From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bobcat.rjmcmahon.com (bobcat.rjmcmahon.com [45.33.58.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 991FE3CB37; Tue, 14 Mar 2023 13:06:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.106] (c-69-181-111-171.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [69.181.111.171]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by bobcat.rjmcmahon.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BC0541EEE8; Tue, 14 Mar 2023 10:06:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 bobcat.rjmcmahon.com BC0541EEE8 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rjmcmahon.com; s=bobcat; t=1678813589; bh=ZTzTLDOyK1JxnBJG06y5bHrWPdzRY8f4c6YLiwm6yZA=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Date:To:CC:From; b=qC2RbtpjYADXVEw+MWF91TUMSS+CmresuYSMlk6+NFG/6PQP3LHyQM2H2wn8uCK58 MSpjS/Ij1eMF8dYpHJucWDUcXZtXwU6iWaQAnjE5S8afX0rrt8dPQa8bgcLO+49DSR BI8/xCXpRRhyobZxvDZGIr0I3fiBrcNtFqhkQK0M= In-Reply-To: References: <83ffc0dad19e3343e49271889369cefc@rjmcmahon.com> <3CD0B9E6-0B2A-4A70-8F53-ED0822DF77A6@gmx.de> <13DE6E53-665F-4C20-BBE2-70E685421E9D@gmx.de> <22C819FA-DDD7-4B9B-8C09-8008D4273287@gmx.de> <5e7fac51071bdbb20837e72e7eedfc7c@rjmcmahon.com> <3f45d2a0b6e46d7b2775fb801e805f93@rjmcmahon.com> <70F71290-C6CB-4D19-8A88-F0F17C0BDDA2@gmx.de> <5e0cd693c4749d128dbb48d6c1129071@rjmcmahon.com> <2ab2983d-6beb-49cb-8c35-e481cbfdc7a3@Spark> X-Referenced-Uid: BLUE_LOCAL:1d67f628-1ba9-47fc-8553-8d6abe45bc4e Thread-Topic: Re: [Rpm] [Starlink] On FiWi User-Agent: Android X-Is-Generated-Message-Id: true MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----8KEW2SN0OM7P0PLBRLNUFG1620H4AX" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Robert McMahon Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 10:06:29 -0700 To: Mike Puchol CC: Dave Taht via Starlink , Rpm , libreqos , bloat Message-ID: <89c55d67-86f0-494d-a09e-c9aeebe46dc0@rjmcmahon.com> Subject: Re: [Rpm] [Starlink] On FiWi X-BeenThere: rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: revolutions per minute - a new metric for measuring responsiveness List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 17:06:30 -0000 ------8KEW2SN0OM7P0PLBRLNUFG1620H4AX Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 The ISP could charge per radio head and manage the system from a FiWi head = end which they own=2E Virtualize the APs=2E Get rid of SoC complexity and c= ostly O&M via simplicity=2E Eliminate all the incremental engineering that = has gone astray, e=2Eg=2E bloat and over powered APs=2E Bob On Mar 14,= 2023, 9:49 AM, at 9:49 AM, Robert McMahon wrot= e: >Hi Mike, > >I'm thinking more of fiber to the room=2E The last few mete= rs are wifi >everything else is fiber=2E=2E Those radios would be a max of = 20' from the >associated STA=2E Then at phy rates of 2=2E8Gb/s per spatial = stream=2E The >common MIMO is 2x2 so each radio head or wifi transceiver su= pports >5=2E6G, no queueing delay=2E Wholesale is $5 and retail $19=2E95 pe= r >pluggable transceiver=2E Sold at Home Depot next to the irrigation aisle= =2E >10 per house is $199 and each room gets a dedicated 5=2E8G phy rate=2E= Need >more devices in a space? Pick an RRH with more cmos radios=2E Also, = the >antennas would be patch antenna and fill the room properly=2E Then plu= g >in an optional sensor for fire alerting=2E > > >A digression=2E A lot of= signal processing engineers have been working on >TX beam forming=2E The b= est beam is fiber=2E Just do that=2E It even can turn >corners and goes exa= ctly to where it's needed at very low energies=2E >This is similar to pvc p= ipes in irrigation systems=2E They're designed to >take water to spray head= s=2E > >The cost is the cable plant=2E That's labor more than materials=2E = Similar >for irrigation, pvc is inexpensive and lasts decades=2E A return l= abor >means use future proof materials, e=2Eg=2E fiber=2E > >Bob > > > >On = Mar 14, 2023, 4:10 AM, at 4:10 AM, Mike Puchol via Rpm > wrote: >>Hi Bob, >> >>You hit on a set of very valid points, w= hich I'll complement with my >>views on where the industry (the bit of it t= hat affects WISPs) is >>heading, and what I saw at the MWC in Barcelona=2E = Love the FiWi term >:-) >> >>I have seen the vendors that supply WISPs, suc= h as Ubiquiti, Cambium, >>and Mimosa, but also newer entrants such as Taran= a, increase the >>performance and on-paper specs of their equipment=2E My e= xamples below >>are centered on the African market, if you operate in Europ= e or the >US, >>where you can charge customers a higher install fee, or eve= n charge >>them a break-up fee if they don't return equipment, the economic= s >work=2E >> >>Where currently a ~$500 sector radio could serve ~60 endpoi= nts, at a >>cost of ~$50 per endpoint (I use this term in place of ODU/CPE,= the >>antenna that you mount on the roof), and supply ~2=2E5 Mbps CIR per = >>endpoint, the evolution is now a ~$2,000+ sector radio, a $200 >>endpoint= , capability for ~150 endpoints per sector, and ~25 Mbps CIR >>per endpoint= =2E >> >>If every customer a WISP installs represents, say, $100 CAPEX at >= >install time ($50 for the antenna + cabling, router, etc), and you >>charg= e a $30 install fee, you have $70 to recover, and you recover >from >>the m= onthly contribution the customer makes=2E If the contribution after >>OPEX = is, say, $10, it takes you 7 months to recover the full install >>cost=2E N= ot bad, doable even in low-income markets=2E >> >>Fast-forward to the next-= generation version=2E Now, the CAPEX at install >>is $250, you need to reco= ver $220, and it will take you 22 months, >>which is above the usual 18 mon= ths that investors look for=2E >> >>The focus, thereby, has to be the lever= that has the largest effect on >>the unit economics - which is the per-cus= tomer cost=2E I have drawn what >>my ideal FiWi network would look like: >>= >> >> >>Taking you through this - we start with a 1-port, low-cost EPON OL= T >(or >>you could go for 2, 4, 8 ports as you add capacity)=2E This OLT ha= s >>capacity for 64 ONUs on its single port=2E Instead of connecting the >>= typical fiber infrastructure with kilometers of cables which break, >>requi= re maintenance, etc=2E we insert an EPON to Ethernet converter (I >>added "= magic" because these don't exist AFAIK)=2E >> >>This converter allows us to= connect our $2k sector radio, and serve >the >>$200 endpoints (ODUs) over = wireless point-to-multipoint up to 10km >>away=2E Each ODU then has a rever= se converter, which gives us EPON >again=2E >> >>Once we are back on EPON, = we can insert splitters, for example, >>pre-connectorized outdoor 1:16 boxe= s=2E Every customer install now >>involves a 100 meter roll of pre-connecto= rized 2-core drop cable, and >a >>$20 EPON ONU=2E >> >>Using this deploymen= t method, we could connect up to 16 customers to a >>single $200 endpoint, = so the enpoint CAPEX per customer is now $12=2E5=2E >>Add the ONU, cable, e= tc=2E and we have a per-install CAPEX of $82=2E5 >>(assuming the same $50 o= f extras we had before), and an even shorter >>break-even=2E In addition, a= s the endpoints support higher capacity, we >>can provision at least the sa= me, if not more, capacity per customer=2E >> >>Other advantages: the $200 O= DU is no longer customer equipment and >>CAPEX, but network equipment, and = as such, can operate under a longer >>break-even timeline, and be financed = by infrastructure PE funds, for >>example=2E As a result, churn has a much = lower financial impact on the >>operator=2E >> >>The main reason why this w= ouldn't work today is that EPON, as we know, >>is synchronous, and requires= the OLT to orchestrate the amount of time >>each ONU can transmit, and whe= n=2E Having wireless hops and media >>conversions will introduce latencies = which can break down the >>communications (e=2Eg=2E one ONU may transmit, g= et delayed on the radio >>link, and end up overlapping another ONU that tra= nsmitted on the next >>slot)=2E Thus, either the "magic" box needs to accou= nt for this, or an >>new hybrid EPON-wireless protocol developed=2E >> >>My= main point here: the industry is moving away from the unconnected=2E >>All= the claims I heard and saw at MWC about "connecting the >>unconnected" had= zero resonance with the financial drivers that the >>unconnected really op= erate under, on top of IT literacy, digital >>skills, devices, power=2E=2E= =2E >> >>Best, >> >>Mike >>On Mar 14, 2023 at 05:27 +0100, rjmcmahon via St= arlink >>, wrote: >>> To change the top= ic - curious to thoughts on FiWi=2E >>> >>> Imagine a world with no copper = cable called FiWi (Fiber,VCSEL/CMOS >>> Radios, Antennas) and which is poin= t to point inside a building >>> connected to virtualized APs fiber hops aw= ay=2E Each remote radio head >>> (RRH) would consume 5W or less and only wh= en active=2E No need for >>things >>> like zigbee, or meshes, or threads as= each radio has a fiber >>connection >>> via Corning's actifi or equivalent= =2E Eliminate the AP/Client power >>> imbalance=2E Plastics also can house = smoke or other sensors=2E >>> >>> Some reminders from Paul Baran in 1994 (a= nd from David Reed) >>> >>> o) Shorter range rf transceivers connected to f= iber could produce a >>> significant improvement - - tremendous improvement= , really=2E >>> o) a mixture of terrestrial links plus shorter range radio = links has >>the >>> effect of increasing by orders and orders of magnitude = the amount of >>> frequency spectrum that can be made available=2E >>> o) B= y authorizing high power to support a few users to reach >slightly >>> long= er distances we deprive ourselves of the opportunity to serve >the >>> many= =2E >>> o) Communications systems can be built with 10dB ratio >>> o) Digit= al transmission when properly done allows a small signal to >>> noise ratio= to be used successfully to retrieve an error free >signal=2E >>> o) And, n= ever forget, any transmission capacity not used is wasted >>> forever, like= water over the dam=2E Not using such techniques >represent >>> lost opport= unity=2E >>> >>> And on waveguides: >>> >>> o) "Fiber transmission loss is = ~0=2E5dB/km for single mode fiber, >>> independent of modulation" >>> o) = =E2=80=9CCopper cables and PCB traces are very frequency dependent=2E At >>= > 100Gb/s, the loss is in dB/inch=2E" >>> o) "Free space: the power density= of the radio waves decreases with >>the >>> square of distance from the tr= ansmitting antenna due to spreading of >>the >>> electromagnetic energy in = space according to the inverse square law" >>> >>> The sunk costs & long-li= ved parts of FiWi are the fiber and the CPE >>> plastics & antennas, as CMO= S radios+ & fiber/laser, e=2Eg=2E VCSEL could >>be >>> pluggable, allowing = for field upgrades=2E Just like swapping out SFP >in >>a >>> data center=2E= >>> >>> This approach basically drives out WiFi latency by eliminating >sh= ared >>> queues and increases capacity by orders of magnitude by leveraging= >>10dB >>> in the spatial dimension, all of which is achieved by a physica= l >>design=2E >>> Just place enough RRHs as needed (similar to a pop up spr= inkler in >an >>> irrigation system=2E) >>> >>> Start and build this for an= MDU and the value of the building >>improves=2E >>> Sadly, there seems no = way to capture that value other than over long >>> term use=2E It doesn't m= atter whether the leader of the HOA tries to >>> capture the value or if a = last mile provider tries=2E The value >remains >>> sunk or hidden with noth= ing on the asset side of the balance sheet=2E >>> We've got a CAPEX spend t= hat has to be made up via "OPEX returns" >>over >>> years=2E >>> >>> But th= e asset is there=2E >>> >>> How do we do this? >>> >>> Bob >>> ____________= ___________________________________ >>> Starlink mailing list >>> Starlink@= lists=2Ebufferbloat=2Enet >>> https://lists=2Ebufferbloat=2Enet/listinfo/st= arlink ------8KEW2SN0OM7P0PLBRLNUFG1620H4AX Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The ISP coul= d charge per radio head and manage the system from a FiWi head end which th= ey own=2E Virtualize the APs=2E Get rid of SoC complexity and costly O&= M via simplicity=2E Eliminate all the incremental engineering that has gone= astray, e=2Eg=2E bloat and over powered APs=2E

Bob
On Mar 14, 2023, at 9:49 AM, Ro= bert McMahon <rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon=2Ecom> wrote:
Hi Mike,

I'm thinking more of fiber to the room=2E The last few meter= s are wifi everything else is fiber=2E=2E Those radios would be a max of 20= ' from the associated STA=2E Then at phy rates of 2=2E8Gb/s per spatial str= eam=2E The common MIMO is 2x2 so each radio head or wifi transceiver suppor= ts 5=2E6G, no queueing delay=2E Wholesale is $5 and retail $19=2E95 per plu= ggable transceiver=2E Sold at Home Depot next to the irrigation aisle=2E 10= per house is $199 and each room gets a dedicated 5=2E8G phy rate=2E Need m= ore devices in a space? Pick an RRH with more cmos radios=2E Also, the ante= nnas would be patch antenna and fill the room properly=2E Then plug in an o= ptional sensor for fire alerting=2E


A d= igression=2E A lot of signal processing engineers have been working on TX b= eam forming=2E The best beam is fiber=2E Just do that=2E It even can turn c= orners and goes exactly to where it's needed at very low energies=2E This i= s similar to pvc pipes in irrigation systems=2E They're designed to take wa= ter to spray heads=2E

The cost is the cable= plant=2E That's labor more than materials=2E Similar for irrigation, pvc i= s inexpensive and lasts decades=2E A return labor means use future proof ma= terials, e=2Eg=2E fiber=2E

Bob
On Mar 14, 2023, at 4:10 AM, Mike Puchol via Rpm <<= a href=3D"mailto:rpm@lists=2Ebufferbloat=2Enet" target=3D"_blank">rpm@lists= =2Ebufferbloat=2Enet> wrote:
Hi Bob,

You hit on a set of very valid points, which I'l= l complement with my views on where the industry (the bit of it that affect= s WISPs) is heading, and what I saw at the MWC in Barcelona=2E Love the FiW= i term :-)

I have seen the vendors that supply WISPs, such a= s Ubiquiti, Cambium, and Mimosa, but also newer entrants such as Tarana, in= crease the performance and on-paper specs of their equipment=2E My examples= below are centered on the African market, if you operate in Europe or the = US, where you can charge customers a higher install fee, or even charge the= m a break-up fee if they don't return equipment, the economics work=2E
Where currently a ~$500 sector radio could serve ~60 endpoints, = at a cost of ~$50 per endpoint (I use this term in place of ODU/CPE, the an= tenna that you mount on the roof), and supply ~2=2E5 Mbps CIR per endpoint,= the evolution is now a ~$2,000+ sector radio, a $200 endpoint, capability = for ~150 endpoints per sector, and ~25 Mbps CIR per endpoint=2E
<= br> If every customer a WISP installs represents, say, $100 CAPEX at instal= l time ($50 for the antenna + cabling, router, etc), and you charge a $30 i= nstall fee, you have $70 to recover, and you recover from the monthly contr= ibution the customer makes=2E If the contribution after OPEX is, say, $10, = it takes you 7 months to recover the full install cost=2E Not bad, doable e= ven in low-income markets=2E

Fast-forward to the next-genera= tion version=2E Now, the CAPEX at install is $250, you need to recover $220= , and it will take you 22 months, which is above the usual 18 months that i= nvestors look for=2E

The focus, thereby, has to be the lever= that has the largest effect on the unit economics - which is the per-custo= mer cost=2E I have drawn what my ideal FiWi network would look like:
=


Taking you through this - we start = with a 1-port, low-cost EPON OLT (or you could go for 2, 4, 8 ports as you = add capacity)=2E This OLT has capacity for 64 ONUs on its single port=2E In= stead of connecting the typical fiber infrastructure with kilometers of cab= les which break, require maintenance, etc=2E we insert an EPON to Ethernet = converter (I added "magic" because these don't exist AFAIK)=2E
This converter allows us to connect our $2k sector radio, and serve the = $200 endpoints (ODUs) over wireless point-to-multipoint up to 10km away=2E = Each ODU then has a reverse converter, which gives us EPON again=2E
=
Once we are back on EPON, we can insert splitters, for example, pre= -connectorized outdoor 1:16 boxes=2E Every customer install now involves a = 100 meter roll of pre-connectorized 2-core drop cable, and a $20 EPON ONU= =2E 

Using this deployment method, we could connect up = to 16 customers to a single $200 endpoint, so the enpoint CAPEX per custome= r is now $12=2E5=2E Add the ONU, cable, etc=2E and we have a per-install CA= PEX of $82=2E5 (assuming the same $50 of extras we had before), and an even= shorter break-even=2E In addition, as the endpoints support higher capacit= y, we can provision at least the same, if not more, capacity per customer= =2E

Other advantages: the $200 ODU is no longer customer equ= ipment and CAPEX, but network equipment, and as such, can operate under a l= onger break-even timeline, and be financed by infrastructure PE funds, for = example=2E As a result, churn has a much lower financial impact on the oper= ator=2E

The main reason why this wouldn't work today is that= EPON, as we know, is synchronous, and requires the OLT to orchestrate the = amount of time each ONU can transmit, and when=2E Having wireless hops and = media conversions will introduce latencies which can break down the communi= cations (e=2Eg=2E one ONU may transmit, get delayed on the radio link, and = end up overlapping another ONU that transmitted on the next slot)=2E Thus, = either the "magic" box needs to account for this, or an new hybrid EPON-wir= eless protocol developed=2E

My main point here: the industry= is moving away from the unconnected=2E All the claims I heard and saw at M= WC about "connecting the unconnected" had zero resonance with the financial= drivers that the unconnected really operate under, on top of IT literacy, = digital skills, devices, power=2E=2E=2E

Best, <= br>
Mike
On Ma= r 14, 2023 at 05:27 +0100, rjmcmahon via Starlink <starlink@lists=2Ebuff= erbloat=2Enet>, wrote:
To change the topic - curious to thought= s on FiWi=2E

Imagine a world with no copper cable called FiW= i (Fiber,VCSEL/CMOS
Radios, Antennas) and which is point to point in= side a building
connected to virtualized APs fiber hops away=2E Each= remote radio head
(RRH) would consume 5W or less and only when acti= ve=2E No need for things
like zigbee, or meshes, or threads as each = radio has a fiber connection
via Corning's actifi or equivalent=2E E= liminate the AP/Client power
imbalance=2E Plastics also can house sm= oke or other sensors=2E

Some reminders from Paul Baran in 19= 94 (and from David Reed)

o) Shorter range rf transceivers co= nnected to fiber could produce a
significant improvement - - tremend= ous improvement, really=2E
o) a mixture of terrestrial links plus sh= orter range radio links has the
effect of increasing by orders and o= rders of magnitude the amount of
frequency spectrum that can be made= available=2E
o) By authorizing high power to support a few users to= reach slightly
longer distances we deprive ourselves of the opportu= nity to serve the
many=2E
o) Communications systems can be bu= ilt with 10dB ratio
o) Digital transmission when properly done allow= s a small signal to
noise ratio to be used successfully to retrieve = an error free signal=2E
o) And, never forget, any transmission capac= ity not used is wasted
forever, like water over the dam=2E Not using= such techniques represent
lost opportunity=2E

And on= waveguides:

o) "Fiber transmission loss is ~0=2E5dB/km for = single mode fiber,
independent of modulation"
o) =E2=80=9CCop= per cables and PCB traces are very frequency dependent=2E At
100Gb/s= , the loss is in dB/inch=2E"
o) "Free space: the power density of th= e radio waves decreases with the
square of distance from the transmi= tting antenna due to spreading of the
electromagnetic energy in spac= e according to the inverse square law"

The sunk costs & = long-lived parts of FiWi are the fiber and the CPE
plastics & an= tennas, as CMOS radios+ & fiber/laser, e=2Eg=2E VCSEL could be
p= luggable, allowing for field upgrades=2E Just like swapping out SFP in a =
data center=2E

This approach basically drives out WiFi = latency by eliminating shared
queues and increases capacity by order= s of magnitude by leveraging 10dB
in the spatial dimension, all of w= hich is achieved by a physical design=2E
Just place enough RRHs as n= eeded (similar to a pop up sprinkler in an
irrigation system=2E) <= br>
Start and build this for an MDU and the value of the building i= mproves=2E
Sadly, there seems no way to capture that value other tha= n over long
term use=2E It doesn't matter whether the leader of the = HOA tries to
capture the value or if a last mile provider tries=2E T= he value remains
sunk or hidden with nothing on the asset side of th= e balance sheet=2E
We've got a CAPEX spend that has to be made up vi= a "OPEX returns" over
years=2E

But the asset is there= =2E

How do we do this?

Bob
___________= ____________________________________
Starlink mailing list
St= arlink@lists=2Ebufferbloat=2Enet
https://lists=2Ebufferbloat=2Enet/l= istinfo/starlink
------8KEW2SN0OM7P0PLBRLNUFG1620H4AX--