Mark:

That's correct, we can do the same.  You just have to worry about the
differential timing window, manufacturers call it different things.

Regards,
Chuck

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Mark - Myakka Technologies <[email protected]
> wrote:

> Chuck,
>
> We are pushing 30km with our GPON using C Lasers.  Our zhone equipment
> allows use to slide that 20km window to fix the timing issues.  That port
> is on a 20km-40km timing window instead of the standard 0km-20km.
>
>
>
> *-- Best regards, Mark                            *mailto:[email protected]
> <[email protected]>
>
>
> *Myakka Technologies, Inc. *www.MyakkaTech.com
>
>
> *Proud Sponsor of the Myakka City Relay For Life *
> http://www.RelayForLife.org/MyakkaCityFL
>
> *Please Donate at Please Donate at *http://www.myakkatech.com/RFL.html
>
>
>
>
> *------ Thursday, August 3, 2017, 11:10:02 AM, you wrote: *
>
> Last time I did some calculations, you run into timing limitations before
> you run out of light.
>
> *From:* Chuck Hogg
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 3, 2017 8:11 AM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] UBNT OLT Transition from Active Ethernet to GPON
>
> It doesn't work that way, "turn down".  There are specification limits,
> those are specified in the optics.  Maximum differential fiber distance is
> usually about 20km for the distance from your nearest to farthest client.
> There are different optic levels, B+/C+, but it really depends on your
> splits and light levels.
>
> Regards,
> Chuck
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:33 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?
>

Reply via email to