[Cerowrt-devel] 10GigE nics and SFP+ modules?

Joel Wirāmu Pauling joel at aenertia.net
Wed Sep 10 17:54:33 EDT 2014

I have been heavily involved with the UFB (Ultrafast Broadband) PON
deployment here in New Zealand.

I am not sure how the regulated environment is playing out in Canada
(I am moving there in a month so I guess I will find out). But here
the GPON architecture is METH based and Layer2 only. Providers (RSP's)
are the ones responsible for asking for Handoffer buffer tweaks to the
LFC(local fibre companies; the layer 0-2 outfits-) which have mandated
targets for Latency (at most 4.5ms) accross their PON Access networks
to the Handover port.

Most of the time this has been to 'fix' Speedtest.net TCP based
results to report whatever Marketed service (100/30 For example) is in
everyones favourite site speedtest.net.

This has meant at least for the Chorus LFC regions where they use
Alcatel-Lucent 7450's as the handover/aggregation switches we have
deliberately introduced buffer bloat to please the RSP's - who
otherwise get whingy about customers whinging about speedtest not
showing 100/30mbit. Of course user education is 'too hard' .


On 11 September 2014 08:03, Michael Richardson <mcr at sandelman.ca> wrote:
>     >> 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 at sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

More information about the Cerowrt-devel mailing list