From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC1EC3B29E for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:29:16 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1642170555; bh=09SQuo0hOHhkdF7XizbfMWT6p9Pny8MmO9u+zzfPVMM=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=i51w7nCtMOVbjyi4+QI9mPZcoJvRYTZV2ZIT9GKCD8dCGKw3dQiptYyLEiA8RKYOg 85trl4ZcD47VLPfUYBQ/iFm3QjVJSHS7EjRZK/xBdFl9uVHhaKIke2fZdgGLdzu2sk /zti9EpLCj560TNzeng8LGpuHBwUQ4iM3i5I/zOs= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from smtpclient.apple ([134.76.241.253]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N5mKJ-1mFdPl3kp1-017AHN; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:29:14 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 15:29:14 +0100 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= , cerowrt-devel Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <23793242-6837-4A2D-BF05-73E740A7FA98@gmx.de> References: <6D533A43-C4E9-4D48-BC9B-26630F1E17F5@gmx.de> <4F3A4139-6703-467C-832D-3E27294707CE@gmx.de> <15074B17-393D-4167-AE61-A5980C858811@gmx.de> To: =?utf-8?Q?Jonas_M=C3=A5rtensson?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:s0KALIkfN3s+Kd77cR64qklmF+LbcYnR+p+tosTrch/8X2ib+qD sCdpI8CUKDTkDEHuMacVjQkPT/zYn5bBhgOEJwienXddDLBXcD4MSjBS7g4lAjgElO0Pqb6 hDuI6msp0cvsWclEubxo8HF7vAHsyALUn8SHe3lwR8kGeNJx2UXYB+S6i3q4X4BfntsmUNe 16E/GHVFFjjDnUS1fLTxA== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:0Lh75Um5GPc=:CuokCHuerqvFPqkMURew+B kY12NGw0Q6Q9ccgYyP2RPKS5urRWVytgJGDj/6IRnMBdFsy3/7rUe2pZ0OId/deD0soj59Hhd wIkk+buMK4BDsxigCMMS+eqiMMzNXUUo1xIHbDegcJxiNkvSkuvg3y0HyP57XUE18gLWiQYmb w9M8uoryQwTU0ypR5ZsDHSbi1nOSvz/ShHzQH6gawplemCiihZx7tUptEccmJm1rwvOSw4H9c REtr+fUHSTQnoPdlcA4FXXqcnUqFg7Ya+7H5Vgl6ImrFUGqCcLKEIBdqhy1kwcQ6n2JsjUf6n pjn0C5TubB1EUxOjX18GlI5frpwUZzu65YEYeUeg0Kl4uMxsVLziDzF0cH8tpNyxExo0e+bex mLbIfycW4OiHcW8O2FD2XL822+/b8sZiTovNxmXuN67bu9gQF6DDixAqDfGqIVs4ew91UEYXG hNP8UkFaqEgNlORQNhRiXLm64QjT5zLRsNlorIL28nWqmjSuKMDF7S/xvh+Vwq0DrfW8rKLf1 PCv+/7ZSAqvDM78gVsimTn+MjMtIhQcgjyEhcHN7XguLC7ZAeKeA1d1AQwt9LqbMI5tfl1pKP dcsfwypMXS885iAVj16+aayx6bIKIMPsq8urCnBUVk31uJ91fQYjQcmFAOF8GNFflYJBh7saL 4772XXGHTr3ry5ou8k2GM+SToQQbS1P7+caCLL7EIdhFkyViJTfI3bFbDKL+gY2D3gobCUPr0 xJ0HQcmUGye3nzRWovwZCZAcSyDdVUJc3x5L2sTl7OL0cfApUNwJiMNeGHDYVvwtZ7+Kj6e8W USYVilYhpT3f4+kBP7wFNDwj3swD97Az15gys8ukoODhc+D9OGHjtJSqEeeOICCshLcnSsR3g 90NZcg0z23XJ2gaTOGJMz/aak1gTXixE9SbS7hurvmVCwBSGC8Xbc9oRj2E/fwi9bjNmfWCAJ vxQaQbP5RyiXF4c3zY1BCzW+YLarAlYOan7pzdHIj4o7EKwJU1PvtWyFtakhvJzo2UzdsW5d0 PbJafzdtExESQpSdM61s93t+O0N/7cDUMbmNNmeAY5kX5D4GWyyv94Iw40xAnQyYBQlPLAP8W ONbgGZ/0ZksI2s= 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 14:29:17 -0000 Hi Jonas, > On Jan 14, 2022, at 14:50, Jonas M=C3=A5rtensson = wrote: >=20 > > Not all ISPs work with a single level of splitters, some do 1:4 and = split each of the four up into more later, I would guess that 1:4 + 1:8 = will have a bigger aggregate attenuation than going 1:32 directly, but I = am guessing here, so thanks for the numbers. >=20 > It will be slightly higher, mainly due to the extra splices I think, = but other than that there is no fundamental difference between doing = 1:32 and doing 1:4 + 1:8. The fundamental loss is 3 dB per 1:2 split. >=20 > > In Germany the law is as it is and requires a passive handover point = of an ISPs network to the home network and also the freedom to choose = routers (and probably also ONTs/ONUs but that is still in flux), so = plugs will be common as will be exchange of ONTs/ONUs by end-users. >=20 > That's interesting. I would think that exchanging ONUs is quite tricky = (as also indicated by the "hacking" threads discussed earlier) since = OLTs and ONUs from different suppliers may not even be compatible. Well the big incumbent has a process under test which might = require one phone call to transmit one important number after which a = compatible ONT (there is a compatibility list I think) can and will be = provisioned, so this is possible. And given that GPON is an ITU standard = I would assume that unless vendoe-specific extra features are used ONTs = should be compatible. > Can't the "passive handover point" be between the ONU and the home = router? That is under discussion. The BEREC describes three hand-over = points, one passive before the ONT, one at the ethernet port of an ONT = (or maybe the cage-end of an SFP-module) and/or behind an ISP supplied = router (see = https://berec.europa.eu/eng/document_register/subject_matter/berec/regulat= ory_best_practices/guidelines/9033-berec-guidelines-on-common-approaches-t= o-the-identification-of-the-network-termination-point-in-different-network= -topologies). The German law however is clear, the termination point = needs to be passive (unless there is an explicit exemption granted by = the national regulatory authority NRA) OR the ISP declares an device as = part of its active network, but then the ISP needs to cover the = electricity cost of that device. The NRA BNetzA has communicated that it = expects ONT to be treated the same as routers (for which the law grants = freedom of choice by end-users) and that it is unlikely/unwilling to = grant exceptions unless there are excellent reasons to do so (so far = ISPs did not bring forward convincing arguments for not offering a = passive termination point, as far as the BNetzA is concerned). > In Sweden (where FTTH is very common but PON is almost non-existing), = the ISP normally installs both an Ethernet "switch" terminating the = fiber (typically using an SFP) and a home router connected to the switch = using copper Ethernet cable. While it is common to exchange the home = router (or selecting to not install the ISP's router from the = beginning), I don't think anyone exchanges the switch with the fiber = termination and doing so would probably not work anyway since the switch = needs to be "managed" by the ISP. German law allows for that, as long as the ISP covers the = electricity bill of that switch (operating it as part of the ISPs own = active network), the termination point then would be the CatN-socket in = each flat. The goal in Germany is true FTTH where each dwelling = unit/flat has its own fiber connection (and then AON becomes pricy, you = need to run all those fibers to COs and then have enough room for the = required patching/splicing, with fiber taking more room than coper). Regards Sebastian P.S.: While AON is the technically better solution (you can always = easilyput a splitter in a CO and run X direct fibers as a PON, but try = the same when the spillters are out in the field much closer to the = end-users than the CO and there are not enough fibers between splitter = and CO). Telcos especially incumbents however prefer PON for a number of = reasons: a) price, it simply is cheaper, fewer fibers to pull and terminate and = OLTs appear smaller and cheaper that active switches that can supply a = similar number of end-nodes. b) control I: if a telco builds a PON plant every user of that PON will = owe the incumbent some money c) control II: no competitor will be able to offer more advanced = technology over a PON than its owner. >=20 > /Jonas >=20 > On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 2:23 PM Sebastian Moeller = wrote: > Hi Jonas, >=20 >=20 >=20 > > On Jan 14, 2022, at 14:12, Jonas M=C3=A5rtensson = wrote: > >=20 > > > Sure, but given that you probably need a few splices along the = way and preferably pluggable connectors at both ends the loss budget is = not that large (assuming an ISP does not want to push its luck and = allows for stuff like end-users not cleaning the plug diligently before = each plugging). > >=20 > > GPON loss budget is 28 dB and typical insertion losses for 1:32 and = 1:64 splitters are 17 dB and 21 dB. This leaves 11 dB or 7 dB for = splices, connectors and fiber losses. I don't think it's common to have = end-users cleaning and plugging in the fiber, this is done by the ISP = technician at installation. >=20 > Not all ISPs work with a single level of splitters, some do = 1:4 and split each of the four up into more later, I would guess that = 1:4 + 1:8 will have a bigger aggregate attenuation than going 1:32 = directly, but I am guessing here, so thanks for the numbers. In Germany = the law is as it is and requires a passive handover point of an ISPs = network to the home network and also the freedom to choose routers (and = probably also ONTs/ONUs but that is still in flux), so plugs will be = common as will be exchange of ONTs/ONUs by end-users. Whether that is a = good or a bad thins is open for discussion, but as an ISP I would try to = plan my PON plant such that there would be more loss reserve for these = final connections than would be if these would be performed and = documented by trained technicians. (I think that might be one of the = consequences of deploying FTTH in the mass market, solutions need to be = a bit more error tolerant than for networks mainly handled by experts = only.) >=20 > >=20 > > > Dslreports has no cue what a link is actually using, all it = reports wich test profile a user selected, and some users like me ignore = the names and simply use/recommend the profile with the desired number = of flows. Plus quite a number of dedidedly metallic access technology = are marketed with fiber somewhere in the name, potentially confusing = users into selecting the "wrong" profile (think Fiber to the Cabinet for = copper DSL or even Hybrid-Fiber-Coax for docsis cable)... in short the = abels are nice, but I would not read too much inside those. > >=20 > > I agree with all these points. It may be better to look at ISPs that = are known to only use PON, such as Google Fiber. Here are some recent = tests that all show similar and interesting bufferbloat behaviour on the = uplink: > >=20 > > https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/70320015 > > https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/70346586 > > https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/70346578 >=20 > Thanks! >=20 > Best Regards > Sebastian >=20 >=20 >=20 > >=20 > > /Jonas > >=20 > > On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 12:55 PM Sebastian Moeller = wrote: > > Hi Jonas, > >=20 > >=20 > > > On Jan 14, 2022, at 11:44, Jonas M=C3=A5rtensson = wrote: > > >=20 > > > Hi, > > >=20 > > > > getting gpon more right has increasingly been on my mind > > >=20 > > > I think more right is to not turn the fiber into a shared medium = in the first place but since gpon is so popular, improving it seems like = a nice goal. > > >=20 > > > > Nobody in their right mind is going to hook up 128 terminalt to = one OLT port, I hope... > > >=20 > > > Well, sharing one OLT port between many terminals is kind of the = (only) advantage of PON, although split ratios of 32 or 64 are more = typical. But often it's the loss budget that limits the ratio. > >=20 > > Sure, but given that you probably need a few splices along = the way and preferably pluggable connectors at both ends the loss budget = is not that large (assuming an ISP does not want to push its luck and = allows for stuff like end-users not cleaning the plug diligently before = each plugging). > >=20 > >=20 > > >=20 > > > > Fist question might to be "how broken is GPON/XGPON" to start = with, no? > > >=20 > > > Looking at dslreports bufferbloat results for fiber, there are = many samples with >250ms latency on the uplink. Unfortunately, this = graph doesn't show results for 500Mbit/s or 1Gbit/s services but it's = still interesting to look at: > > >=20 > > > https://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat?up=3D1 > >=20 > > Dslreports has no cue what a link is actually using, all it = reports wich test profile a user selected, and some users like me ignore = the names and simply use/recommend the profile with the desired number = of flows. Plus quite a number of dedidedly metallic access technology = are marketed with fiber somewhere in the name, potentially confusing = users into selecting the "wrong" profile (think Fiber to the Cabinet for = copper DSL or even Hybrid-Fiber-Coax for docsis cable)... in short the = abels are nice, but I would not read too much inside those. > >=20 > >=20 > > >=20 > > > > this thread = https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/eigenes-modem-an-ftth-anschluss-= via-sfp-gpon-modul.2061989/ (in German) has some instructions how to get = root on one type of SFP ONU... > > >=20 > > > Thanks, that's an interesting thread. "Hacking" SFP ONUs seems = like a popular hobby. Here are some other resources I found: > > >=20 > > > https://github.com/zry98/SFP-GPON-ONU > > > https://github.com/hwti/G-010S-A > > > = https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=3D116364&start=3D300#p771961 > >=20 > > Thanks for the links! > >=20 > > Regards > > Sebastian > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > >=20 > > > > so pulling a testbed together of some sort would be cool, and = for that matter, having a SFP that could go right into a SFP enabled = home router rather than a separate unit seems like a good idea, also > > >=20 > > > Yes, but ideally I guess you would also need some control of the = OLT side. You may want to look into the VOLTHA project run by ONF: > > >=20 > > > https://wiki.opennetworking.org/display/COM/VOLTHA > > >=20 > > > /Jonas > > >=20 > > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 5:29 PM Sebastian Moeller = wrote: > > > Hi Dave, > > >=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > > On Jan 13, 2022, at 16:59, Dave Taht = wrote: > > > >=20 > > > > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 7:57 AM Sebastian Moeller = wrote: > > > >>=20 > > > >> Hi Dave, > > > >>=20 > > > >>=20 > > > >> this thread = https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/eigenes-modem-an-ftth-anschluss-= via-sfp-gpon-modul.2061989/ (in German) has some instructions how to get = root on one type of SFP ONU... (I was monitoring that thread for general = interest, turns out the intel falcon plattform seems somehow based on an = ancient OpenWrt) > > > >>=20 > > > >> Regards > > > >> Sebastian > > > >=20 > > > > It's really remarkable how many places are running an ancient = openwrt. > > > > Starlink's use was not an abomination, but a persistent reality. = Given > > > > how much > > > > chaos calmer I've found, I sometimes wish we'd somehow started = the > > > > cerowrt project 2 years earlier. > > >=20 > > > Yes and no. > > >=20 > > > > Then we'd be done by now. > > >=20 > > > Hopefully, but then I would not have noticed the whole = thing and would probably not have participated... ;) > > >=20 > > > Regards > > > Sebastian=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > >>=20 > > > >>> On Jan 13, 2022, at 15:38, Dave Taht = wrote: > > > >>>=20 > > > >>> And a gpon onu > > > >>>=20 > > > >>> https://www.fs.com/products/133619.html > > > >>>=20 > > > >>> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 6:23 AM Sebastian Moeller = wrote: > > > >>>>=20 > > > >>>> That is similar to what happens in some GPON-ONT SFPs, some = run a full small Linux distribution like OpenWrt inside.... though for = ethernet that is unexpected. > > > >>>> This is also similar to SFP VDSL "modems" which likely run = their own embedded OS as well inside the SFP package (at a time there = was even a PCI VDSL2 "modem" that was actually running its own embedded = system on the PCI board, IIRC, it pretended to the main computer to be = an ethernet NIC). > > > >>>>=20 > > > >>>> Regards > > > >>>> Sebastian > > > >>>>=20 > > > >>>>=20 > > > >>>>=20 > > > >>>>> On Jan 13, 2022, at 15:18, Dave Taht = wrote: > > > >>>>>=20 > > > >>>>> running linux, of course. > > > >>>>>=20 > > > >>>>> https://blog.benjojo.co.uk/post/smart-sfp-linux-inside > > > >>>>>=20 > > > >>>>> -- > > > >>>>> I tried to build a better future, a few times: > > > >>>>> = https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org > > > >>>>>=20 > > > >>>>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC > > > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > > > >>>>> Cerowrt-devel mailing list > > > >>>>> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > > > >>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > > > >>>>=20 > > > >>>=20 > > > >>>=20 > > > >>> -- > > > >>> I tried to build a better future, a few times: > > > >>> = https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org > > > >>>=20 > > > >>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC > > > >>=20 > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > --=20 > > > > I tried to build a better future, a few times: > > > > https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org > > > >=20 > > > > Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC > > >=20 > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > > > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel > >=20 >=20