----- Original Message ----- > From: "Leo Bicknell" <[email protected]>
> In a message written on Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 07:11:56PM -0800, Owen > DeLong wrote: > > I believe they should be allowed to optionally provide L2 enabled > > services of various > > forms. > > Could you expand on why you think this is necessary? I know you've > given this some thought, and I'd like to understand. I'll give you my answer, which may not be the same as Owen's. > The way I see it, for $100 in equipment (2x$50 optics) anyone can > light 1Gbps over the fiber. The only way the muni has significantly > cheaper port costs than a provider with a switch and a port per > customer is to do something like GPON which allows one port to > service a number of customers, but obviously imposes a huge set of > limitions (bandwiths, protocols you can run over it, etc). You're assuming there, I think, that residential customers will have mini-GBIC ports on their routers, which has not been my experience. :-) Understand that I'm not concerned with minimizing the build cost to the muni; I'm interested in *maximizing the utility of the build*, both to the end-user customers, *and* to local businesses who might/will serve them. If all that potential small ISP has to bring me is a 10GE, *backhauled over one of my own pairs from whatever space they rent*, and *I'm* responsible for all the muxing, the part of the Public Good which tries to bring businesses to the city is well served by that. > I also think the "ONT" adds unnecesary cost. They are used today > primarily for a handoff test point, and to protect shared networks > (like GPON) from a bad actor. With a dedicated fiber pair per > customer I think they are unnecessary. I can see a future where > the home gateway at the local big box has an SFP port (or even fixed > 1000baseLX optics) and plugs directly into the fiber pair. This depends on exactly how the ONT is built, and I am not as familiar with the field as I will be by the time I have to care. But the ability to deliver multiple VLANs over a single pair, and possibly terminate all 3 pairs in one ONT (or in several, for redundancy), and the handoff is Ethernet -- and possibly DOCSIS3.0 RF, depending on what the boxes already come with (I'm not interested in custom hardware at my scale) -- is quite fetching to me for all those reasons. > No ONT cost, no ONT limitations, no need to power it (UPS battery > replacement, etc). It's a value subtract, not a value add. Based also on the point Owen makes about reducing truck rolls by having netadmin controlled hardware at the customer end, I'm not at all sure I agree; I think it depends a lot on what you're trading it off *against*. I am, I admit, not all that fond of distributed power, but you make the trades you must. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink [email protected] Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
