Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
I hope I said E7; it's what I meant to say. Yes, I wasn't going to stop at Calix; I'm just juggling budgetary type numbers at the moment; I'll have 3 or 4 quotes before I go to press. It's a 36 month project just to beginning of build, at this point, likely. Assuming I get the gig at all. The E7 is a good shelf, so that's a decent starting point. I'd also talk with Zhone, Allied Telesys, Adtran, and Cisco if for no other reason but get the best pricing you can. I'd also focus much more on your cost per port than the density since your uptake rate will be driven by economics long before port density and how much space your gear takes becomes an issue. 2) I have no idea who told you this, but this is completely and utterly incorrect in nationwide terms. If you have a specific layer 3 provder in mind that tells you they want a GPON hand off then that's fine, but ISPs in general don't know what GPON is and have no gear to terminate that kind of connection. Other people here, said it. If nothing else, it's certainly what the largest nationwide FTTH provider is provisioning, and I suspect it serves more passings than anything else; possibly than everything else. I'm not sure what you mean by this. The largest PON offering in the US is Verizon's FIOS, but AFAIK they don't interconnect with anyone at layer 2 and their layer 3 fiber connections are either Packet Over SONET, Gig E(most common), or very occasionally still ATM. I have heard of a few instances where they'd buy existing GPON networks but I've never heard of them cross connecting like this even with operators that they do significant business with in other ways. But it doesn't matter either way, except in cross-connects between my MDF and my colo cages; except for GPONs apparent compatibility with RF CATV delivery (which I gather, but have not researched) is just block-upconvert, I don't care either way; there's no difference in the plant buildout. This is not correct. DOCSIS is an MPEG stream over QAM or QPSK modulation and there is nothing about it that is compatible to any flavor of PON. In fact if you look at the various CableLabs standards you'll see DPoE ( http://www.cablelabs.com/dpoe/specifications/index.html) which lists how a DOCSIS system can inter-operate and provision an PON system. If you look at the two largest PON networks (FIOS and Uverse) you'll see the two different approaches to doing video with a PON architecture. Verizon is simply modulating a MPEG stream (this is block compatible to a cable plant, in fact its the same way that a HFC network functions) on a different color on the same fiber that they send their PON signalling. ATT takes another approach where they simply run IPTV over their PON network. I've listened to presentations from Verizon's VP of Engineering (at that time) for FIOS and he said their choice was driven by the technology available when they launched and they did modulated RF over their fiber instead of IPTV because that technology wasn't as mature when they started. Verizon's approach may be what someone was thinking of when they said that PON was compatible to cable signaling but that's not how it works. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com 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 -- Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 http://twitter.com/kscotthelms -- Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
On Sat, 2 Feb 2013, Scott Helms wrote: I'd also talk with Zhone, Allied Telesys, Adtran, and Cisco if for no other reason but get the best pricing you can. I can't believe I'm going to beat Owen to this point, but considering you a building a brand new infrastructure, I'd hope you'd support your service provider's stakeholders if they want to do IPv6. To do so securely, you'll want your neutral layer 2 infrastrcuture to at least support RA-guard and DHCPv6 shield. You might also want/need DHCPv6 PD snooping, MLD snooping. We have found VERY disappointing support for these features in this type of gear. -- Brandon Ross Yahoo AIM: BrandonNRoss +1-404-635-6667ICQ: 2269442 Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/brossSkype: brandonross
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
That's one of the reasons to look at active ethernet over gpon. There is much more of a chance to do v6 on that gear, especially cisco's Metro ethernet switches. On Feb 2, 2013 5:27 PM, Brandon Ross br...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, 2 Feb 2013, Scott Helms wrote: I'd also talk with Zhone, Allied Telesys, Adtran, and Cisco if for no other reason but get the best pricing you can. I can't believe I'm going to beat Owen to this point, but considering you a building a brand new infrastructure, I'd hope you'd support your service provider's stakeholders if they want to do IPv6. To do so securely, you'll want your neutral layer 2 infrastrcuture to at least support RA-guard and DHCPv6 shield. You might also want/need DHCPv6 PD snooping, MLD snooping. We have found VERY disappointing support for these features in this type of gear. -- Brandon Ross Yahoo AIM: BrandonNRoss +1-404-635-6667ICQ: 2269442 Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/brossSkype: brandonross
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
On Feb 2, 2013 3:33 PM, Scott Helms khe...@zcorum.com wrote: .. This is not correct. DOCSIS is an MPEG stream over QAM or QPSK modulation and there is nothing about it that is compatible to any flavor of PON. In fact if you look at the various CableLabs standards you'll see DPoE ( http://www.cablelabs.com/dpoe/specifications/index.html) which lists how a DOCSIS system can inter-operate and provision an PON system. If you look at Jay may be referring to something I alluded to earlier, what Calix refers to as RF overlay. The RF signal from the traditional cable system is converted to 1550nm and combined onto the PON before the splitter with a CWDM module. Certain model ONT's split the 1550 back off and convert back to an RF port.
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
Jason, Yeah, that's what I figured. There are lots of older PON deployments that used the modulated RF approach. On Sat, Feb 2, 2013 at 9:03 PM, Jason Baugher ja...@thebaughers.com wrote: On Feb 2, 2013 3:33 PM, Scott Helms khe...@zcorum.com wrote: .. This is not correct. DOCSIS is an MPEG stream over QAM or QPSK modulation and there is nothing about it that is compatible to any flavor of PON. In fact if you look at the various CableLabs standards you'll see DPoE ( http://www.cablelabs.com/dpoe/specifications/index.html) which lists how a DOCSIS system can inter-operate and provision an PON system. If you look at Jay may be referring to something I alluded to earlier, what Calix refers to as RF overlay. The RF signal from the traditional cable system is converted to 1550nm and combined onto the PON before the splitter with a CWDM module. Certain model ONT's split the 1550 back off and convert back to an RF port. -- Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
This has been a fascinating discussion :) While we don't quite qualify as a small city, we do have quite a dispersion of coverage across our residence halls and general campus. There is an ongoing RFP process to build out our own CATV distribution (or more generally, to avoid the resident CATV provider charge monopoly). Initial competitors included incumbent cable (largely RF coax), new providers (also RF coax), and content-only providers (either assuming we do distribution over our fiber, or add another distribution component), to IPTV solutions (using existing network). IPTV requires a very co-operative multicast distribution, which we currently do not have (not exclusive vendor gear end-to-end); it needs to be designed that way from the beginning as opposed to bolted onto the end. RF CATV (or HFC distribution) requires some unique fiber plant... notably AFC terminations as opposed to the UPCs we have for data. And you have to consider one-way content provider network, versus two-way feedback (and the associated set-top box complications we're trying to avoid). And throw in the phone for the other triple play component, and you're generally talking PoE[+]. Even in a captive audience, the possibilities are challenging :) Jeff
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
Word to dropping docsis science on NANOG. On Feb 2, 2013 3:34 PM, Scott Helms khe...@zcorum.com wrote: I hope I said E7; it's what I meant to say. Yes, I wasn't going to stop at Calix; I'm just juggling budgetary type numbers at the moment; I'll have 3 or 4 quotes before I go to press. It's a 36 month project just to beginning of build, at this point, likely. Assuming I get the gig at all. The E7 is a good shelf, so that's a decent starting point. I'd also talk with Zhone, Allied Telesys, Adtran, and Cisco if for no other reason but get the best pricing you can. I'd also focus much more on your cost per port than the density since your uptake rate will be driven by economics long before port density and how much space your gear takes becomes an issue. 2) I have no idea who told you this, but this is completely and utterly incorrect in nationwide terms. If you have a specific layer 3 provder in mind that tells you they want a GPON hand off then that's fine, but ISPs in general don't know what GPON is and have no gear to terminate that kind of connection. Other people here, said it. If nothing else, it's certainly what the largest nationwide FTTH provider is provisioning, and I suspect it serves more passings than anything else; possibly than everything else. I'm not sure what you mean by this. The largest PON offering in the US is Verizon's FIOS, but AFAIK they don't interconnect with anyone at layer 2 and their layer 3 fiber connections are either Packet Over SONET, Gig E(most common), or very occasionally still ATM. I have heard of a few instances where they'd buy existing GPON networks but I've never heard of them cross connecting like this even with operators that they do significant business with in other ways. But it doesn't matter either way, except in cross-connects between my MDF and my colo cages; except for GPONs apparent compatibility with RF CATV delivery (which I gather, but have not researched) is just block-upconvert, I don't care either way; there's no difference in the plant buildout. This is not correct. DOCSIS is an MPEG stream over QAM or QPSK modulation and there is nothing about it that is compatible to any flavor of PON. In fact if you look at the various CableLabs standards you'll see DPoE ( http://www.cablelabs.com/dpoe/specifications/index.html) which lists how a DOCSIS system can inter-operate and provision an PON system. If you look at the two largest PON networks (FIOS and Uverse) you'll see the two different approaches to doing video with a PON architecture. Verizon is simply modulating a MPEG stream (this is block compatible to a cable plant, in fact its the same way that a HFC network functions) on a different color on the same fiber that they send their PON signalling. ATT takes another approach where they simply run IPTV over their PON network. I've listened to presentations from Verizon's VP of Engineering (at that time) for FIOS and he said their choice was driven by the technology available when they launched and they did modulated RF over their fiber instead of IPTV because that technology wasn't as mature when they started. Verizon's approach may be what someone was thinking of when they said that PON was compatible to cable signaling but that's not how it works. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com 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 -- Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 http://twitter.com/kscotthelms -- Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
What does Cisco shitty metro switches have to do with anything? Haay we have the best shitty metro-e boxes around. We're awesome. On Feb 2, 2013 4:49 PM, Scott Helms khe...@zcorum.com wrote: That's one of the reasons to look at active ethernet over gpon. There is much more of a chance to do v6 on that gear, especially cisco's Metro ethernet switches. On Feb 2, 2013 5:27 PM, Brandon Ross br...@pobox.com wrote: On Sat, 2 Feb 2013, Scott Helms wrote: I'd also talk with Zhone, Allied Telesys, Adtran, and Cisco if for no other reason but get the best pricing you can. I can't believe I'm going to beat Owen to this point, but considering you a building a brand new infrastructure, I'd hope you'd support your service provider's stakeholders if they want to do IPv6. To do so securely, you'll want your neutral layer 2 infrastrcuture to at least support RA-guard and DHCPv6 shield. You might also want/need DHCPv6 PD snooping, MLD snooping. We have found VERY disappointing support for these features in this type of gear. -- Brandon Ross Yahoo AIM: BrandonNRoss +1-404-635-6667ICQ: 2269442 Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/brossSkype: brandonross
Re: Fwd: Rollup: Small City Municipal Broadband
On 13-02-02 21:29, Scott Helms wrote: Yeah, that's what I figured. There are lots of older PON deployments that used the modulated RF approach. From what I have read, Verizon's FIOS does that. RFoG cable TV for certain frequencies, normal ethernet data for other frequencies, and dedicated bandwidth for VoIP. Cable companies in Canada have begun to deploy FTTH in greenfields. And those are deployed to be compatible with their coax infrastructure. The fibre from the CMTS is simply extended to the home instead of stopping at a node on a telephone pole. The coax starts at the ONT to get to the TV sets. Not sure if they have a DOCSIS modem attached to the coax or if they get the ethernet out of ONT. However, Rogers seems to have areas being deployed differently and I *believe* it is pure ethernet. (and not even sure if GPON). Rogers also wants to go all IPTV , something unexpected from a traditional cableTV company. Something to consider about dark fibre L1 service: If city lets Service Providers perform installations (string from telephone pole to homes etc), you need to worry about damages they can cause. And in cases when customer unsubscribes from SP-1 and subscribes to SP-2 you have to make sure that SP-1 doesn't damage the termination of the fibre in the home to make installation by SP-2 harder/costlier. In an L2 service, the city is responsible for all installations and de-installs and has no incentive to damage the infrastructure to hurt a competitor. And generally, the CPE is installed by city and stays in place when end user swiches service provider.
