Monday, August 3, 2020

VPLS.US 06/26/2011 Active Ethernet Versus PON Sun, 26 Jun 2011 17:29:08 +0000 timc

PON: basically a passive splitter 4 way that’s again split with an 8way. Giving you up to 32 ONTs. It’s shared. Kind of like the old 10base2. or 10base5 or arcnet :) Except it’s fiber rather than copper

PON Passive Optical Splitter

Active Ethernet :) well, you’ve been reading about it here for a couple years now. just a series of switches that bring it back to a router at some point. Over fiber it means you are basically limited by the optics you are using to the CE (The Home in the FTTH, or Premises on FTTP).

We ultimately rolled out some PON using Ciena down in Latin America. I didn’t have much to do with that installation, and am certainly glad it wasn’t me who had to make the call for using PON.

As near as I can tell, there doesn’t seem to be a serious amount of saved resources by going with PON. You still have to dig trenches… You still have to get entrance facility. As near as I can tell, all you save is power at the break out boxes…. Where PON is passive and doesn’t require power. The Ethernet requires electricity to power it’s repeaters.

Err not repeaters that was Hubs. :) 3 active repeaters between the user and the CE, but that’s copper. Oh, and you also save a bit of fiber, but having been in a company that laid a lot of fiber, I can tell you that the major expense of laying fiber isn’t the cost of the fiber. It’s the cost of getting the fiber into the ground that costs the most money. Putting more in the ground just gives you future expansion capabilities.


Add comment

Fill out the form below to add your own comments