On 15/Feb/19 15:06, Colton Conor wrote:
> Well the CES is EOLed.
Like I said, been a while. But with a quick scan over the years, nothing
is blowing my skirt up.
> ACX5048 can be had for around $10k, so not cheap for residential
> customers but fine for upstream aggregation.
You need to
On 15/Feb/19 15:06, Colton Conor wrote:
> Well the CES is EOLed.
Like I said, been a while. But with a quick scan over the years, nothing
is blowing my skirt up.
>
> ACX5048 can be had for around $10k, so not cheap for residential
> customers but fine for upstream aggregation.
You need
Well the CES is EOLed.
ACX5048 can be had for around $10k, so not cheap for residential customers
but fine for upstream aggregation.
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 2:00 AM Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 14/Feb/19 23:25, Brandon Martin wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > The CES is...wonky. My Foundry/Brocade/Extreme
Not all gen of CER takes full routes.
I got a pair of 1gen here with 512k FIB.
-
Alain Hebertaheb...@pubnix.net
PubNIX Inc.
50 boul. St-Charles
P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7
Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.netFax:
On 14/Feb/19 23:25, Brandon Martin wrote:
>
>
> The CES is...wonky. My Foundry/Brocade/Extreme SEs have steered me
> away from them on more than one occasion.
>
> The CER is fine but of course more expensive. It'll take a full
> Internet table, though, which is handy.
>
> For AE resi
On 14/Feb/19 17:10, Aaron Gould wrote:
> Not sure if this is what y'all are talking about, but I use lots of Juniper
> ACX5048 (previously Cisco ME3600 or ASR9000) for mpls-capable router edging
> in native ip/ethernet from ftth gpon network into mpls l2circuits and LOTS of
> vrf vrf for
On 2/14/19 12:08 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
As a pure FTTH Active-E AN, I still think the Brocade (Extreme) CER/CES
is a good box.
The CES is...wonky. My Foundry/Brocade/Extreme SEs have steered me away
from them on more than one occasion.
The CER is fine but of course more expensive. It'll
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019, Aaron Gould wrote:
Not sure if this is what y'all are talking about, but I use lots of Juniper
ACX5048 (previously Cisco ME3600 or ASR9000) for mpls-capable router edging in
native ip/ethernet from ftth gpon network into mpls l2circuits and LOTS of
vrf vrf for public
On Wed, 13 Feb 2019, Colton Conor wrote:
Just wondering, but what IP-capable MPLS switches are people using to
deploy AE to residential internet connections? Most 48 port AE switches
from repetuable vendors are crazy expensive, and I can't see how the ROI
would ever work compared to GPON.
A much more common configuration is a combination of a low cost 48-port L2
aggregation switch, something whitebox or similar to a Taiwanese OEM/ODM
such as edgecore, with a single 10GbE uplink to a small MPLS-capable
router. One 10Gbps link can fit a great many 1GbE active-E residential
customers
Aaron,
Indeed the ACX5048 is a great box but expensive. I was talking about using
the Gig-e ports of a 48 port switch to face subscribers, and asking what
low cost IP-Capable MPLS capable 48 port switch fits that role. Basically
an access switch for AE.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 9:10 AM Aaron
Not sure if this is what y'all are talking about, but I use lots of Juniper
ACX5048 (previously Cisco ME3600 or ASR9000) for mpls-capable router edging in
native ip/ethernet from ftth gpon network into mpls l2circuits and LOTS of
vrf vrf for public ip, vrf for cgnat for private ip, vrf for
On 14/Feb/19 04:41, Colton Conor wrote:
> Just wondering, but what IP-capable MPLS switches are people using to
> deploy AE to residential internet connections? Most 48 port AE
> switches from repetuable vendors are crazy expensive, and I can't see
> how the ROI would ever work compared to
Just wondering, but what IP-capable MPLS switches are people using to
deploy AE to residential internet connections? Most 48 port AE switches
from repetuable vendors are crazy expensive, and I can't see how the ROI
would ever work compared to GPON.
On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 4:25 PM Mark Tinka
For my fellow americans, LLUB stands for Local Loop UnBundling. What we
might call a Unbundled Network Element.
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 5:49 AM Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> >> In any case, we are now building out our own fiber to cover the gaps
> >>
I find the input to this discussion from non-US operators very useful.
Thank you. One flaw of America is our parochialism and isolation means we
don't learn from experiences elsewhere. We are so used to leading the world
in technology that we have very little exposure to advances outside of the
On 11/Feb/19 16:21, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> Speaking of an Asia-Pac example, Thailand, the government owned telco.
>
>
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, Mark Tinka wrote:
We have the same problem here in Africa too (and I saw it in Asia-Pac
while I was there as well)... non-telco-centric companies that deployed
Speaking of an Asia-Pac example, Thailand, the government owned telco.
On 11/Feb/19 15:55, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
>
> If they had just stayed at the L1 level and provided dark fiber for
> the amount of money mentioned before (for instance 10-15 EUR a month)
> then a lot of the problems wouldn't be there. They could have used the
> same organisation as
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, Mark Tinka wrote:
someone else" they will say "huh? what do you mean". There is an
unfortunate common conflation between the fiber optic cable and the
services offered on it.
I get what you're saying, but sadly, someone has to take the risk to
build out a network. Unless
On 11/Feb/19 12:49, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> In Sweden it's very common that people who live in detached house
> areas have to pay 1500-3000EUR to get attached to the fiber network as
> it's being built out. There are even bank loans you can get to pay for
> this, and pay it off over
On Mon, 11 Feb 2019, Mark Tinka wrote:
In any case, we are now building out our own fiber to cover the gaps
left by TDC. Here the end user has to pay DKK 12,000 (USD 1,824 / EUR
1,608) one time fee and with that he gets everything including 5 years
of free internet. This works out at DKK 200 /
On 11/Feb/19 11:31, Thomas Bellman wrote:
> I assume this is targeted towards single-family detached houses, where
> the family owns the house themselves. Then they likely will view that
> as an investment in the house. If you want to sell your house a couple
> of years later, and it doesn't
On 2019-02-11 04:57 CET, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On 10/Feb/19 17:46, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
[...]
>> In any case, we are now building out our own fiber to cover the gaps
>> left by TDC. Here the end user has to pay DKK 12,000 (USD 1,824 / EUR
>> 1,608) one time fee and with that he gets everything
On 10/Feb/19 17:46, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
>
> As you get access to the fiber itself, nobody will care what speeds or
> even what technology you use on that fiber.
This has always been the end-goal:
* How many IPTV channels do I get; not how much bandwidth do they require?
* How many
On 10/Feb/19 16:30, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> I also have available 250/50 via DOCSIS for approx the same EUR35.
>
> Basically access technology (AE/GPON/DOCSIS) doesn't matter a huge
> part, it's all about market and competition.
In essence, agreed.
For the most part, my 100Mbps does
Hello
There are of course regions where monopoly has created even higher
prices. But it should be fair to compare the Skåne region of Sweden
directly with the greater Copenhagen area of Denmark, as those are
separated by just a bridge.
In Denmark the government choose to regulate access to
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019, Mark Tinka wrote:
Fair point, my mate is on a Stokab-driven network, but EUR35 for 250Mbps
is nothing to laugh at. I'm paying double that for 100Mbps in
Johannesburg, on GPON.
I also have available 250/50 via DOCSIS for approx the same EUR35.
Basically access technology
On 10/Feb/19 15:27, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> The general going rate for a 250/100 in Sweden is around 35EUR for the
> kind of service where you can then choose any ISP. Typically the
> first-mile provider takes the bulk of this money.
>
> In the cases where the proprty is on STOKAB
On Sun Feb 10, 2019 at 06:41:29PM +1300, Tony Wicks wrote:
> in New Zealand the access layer (GPON plus local transport)
> is largely regulated. Then Retail service providers buy the
> access component wholesale and add layer3, national backhaul
> etc. Retail for unlimited 1G/500M internet is
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019, Tony Wicks wrote:
Certainly the devil is in the details, in New Zealand the access layer
(GPON plus local transport) is largely regulated. Then Retail service
providers buy the access component wholesale and add layer3, national
backhaul etc. Retail for unlimited 1G/500M
On 10/Feb/19 07:20, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> The FTTH rollout in Sweden has resulted in monopoly and the prices are
> high.
The prices are high?
I'd like to hear more on your thoughts about this.
Mark.
February 2019 6:21 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Last Mile Design
The FTTH rollout in Sweden has resulted in monopoly and the prices are high.
Anything will work if you do not need to compete and you are getting financed
by someone with money to spend.
On 2019-02-09 18:59 CET, Mikael
The FTTH rollout in Sweden has resulted in monopoly and the prices are
high. Anything will work if you do not need to compete and you are getting
financed by someone with money to spend.
lør. 9. feb. 2019 22.05 skrev Thomas Bellman :
> On 2019-02-09 18:59 CET, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
> > For
On 2/9/19 1:20 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Though... getting power to
the switches might be an issue, less so if you're deploying on power poles.
Just because you're on the power poles doesn't mean you can easily get
permission or space to mount powered equipment on them let alone power
at
In New Zealand we have a mostly (any town of about 20k population or more)
nationwide FTTH rollout underway (government/private partnership) that is
mostly based on GPON. Both Point to Point and Dark Fibre are available as well.
The service is layer 2 QinQ delivered to the retail service
On 9/Feb/19 21:12, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
>
> If you're marketing to business customers, or home office
> professionals, of families with multiple users that consume upstream
> bandwidth, AE gives you a lot of room for upside growth (assuming you
> provision the right kinds of fiber).
On 9/Feb/19 19:59, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
>
> For anyone saying it's "impossible" to do AE they're welcome here to
> the nordic region and especially Sweden where PON is basically unheard
> of. We have millions of AE connected households. I live in one of them.
Love what Stokab
On 9/Feb/19 18:07, Brandon Martin wrote:
>
>
> Bingo. You're fine as long as your access L3 gear speaks MPLS. That
> does somewhat bump you out of the realm of "cheap L3 switch", but
> there are still options.
IP-capable switches that have little to no MPLS support would certainly
be
On 2/9/19 4:04 PM, Thomas Bellman wrote:
On 2019-02-09 18:59 CET, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
For anyone saying it's "impossible" to do AE they're welcome here to
the nordic region and especially Sweden where PON is basically unheard
of. We have millions of AE connected households. I live in
On 2/9/19 1:13 PM, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
GPON is 2.4 Gbps downstream and 1.2 Gbps upstream.
Okay.
I guess I've not thought about the fact that the GPON itself might be ~>
is asymmetric. From my naive point of view, I see a 1G/1G symmetric
Ethernet hand off from the ONT to my equipment.
On 2019-02-09 18:59 CET, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> For anyone saying it's "impossible" to do AE they're welcome here to
> the nordic region and especially Sweden where PON is basically unheard
> of. We have millions of AE connected households. I live in one of them.
However, large parts
om: *"Miles Fidelman"
*To: *"Mike Hammett"
*Cc: *nanog@nanog.org
*Sent: *Saturday, February 9, 2019 2:26:13 PM
*Subject: *Re: Last Mile Design
I expect things are going to change as IoT takes off - security
cameras, baby monitors, start to push video upstream - that makes a
differenc
anog@nanog.org
Sent: Saturday, February 9, 2019 2:26:13 PM
Subject: Re: Last Mile Design
I expect things are going to change as IoT takes off - security cameras, baby
monitors, start to push video upstream - that makes a difference.
And then there are the efforts of cell carriers to push traffic on
swisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
*From: *"Miles Fidelman"
*To: *nanog@nanog.org
*Sent: *Saturday, February 9, 2019 12:20:36 PM
*Subject: *Re: Last Mile Design
Speaking of wh
On 2/9/19 2:51 PM, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
On 2/9/19 12:12 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
With early PON designs, upstream bandwidth was horrible. Not
particularly useful if you're doing things like remote backup, or
video chatting, or running a server (business grade service). GPON
does
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Miles Fidelman"
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Saturday, February 9, 2019 12:20:36 PM
Subject: Re: Last Mile Design
Speaking of which, the Grant County Public Utility District (
GPON is 2.4 Gbps downstream and 1.2 Gbps upstream. Residential users are
download heavy and more than 1:2. However there is a big difference between
average, peak and micro burst. The conclusion is not simple.
We typically have 60+ users on each port. We sell 1000/1000 internet. And
yet we only
On 2/9/19 12:12 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
With early PON designs, upstream bandwidth was horrible. Not
particularly useful if you're doing things like remote backup, or video
chatting, or running a server (business grade service). GPON does better
on upstream bandwidth, but it's still
On 2/9/19 1:44 PM, Grant Taylor via NANOG wrote:
So let me ask this: Are there any functional reasons to favor AE over
PON /within/ the lifecycle of a deployment? Does one methodology
offer any significant advantages or disadvantages over the other? If
so, is (are) the pro(s) / con(s)
On 2/9/19 11:22 AM, Sander Steffann wrote:
Same for me. I like the architecture where the PON splitters are in
powered roadside cabinets (even though the splitter is passive). That
way the ISP can convert it to AE at any time they want. The architectures
where PON has been hardcoded into the
It is not impossible just more expensive. Incidentally here in Denmark we
have TDC now converting active ethernet to GPON.
lør. 9. feb. 2019 19.01 skrev Mikael Abrahamsson :
> On Sat, 9 Feb 2019, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> > If I had to build a consumer broadband network and had the budget (and
> >
We have around 60,000 homes passed with GPON architecture. I'm not
really sure how we would have built that with active roadside
cabinets, and still have been able to maintain any sort cost control.
If we did it with a home run individual fibre scheme hauled back to a
central POP, the
Hi Mark,
> My preference, for the home, would be Active-E. But I do understand the
> economics that may support PON, and my position on that has softened over the
> years.
Same for me. I like the architecture where the PON splitters are in powered
roadside cabinets (even though the splitter
Speaking of which, the Grant County Public Utility District (Washington
State), has wired active ethernet all over their rural county.
Seems to me that the cost difference between splitters & switches is a
pretty minor component of deploying FTTH - the costs are in the
trenching, and the
On Sat, 9 Feb 2019, Mark Tinka wrote:
If I had to build a consumer broadband network and had the budget (and
owned the fibre) to do so, I'd definitely always choose Active-E:
For anyone saying it's "impossible" to do AE they're welcome here to the
nordic region and especially Sweden where
On 2/9/19 2:13 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
My assumption is that you'd be running full IP/MPLS all the way into the
Access. In that case, what I'm saying is that you can run EoMPLS to
deliver the service.
Bingo. You're fine as long as your access L3 gear speaks MPLS. That
does somewhat bump you
My preference, for the home, would be Active-E. But I do understand the
economics that may support PON, and my position on that has softened
over the years. My service provider delivers their FTTH service to me
via PON, and for the most part, it's been all good.
That said, I was particularly
I should probably have mentioned that in this sense I view “urban” as exclusive
to “single family homes” - meaning I’m talking about high density modern urban
with under grounding requirements - and high rise residential towers.
We are the opposite, we are presently enterprise, midsize, and
PON in urban areas absolutely makes sense. Maybe less in a high rise area,
where each building can have a small building wide network of its own. But
it in areas with single family homes PON is king.
Our POPs can have up to 10 000 customers each. All on a single 96 fiber
strand cable leading into
PON in my view is well suited for residential distribution and use profiles.
10G/XG-PON at 10gig/2.5gig is a pretty serious residential connection and even
2.5/1 is pretty great for residential 1/1 symmetric service.
That said, I would in urban environments not recommend designing for GPON
On 8/Feb/19 19:44, Brandon Martin wrote:
>
>
> I'm thinking that, if you push L3 termination all the way out to the
> last access node (FTTN DSLAM being the obvious one here), you may then
> lack a decent way to haul pure Ethernet back to their head-end. If
> your L3 termination also
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019, Chris Gross wrote:
For a lot of us, PONs are a way of life and may not even have any 100G
capable devices in our network, muchless enough to make our money on.
While you may be so "lucky" to "never really take it seriously", it is
supporting hundreds of thousands, if not
e any brevity, typos, or
lack of formality.
From: Aaron
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 16:03
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Last Mile Design
My statement was meant to be tongue in cheek. We deliver 1G to the home
free of charge and make our money on the 10,40 and 1
I want to work in a ISP environment and all the input here has helped.
Thanks!
On Thu, Feb 7, 2019, 6:46 PM David Ratkay I am not sure if this is a easy question to answer. But I am wondering
> what ISP's do for their residential and business customers for designing
> POP's that they usually
, 2019 3:02 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Last Mile Design
My statement was meant to be tongue in cheek. We deliver 1G to the home
free of charge and make our money on the 10,40 and 100G connections. We
haven't been able to deliver those capacities over PON so we've never
really taken
My statement was meant to be tongue in cheek. We deliver 1G to the home
free of charge and make our money on the 10,40 and 100G connections. We
haven't been able to deliver those capacities over PON so we've never
really taken it seriously. As with everything else, you're use case and
It also significantly reduces the requirement to distribute active equipment
into the field while massively reducing the feeder fibre requirement. Point to
point has its place to be sure, but mass market FTTH is not viable without
PON's economics.
On 02/08/2019 12:48 PM, Aaron wrote:
> I've
On 02/08/2019 12:48 PM, Aaron wrote:
I've always felt PON is a tool for people who don't know how to design a
proper network.
Why is that?
I always thought PON was a technology that reduced the number of active
ports, thus altering the port cost per subscriber significantly by not
actually
I've always felt PON is a tool for people who don't know how to design a
proper network.
Aaron
On 2/8/2019 1:38 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
Good for you. None of this PON splitter nonsense.
Miles Fidelman
On 2/8/19 2:17 PM, Aaron wrote:
We run direct fiber connections to each house and
Good for you. None of this PON splitter nonsense.
Miles Fidelman
On 2/8/19 2:17 PM, Aaron wrote:
We run direct fiber connections to each house and business and
terminate them on the same switches. Our switches are housed in small
"huts" that are dispersed throughout the city and each handle
We run direct fiber connections to each house and business and terminate
them on the same switches. Our switches are housed in small "huts" that
are dispersed throughout the city and each handle a specific area then
the huts are all connected in a ring. It really comes down to what your
On 2/8/19 2:07 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
I do like to separate SMB and Resi traffic, but it's mostly for
customer service reasons rather than technical reasons. That
separation rarely entails separate equipment but rather just VLANs and
PCPs, IP subnets, etc.
Many years ago, I did consider
On 8/Feb/19 02:37, Brandon Martin wrote:
>
> I've never been overly fond of the Ma' Bell style designs with
> humongous routers in centralized areas and L2-only haul out to the
> last-mile termination. The failure modes of such systems often result
> in hilariously large outages that are
On Thu, 07 Feb 2019 18:46:40 -0500, David Ratkay said:
> I am not sure if this is a easy question to answer.
Actually,trivial to answer: "It depends". Often due to "hysterical raisins".
> even within the last mile POP. Do you just have POP's delegated to
> residential users and a separate POP
On 2/7/19 6:46 PM, David Ratkay wrote:
I am not sure if this is a easy question to answer. But I am wondering
what ISP's do for their residential and business customers for designing
POP's that they usually access to get theur traffic into a given ISP and
beyond. Is it usually a L1/L2
76 matches
Mail list logo
