Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Trey Scarborough 
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 > on behalf
of Jason McKemie >
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com " >
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:33 PM
To: "af@afmug.com " >
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 > wrote:



From: Af > on
behalf of PE R >
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com " >
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "af@afmug.com " >
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 >
*To:* af@afmug.com 
*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"  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:* af@afmug.com
*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"  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: af@afmug.com
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" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 3/27/2017 4:54:08 PM

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread PE R 
From: "ch...@wbmfg.com" 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 3:18 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings
If you're referring to the OLT that I am citing?  Yes.
  From: "ch...@wbmfg.com" 
 To: af@afmug.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 3:18 PM
 Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
   
Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings. From: Gino Villarini 
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PMTo: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the 
unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON   From: Af  on 
behalf of PE R 
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
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 
To: af@afmug.com 
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"  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: af@afmug.com  
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"  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: af@afmug.com
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" 
To: af@afmug.com
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: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON

WellI 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" 
To: af@afmug.com
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

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread PE R 
G.8032...

  From: Josh Reynolds 
 To: af@afmug.com 
 Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 6:40 PM
 Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
   
Again: NO
On Mar 28, 2017 6:26 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

No?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Ethernet_Ring_Protection_ Switching
From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds 

Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 6:51 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

Nope...

|  Gino Villarini |
| President |
| Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 |

On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it
From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds 

Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.

|  Gino Villarini |
| President |
| Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 |

On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM,  wrote:

Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings. From: Gino Villarini 
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PMTo: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the 
unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON   From: Af  on 
behalf of PE R 
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
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 
To: af@afmug.com 
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"  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 PMTo: af@afmug.com 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" 
 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: af@afmug.com
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" 
To: af@afmug.com
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

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Jon Langeler 
But for the price among other nice things, who cares. Throw two uplinks to it 
and do the fancy stuff on a core switch/router if desired. 

Jon Langeler
Michwave Technologies, Inc.


> On Mar 28, 2017, at 7:46 PM, Josh Reynolds  wrote:
> 
> For clarification:
> 
> Currently no: ERP, ERPS, Trill, SPB, FabricPath, ITU G8032, ITU G8032v2, 
> MC-LAG, etc
> 
> I probably missed some Netgear variant or someshit...
> 
> On Mar 28, 2017 6:40 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:
> Again: NO
> 
> On Mar 28, 2017 6:26 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:
>> No?
>> 
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_Ring_Protection_Switching
>> 
>> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds 
>> 
>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 6:51 PM
>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>> 
>> Nope...
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> Gino Villarini
>> 
>> President
>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:
>>> Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it
>>> 
>>> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds 
>>> 
>>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>>> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
>>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>> 
>>> No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Gino Villarini
>>> 
>>> President
>>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>>> 
>>> 
 On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM,  wrote:
 Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.
  
 From: Gino Villarini
 Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
 To: af@afmug.com
 Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
  
  
  
 From: Af  on behalf of PE R 
 Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
 Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
 To: "af@afmug.com" 
 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 
 To: af@afmug.com 
 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"  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: af@afmug.com
 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"  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.

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Josh Reynolds 
Oh, I'm thinking of EAPS, which is the Extreme Networks variant that was
out pretty early on. (Another Ring Protection SONET-like protocol)

On Mar 28, 2017 6:54 PM, "Chuck McCown"  wrote:

I think you are answering No to the wrong question.

*From:* Josh Reynolds
*Sent:* Tuesday, March 28, 2017 5:46 PM
*To:* af@afmug.com
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

For clarification:

Currently no: ERP, ERPS, Trill, SPB, FabricPath, ITU G8032, ITU G8032v2,
MC-LAG, etc

I probably missed some Netgear variant or someshit...

On Mar 28, 2017 6:40 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:

Again: NO

On Mar 28, 2017 6:26 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

> No?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_Ring_Protection_Switching
>
> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds <
> j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 6:51 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>
> Nope...
>
>
>
> *Gino Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:
>
>> Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it
>>
>> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds <
>> j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>
>> No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Gino Villarini*
>> President
>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>>
>> On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM,  wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.
>>>
>>> *From:* Gino Villarini
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Af  on behalf of PE R <
>>> hillrunner...@yahoo.com>
>>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>>> Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
>>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>>> 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 
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *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"  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:* af@afmug.com
>>> *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"  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

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Chuck McCown 
I think you are answering No to the wrong question.  

From: Josh Reynolds 
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 5:46 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

For clarification: 

Currently no: ERP, ERPS, Trill, SPB, FabricPath, ITU G8032, ITU G8032v2, 
MC-LAG, etc

I probably missed some Netgear variant or someshit...

On Mar 28, 2017 6:40 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:

  Again: NO

  On Mar 28, 2017 6:26 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

No?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_Ring_Protection_Switching

From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds 

Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 6:51 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON


Nope...




  Gino Villarini
 
  President 
  Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 




On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

  Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it

  From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds 

  Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
  Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
  To: "af@afmug.com" 
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON


  No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.




Gino Villarini
   
President 
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968 




  On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM,  wrote:

Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.

From: Gino Villarini 
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON



From: Af  on behalf of PE R 

Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
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 
To: af@afmug.com 
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"  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: af@afmug.com 
  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"  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

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Josh Reynolds 
For clarification:

Currently no: ERP, ERPS, Trill, SPB, FabricPath, ITU G8032, ITU G8032v2,
MC-LAG, etc

I probably missed some Netgear variant or someshit...

On Mar 28, 2017 6:40 PM, "Josh Reynolds"  wrote:

Again: NO

On Mar 28, 2017 6:26 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

> No?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_Ring_Protection_Switching
>
> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds <
> j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 6:51 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>
> Nope...
>
>
>
> *Gino Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:
>
>> Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it
>>
>> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds <
>> j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>
>> No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Gino Villarini*
>> President
>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>>
>> On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM,  wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.
>>>
>>> *From:* Gino Villarini
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Af  on behalf of PE R <
>>> hillrunner...@yahoo.com>
>>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>>> Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
>>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>>> 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 
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *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"  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:* af@afmug.com
>>> *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"  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: af@afmug.com
>>> 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

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Josh Reynolds 
Again: NO

On Mar 28, 2017 6:26 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

> No?
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_Ring_Protection_Switching
>
> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds <
> j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 6:51 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>
> Nope...
>
>
>
> *Gino Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:
>
>> Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it
>>
>> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds <
>> j...@kyneticwifi.com>
>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>
>> No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Gino Villarini*
>> President
>> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>>
>> On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM,  wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.
>>>
>>> *From:* Gino Villarini
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Af  on behalf of PE R <
>>> hillrunner...@yahoo.com>
>>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>>> Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
>>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>>> 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 
>>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>>> *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"  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:* af@afmug.com
>>> *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"  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: af@afmug.com
>>> 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" 
>>> To: af@afmug.com
>>>

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Gino Villarini 
No?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_Ring_Protection_Switching

From: Af > on behalf of Josh 
Reynolds >
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 6:51 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" >
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

Nope...




Gino Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini" 
> wrote:
Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it

From: Af > on behalf of Josh 
Reynolds >
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" >
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.




Gino Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM, > wrote:
Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.

From: Gino Villarini
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON



From: Af  on behalf of PE R 
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
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

[X]


From: Josh Reynolds 
To: af@afmug.com
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"  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: af@afmug.com
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"  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: af@afmug.com
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" 
To: af@afmug.com
Sent: 3/27/2017 4:54:08 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON

I would be worried that it

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Josh Reynolds 
Nope...

On Mar 28, 2017 5:38 PM, "Gino Villarini"  wrote:

> Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it
>
> From: Af  on behalf of Josh Reynolds <
> j...@kyneticwifi.com>
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>
> No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.
>
>
>
> *Gino Villarini*
> President
> Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968
>
> On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM,  wrote:
>
>> Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.
>>
>> *From:* Gino Villarini
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Af  on behalf of PE R <
>> hillrunner...@yahoo.com>
>> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
>> To: "af@afmug.com" 
>> 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 
>> *To:* af@afmug.com
>> *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"  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:* af@afmug.com
>> *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"  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: af@afmug.com
>> 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" 
>> To: af@afmug.com
>> 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: af@afmug.com
>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>>
>> WellI have to build with what's available today.  If I delay to wait
>> for the next hot product, I'll always be waiting.
>>

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Gino Villarini 
Huh ist it G8032? Even Planet Sw have it

From: Af > on behalf of Josh 
Reynolds >
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:35 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" >
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.




Gino Villarini


President
Metro Office Park #18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, Puerto Rico 00968

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM, > wrote:
Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.

From: Gino Villarini
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON



From: Af  on behalf of PE R 
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
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

[cid:AF622BC68687483AA2227593755BF7F7@MTC.local]


From: Josh Reynolds 
To: af@afmug.com
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"  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: af@afmug.com
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"  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: af@afmug.com
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" 
To: af@afmug.com
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: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON

WellI 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

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Gino Villarini 
Yes with 1

From: Af > on behalf of Jason 
McKemie 
>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>
Date: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 at 4:33 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" >
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

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Gino Villarini 
> wrote:


From: Af > on behalf of PE R 
>
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
>
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" >
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

[cid:aeronet-logo_310cfc3e-6691-4f69-bd49-b37b834b9238.png]


From: Josh Reynolds >
To: af@afmug.com
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"  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: af@afmug.com
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"  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: af@afmug.com
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" 
To: af@afmug.com
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: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON

WellI 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

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Josh Reynolds 
No Erps, that's a Extreme Networks standard anyway.

On Mar 28, 2017 3:18 PM,  wrote:

> Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.
>
> *From:* Gino Villarini
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON
>
>
>
> From: Af  on behalf of PE R  >
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> 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 
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *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"  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:* af@afmug.com
> *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"  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: af@afmug.com
> 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" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> 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: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>
> WellI 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" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> 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  wrote:
>
> I asked the Alphion sales rep about this.  He says the

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread Jason McKemie 
Does it come with the optics?

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Gino Villarini  wrote:

>
>
> From: Af  on behalf of PE R  >
> Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
> Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
> To: "af@afmug.com" 
> 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 
> *To:* af@afmug.com
> *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"  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:* af@afmug.com
> *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"  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: af@afmug.com
> 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" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> 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: af@afmug.com
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON
>
> WellI 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" 
> To: af@afmug.com
> 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  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,

Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON

2017-03-28 Thread chuck 
Interesting in knowing if the uplink will do erps rings.

From: Gino Villarini 
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 2:16 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] the unicorn is here! was: Small Scale PON



From: Af  on behalf of PE R 
Reply-To: "af@afmug.com" 
Date: Monday, March 27, 2017 at 7:52 PM
To: "af@afmug.com" 
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 
To: af@afmug.com 
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"  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: af@afmug.com 
  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"  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: af@afmug.com
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" 
To: af@afmug.com
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: af@afmug.com
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Small Scale PON

  WellI 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" 
  To: af@afmug.com
  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  wrote:

  I asked the Alphion sales rep about this.  He says