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 TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 588173B29E for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:22:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3737638ACF; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:28:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id bJd6LyHXTjEP; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:28:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2982338A7A; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:28:04 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1642188484; bh=AlMwKc99J7QKJ0+h8W/iG5R6rwx0fWqE9RZK4IBpWv4=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=ZpTCQeMlwh+0zS/NFG9BUcW4Y00rB7soXH9o/K0kKRL6iQHCNN2Jackl5IeeW/gdm R/1wUzG/u+xn7UWPLGeceBIU+Zurxqg5Y/wFTDpJo6V8PYyVD8d1otVBDdnLY1y1Nc j9s12lCmVvny29+IiwSEBuL9q8Zc+gqrmjO23VTQQmYKrtb1dirkOAC2s5vkpxZtfz vCmlZoU+/o8mnLUXoaFHtt2Vs+1TZsb6DkBZ8+OcaTgr455UB4zaoJPRpj8e+qFU5G rHF+6a55JUK7Zbhs4wt0eOcXNkrO3tLKRS5JGqGwhL9EGU+Om7SyEFhiolOerekzYb HzCsuygqj2JDw== Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B94111B; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:21:59 -0500 (EST) From: Michael Richardson To: =?us-ascii?Q?=3D=3FUTF-8=3FQ=3FJonas=5FM=3DC3=3DA5rtensson=3F=3D?= , Sebastian Moeller , cerowrt-devel In-Reply-To: References: <6D533A43-C4E9-4D48-BC9B-26630F1E17F5@gmx.de> <4F3A4139-6703-467C-832D-3E27294707CE@gmx.de> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1 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 Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] a smart SFP X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 19:22:02 -0000 Jonas M=C3=A5rtensson wrote: >> getting gpon more right has increasingly been on my mind > I think more right is to not turn the fiber into a shared medium in t= he > first place but since gpon is so popular, improving it seems like a > nice goal. >> Nobody in their right mind is going to hook up 128 terminalt to one >> OLT > port, I hope... > Well, sharing one OLT port between many terminals is kind of the (onl= y) > advantage of PON, although split ratios of 32 or 64 are more > typical. But often it's the loss budget that limits the ratio. And, there are also situations, many of them industrial, where the fiber allows one to avoid ground loops, and where the bandwidth/latency requirements are very modest. it's not all youtube downloads and zoom meetings :-) I was involved in a GPON build back in 2010 into a very poorly served industrial park. (That was for email/web browsing by the industries). A reason they were so poorly served is that there were two expressways (one of them the TransCanada) and a river that bordered the area. There were only eight strands in a single conduit available.... We considered moving (an) OLT into that area actually... DWDM to the rescue in the end, but that was a bit bleeding edge at the time. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh network= s [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect = [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails = [