From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-x234.google.com (mail-lf0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AFAC73B2A0 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 21:05:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-x234.google.com with SMTP id b81so211638154lfe.1 for ; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:05:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lUW/YbNzEIvcAsrXtzT7oVY3QN07BIKSHoK5O1n92jU=; b=LRlTIBvP6LCWQ0LDMLI8UeZss3g4fkipbmzhSj+/b+vZRUCk0Z7rAzHturk/4QF+WD 4jPTVogMBxmJ16OyUIU17oqnO0odstbJx43JxGxkuw3PuPZUsgYvHYv50fTs9HCv3WQv cRN+m5WrFdEmdz9aDpcAkC5YBZgZ1HaC3vsZarNH13+ItF8aivIIL6LrpS0cl5c3NEHF 43fn1dO5slDyE0KgdcShAzEWaTvCfO5f87R4fXetNbcsR5Vf4lTMdAq6H70iwCBlX8TN i7lo80szo0z7e8AEb01ZlCw32u5gDdYK6g8cZ9t6Hpt4qOy/Pla4loTaFPRkHMEcjsVD T3nQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=lUW/YbNzEIvcAsrXtzT7oVY3QN07BIKSHoK5O1n92jU=; b=T0bnmMs7rRJbATg7dBXQnMxpD6QchbBc8tUiAHhnfBiDrgs1s0rzddqn38w355tZZM GyAkrobiE/lIJ3teNaSCrktT28ywKXJ9E2voDcjEIo6Z6tK6wR9VR4wFdw4Q5tEetxMy UT83CrdJOyeQx4ZyQtlNguTAHCoGqeFwPZWj/MjySYt9XS1pZKm1JbvekoHIQb4DTv46 RBUqZSXPfNNUjefbN/DQtHxVv5UnkoSyusn2hYpTa/GQ4tu66L3EjwJ8AfOc/9nb6XOA TeUubMXzulVPsg8VwdVR3CmPuyD4V9DINA8hjGJIwowXuo3kdPr4oCWHpsp4DXzl9mFg KkgQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngveJCUFwXLiaI8kmevfH/eL+Jh/Sp1zBb2uR00uFW3FMbTKmDeEwY7j+ASYv5lwRZb1qlix68b+IzGecNg== X-Received: by 10.25.228.90 with SMTP id b87mr13085205lfh.61.1477443944944; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:05:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.217.150 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:05:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5a2d4224-3f4e-80f0-3b0b-b2fbbdd59697@gmail.com> References: <5a2d4224-3f4e-80f0-3b0b-b2fbbdd59697@gmail.com> From: Benjamin Cronce Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:05:43 -0500 Message-ID: To: Jan Ceuleers Cc: bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c0db564839827053fba3984 Subject: Re: [Bloat] 22 seconds til bloat on gfiber? X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 01:05:46 -0000 --94eb2c0db564839827053fba3984 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sorry to side track 1:1 split bandwidth wise, still a 1:16 or whatever fiber split. Each port can handle 40Gb/s, which is 32 lambdas of 1.25Gb/s, each customer getting their own lambda. The ONT can either be WDM-PON or GPON with an inline filter. A Google Fiber engineer actually had this in his blog a long while back, talking about their design and the "dedicated" aspect of an unshared GPON. PON can only handle about a 32 split before the signal strength gets too low toe be practical. If each group of customers shared a lambda, they would need too many split or repeaters, which is more impractical. According to Sonic.Net, infrastructure and transit only constitutes about 1%-2% of the cost of being an ISP. May as well pony up for the best infrastructure to reduce operational costs, which is where the bulk of the cost of being an ISP rests. Repeaters and excess splits increase operational costs. I'm not entirely sure which part you mean "impractical". I actually have a dedicated self-healing fiber loop from my home to my ISP's CO. $52.74/mo after taxes.Well... $21.09/mo for the promo, and unbundled. Once at the CO, it plugs into a patch panel where it then feeds into a splitter and into a GPON port, but is otherwise dedicated back to the CO. The main benefit of PON is the incredibly high density chassis. Not to mention a single WDM-PON port consumes about 2x the power of a single 1Gb/1Gb active Ethernet port, but can handle up to 32 ONTs and 40Gb/40Gb of bandwidth. Very power efficient. Google Fiber goes the route of fiber huts, while they're not absolutely required, it's probably a good idea when covering a large area. There is some very high density fiber bundles you can purchase, 144 strands of fiber in the thickness of a pencil. If you ran that out to the normal size of a conduit, you're getting into the 100k strands per conduit range, assuming perfect packing density. On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Jan Ceuleers wrote: > On 25/10/16 00:10, Benjamin Cronce wrote: > > WDM-PON, giving each customer their own lambda of bandwidth. Effectively > > a 1:1 split. > > Not quite. All it means is that multiple PONs coexist on the same > outside plant, each on a different wavelength, and each serving multiple > end-users. Allows for higher densities. > > What you suggest could be done but would quickly become impractical. > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > --94eb2c0db564839827053fba3984 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sorry to side track

1:1 split ban= dwidth wise, still a 1:16 or whatever fiber split. Each port can handle 40G= b/s, which is 32 lambdas of 1.25Gb/s, each customer getting their own lambd= a. The ONT can either be WDM-PON or GPON with an inline filter. A Google Fi= ber engineer actually had this in his blog a long while back, talking about= their design and the "dedicated" aspect of an unshared GPON. PON= can only handle about a 32 split before the signal strength gets too low t= oe be practical. If each group of customers shared a lambda, they would nee= d too many split or repeaters, which is more impractical.

According to Sonic.Net, infrastructure and transit only constitutes about= 1%-2% of the cost of being an ISP. May as well pony up for the best infras= tructure to reduce operational costs, which is where the bulk of the cost o= f being an ISP rests. Repeaters and excess splits increase operational cost= s.

I'm not entirely sure which part you mean "imp= ractical". I actually have a dedicated self-healing fiber loop from my= home to my ISP's CO. $52.74/mo after taxes.Well... $21.09/mo for the p= romo, and unbundled. Once at the CO, it plugs into a patch panel where it t= hen feeds into a splitter and into a GPON port, but is otherwise dedicated = back to the CO. The main benefit of PON is the incredibly high density chas= sis. Not to mention a single WDM-PON port consumes about 2x the power of a = single 1Gb/1Gb active Ethernet port, but can handle up to 32 ONTs and 40Gb/= 40Gb of bandwidth. Very power efficient.

Goo= gle Fiber goes the route of fiber huts, while they're not absolutely re= quired, it's probably a good idea when covering a large area. There is = some very high density fiber bundles you can purchase, 144 strands of fiber= in the thickness of a pencil. If you ran that out to the normal size of a = conduit, you're getting into the 100k strands per conduit range, assumi= ng perfect packing density.
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Jan Ceuleers = <jan.ceuleers@gmail.com> wrote:
On 25/10/16 00:10, Benjamin Cronce wrote:
> WDM-PON, giving each customer their own lambda of bandwidth. Effective= ly
> a 1:1 split.

Not quite. All it means is that multiple PONs coexist on the same outside plant, each on a different wavelength, and each serving multiple end-users. Allows for higher densities.

What you suggest could be done but would quickly become impractical.
______________________________= _________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net<= /a>
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat

--94eb2c0db564839827053fba3984--