From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC29721F36A for ; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 13:03:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6C072002C; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:07:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 7AB4863AE9; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:03:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63E2B637FC; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:03:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: Dave Taht In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 23.4.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca Cc: Wes Felter , =?UTF-8?Q?Joel_Wir=C4=81mu_Pauling?= , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] 10GigE nics and SFP+ modules? X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 20:03:47 -0000 >> I don't like when people create their cable plant to match what GPON >> needs. It's done because of the illusion that long-haul fiber is >> expensive. It isn't, if you have to dig anyway. The difference in cost >> of a 12 fiber cable, and a 1000 fiber cable, isn't huge compared to >> the digging costs. Splicing a 1000 fiber cable isn't huge >> either. Point-to-point fiber cabling is the way to go. If you then >> decide to light it up using PON of some kind, fine, that's up to you, >> at least you have the flexibility to change technology in the future. I went through a GPON install. It started as a PtP install. The problem is that while we were installing for 90% of the way, there were a number of places where we could not: conduits under highways, etc. In *Canada* at least, fiber construction is a regulated activity, and people who own fiber are required to lease to others who want it. So, the GPON because of the 10% of places where we had to lease fiber, and leasing 2-3 strands is much easier than 1000. In one case, my understanding was there was only a dozen strands installed, period, under, for instance, the Trans-Canada highway (quebec hwy 40/25 interchange was involved). I'm not otherwise very fond of the GPON stuff. The "terminals" are too smart, and not flexible enough, and yes, they had hidden bufferbloat. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [