On 2016-07-01 20:08 David Boxall wrote: >> Its about costs, if houses are too far apart, there will be too much loss on >> the fibre to be splitting to every house to meet the current contention >> ratios, this would mean that extra fibre will have to be used to service >> these types of customers. ... Wireless is not a bad solution, it is fixed, >> with antennas(so different to mobile) and can service areas where population >> is more sprawled than in town centres. Fibre has a 50% loss on every >> split(its a shared fibre to around 22 homes) so it becomes less viable and >> cost effective the further residences get apart.
It sounds very confused, as though the writer imagines a single distribution fibre is split evenly every time it comes to a house, so the signal after 'n' houses is then (2^-n). But even then, optical transmission is very efficient and transmission loss has nothing to do with the splitter. Not that I'm any expert on this stuff... David L. _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
