds" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: 8/2/2017 1:29:28 PM >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] UBNT OLT Transition from Active Ethernet to GPON >> >> >> To clarify, there is no real intelligent attenuation on any optical >> product I have ever seen. Some can do a 2-3db depending on the product, but >> it's never really a truly intelligent system with bidirectional >> communication between the optics to negotiate power levels. >> >> I may be wrong but this is just my experience. >> >> On Aug 2, 2017 12:26 PM, "Josh Reynolds" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> How could they? TX and RX are different optic sources. You might have a >>> TX power level much higher on one end than the other due to manufacturing >>> differences or different equipment. >>> >>> On Aug 2, 2017 12:10 PM, "Sterling Jacobson" <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hmmm, that's not good if it can't auto-attenuate down. >>>> >>>> Sounds like they need to fix that. >>>> >>>> Most of my SMF lasers and links are short and 'hot', but doesn't seem >>>> to bother anything I'm currently using. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brett A Mansfield >>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 10:16 AM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] UBNT OLT Transition from Active Ethernet to GPON >>>> >>>> I need to print a retraction here. I have been talking to Martin at >>>> UBNT and he shows me the error of my ways. I do not have a 50% failure >>>> rate. In fact, it's a 0% failure rate. My signal was just too hot. I'm new >>>> to the SM Fiber game, so I'm learning as I go. I didn't realize the signal >>>> could be too hot at only -3 dB. All of my multi mode Fiber sits at -2 dB >>>> and works really well. >>>> >>>> You learn something new every day. >>>> >>>> Thank you, >>>> Brett A Mansfield >>>> >>>> > On Jul 31, 2017, at 2:46 PM, Brett A Mansfield < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > I have heard a lot of complaints from DirectCom customers about their >>>> Fiber never being close to what they pay for, but that may be more related >>>> to the way it's throttled then the GPON. >>>> > >>>> > I've been playing with several of these ONT/OLT over the past week. I >>>> really like them. Though I have a 50% failure rate on the nanoG's. The >>>> fiber port breaks very easily. >>>> > >>>> > Thank you, >>>> > Brett A Mansfield >>>> > >>>> >> On Jul 31, 2017, at 2:31 PM, <[email protected]> <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> We have good luck with 32 customers per 2.4 Gbps down on GPON. >>>> Lotsa overhead. No problems, not even close, so far. And we are selling >>>> more Gig circuits than ever before. >>>> >> >>>> >> -----Original Message----- From: Sterling Jacobson >>>> >> Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 2:19 PM >>>> >> To: '[email protected]' >>>> >> Subject: [AFMUG] UBNT OLT Transition from Active Ethernet to GPON >>>> >> >>>> >> Anyone tried their PON OLT CPE and OLT 8 port (128 clients per port) >>>> 1U unit? >>>> >> >>>> >> I see pricing around $70 retail for OLT, but haven't seen pricing >>>> yet for the OLT 1U unit. >>>> >> >>>> >> Also, I'm active fiber right now, so I have full 1 to 1 panels in >>>> the rack already. >>>> >> >>>> >> If I wanted to 'migrate' to OLT from active I would need some sort >>>> of transition panel/setup right? >>>> >> >>>> >> Right now my density is 48 ports per 1U 1 to 1 single family home >>>> connections. >>>> >> >>>> >> The UBNT Fiber OLT has 8 ports handling up to 128 clients each, with >>>> 20Gbps uplink capability (not quite sure on those split details yet). >>>> >> >>>> >> I currently only take a max of 576 per cabinet on active, so I could >>>> easily use just one of these UBNT fiber OLT units. >>>> >> If I don't care about the share ratio I guess, I would just get >>>> another 576 panel count that spliced 72 count to each port and I'm done. >>>> >> >>>> >> I'm unclear what that panel/splice would look like though since I've >>>> never actually done GPON. >>>> >> >>>> >> And I would probably want to not load up that many per port, and >>>> instead maybe get four of the UBNT Fiber OLT units. >>>> >> That would take up 4U of rack space, the fanout would probably still >>>> take up 4U of rack space, for a total of 8 U. >>>> >> And I would have instead an 18 customer to 1 port on the GPON >>>> instead of 72 which I like better for future use. >>>> >> >>>> >> Do these UFiber OLT 1U rackmount units share just 1Gbps per each of >>>> the 8 ports? That would only be 8Gbps needed total. >>>> >> So I assume the GPON spec they are using can transmit more than that >>>> per each of the 8 GPON ports, right? >>>> >>>
