From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.19]) (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 D2FEE3CB37; Fri, 17 Mar 2023 15:01:36 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1679079695; i=moeller0@gmx.de; bh=mywk9YA+xRio7/xl4M0EK3PiNYJ8VbD4zUzHpulY1ng=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=BQwcVijT1IgL8iulVop6C8/rCcSvrB/Tf7mW1f30iKX75ODoyh3Hji2/FE+NfGCt1 NX51ludbEOGy5BOL12BbYKANNckc6MatRLAiBY+FNgZoWhkV/BqqCgPrIvoj0eLzIw GKvpIC2a/HtZ4DOCIX8WMHhTuldEIp5AIbJN0SYYjoDSam/jcF9edMtrjCwApariMU zLFfiu/H83+ztXRXw0XzU8JvFCdwPNPrggoQjEgxdQpv0Z3OpUTbYhf0pD+P0dm9yJ 0+vaY71dXY9iotWtTaMVocAhqTe4+Ckt7NqvNsOSK16AqClZvyP9BomP/SmswcbKSA 0lWNTykOlWoyg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from smtpclient.apple ([95.116.92.219]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N0G1d-1qPHwn3rGx-00xNyK; Fri, 17 Mar 2023 20:01:34 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.2\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 20:01:34 +0100 Cc: Mike Puchol , Dave Taht via Starlink , Rpm , libreqos , bloat Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <8F56CCA3-61C4-475F-975D-99D851C6A7CF@gmx.de> References: <1672786712.106922180@apps.rackspace.com> <77CCAD19-07E0-4F9E-88C1-D207CF7BF376@cable.comcast.com> <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> To: =?utf-8?Q?Dave_T=C3=A4ht?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.2) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:G+B6fTli2FzHov/l0pr/qY/XlPpNsLri9ouBLID9bZnVkcvQyQL /RTDHFDtXnwdWrDOKJBA8+XugPIwiZkGDMNJe7yzj/yJxZB6EpgyIbgmncORTaBf3hI0whJ y9A6PsWJ349ZrKh2AZlwU8syWi6AWqcvgzJhO2zgac9UxdYvyao6MJy8Rle6m2V4J2wZhdd cgUDA7LF00vD99/0/RYKw== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:3GiDKtna/IE=;4+rMR24dNbt4iOT+MtosrZTJ8fV YHbJ+4sTx66UomIHnKmBADlwAFpb7wASTmXxRIgQC4fnPwG4fRdVNc9M5+aaO4FMnOl7LRy9t 79mhlULjuhqa9lXjOQJE8OWPBdzLL3msXZprsAONcUBtLFbfR+wL4W2qztaFSbTc/GVW8krkb tvaApL16ZtpDCo46Rz6/p6tAO+4ivRyYP2fhKPxR/OAG4kNvBSd3RcckI/xAuWGuU1eJKWKcI e/ROLqzo0mjiwmcX+pzUj5+alYDAwk3Dz53ep0AjTvcPNQ7Kf7U9gLeZcwXhw3j0FxQFGxwVn pNksKuEx6UmqB4Z2HJECX3vkN5C3au6lG13cybdBSr4rqxjxod+TAxWez87QaOwJc8SbOn+Mn ht942uYEZgdmOTPmm9XOi+AAyyqp2loVJer7ZZZjsoxvNmp7srWpO8zkaJUo8yfHfIgMQdNkW uRAFhZON//DsVX27choO9Ij1q2g4bBDba1HmXSwtNLAlK9AlK8LZtOQ8TyRL9mcNAW/mkgIrd bLxwLKrHQZR/xoI2ktVI3HCYjoAmG+QgnVPYQNMrWy0InfXEzFAa/mSOg6s3BSO61aIt2+UbV vjXHjGlLHGbPQF2jr/t+4pQR2O3r8oVMhTLJA701VFK6jOUGYSp2N9bHHtCGguQ54LQAtqYYq 0zS/ZAgonlQxljiuudgQTD8waXxNH2XuqlJBPlfmt5SnkIkD6Cv2S4XE2GKMdy0tybDlrkI0e ZMvR71vMitVfIID7WCdJwusFIrqHLtX8on8n09ZrQ9k6xsSVfRqenXWokQW7i3a/f6QLLIGdl KDX/nFjWvcwTeG/txrJuJyEDGu/DAUbD+DvxHh0n1WXtFTAdovPsvoLKvyiF/OTvTLj/jclya ot83WnITRL1Acsa3NNVJLakVaHtlhegls0Lb8yqlGvw3jhQRiL152YNCuwTZlcxl0tyg/26Yx 1GGze6CuywcTTk3Ir/FBNMNIKqw= 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: Fri, 17 Mar 2023 19:01:37 -0000 Hi Dave, > On Mar 17, 2023, at 17:38, Dave Taht via Starlink = wrote: >=20 > This is a pretty neat box: >=20 > https://mikrotik.com/product/netpower_lite_7r >=20 > What are the compelling arguments for fiber vs copper, again? As far as I can tell: Copper:=20 can carry electric power Fiber-PON:=20 much farther reach even without amplifiers (10 Km, 20 Km, ... = depending on loss budget) cheaper operation (less active power needed by the headend/OLT) less space need than all active alternatives (AON, copper = ethernet) likely only robust passive components in the field Existing upgrade path for 25G and 50G is on the horizon over the = same PON infrastructure mostly resistant to RF ingress along the path (as long as a = direct lightning hit does not melt the glas ;) ) Fiber-Ethernet:=20 like fiber-PON but=20 no density advantage (needs 1 port per end device) even wider upgrade paths I guess it really depends on how important "carry electric power" is to = you ;) feeding these from the client side is pretty cool for consenting = adults, but I would prefer not having to pay the electric bill for my = ISPs active gear in the field outside the CPE/ONT... Regards Sebastian >=20 >=20 > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 4:10=E2=80=AFAM Mike Puchol via Rpm = wrote: > Hi Bob, >=20 > You hit on a set of very valid points, which I'll complement with my = views on where the industry (the bit of it that affects WISPs) is = heading, and what I saw at the MWC in Barcelona. Love the FiWi term :-) >=20 > I have seen the vendors that supply WISPs, such as Ubiquiti, Cambium, = and Mimosa, but also newer entrants such as Tarana, increase the = performance and on-paper specs of their equipment. 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 them = a break-up fee if they don't return equipment, the economics work. >=20 > 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 = antenna that you mount on the roof), and supply ~2.5 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. >=20 > If every customer a WISP installs represents, say, $100 CAPEX at = install time ($50 for the antenna + cabling, router, etc), and you = charge a $30 install fee, you have $70 to recover, and you recover from = the monthly contribution the customer makes. If the contribution after = OPEX is, say, $10, it takes you 7 months to recover the full install = cost. Not bad, doable even in low-income markets. >=20 > Fast-forward to the next-generation version. 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 investors look for. >=20 > The focus, thereby, has to be the lever that has the largest effect on = the unit economics - which is the per-customer cost. I have drawn what = my ideal FiWi network would look like: >=20 >=20 > > 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). This OLT has = capacity for 64 ONUs on its single port. Instead of connecting the = typical fiber infrastructure with kilometers of cables which break, = require maintenance, etc. we insert an EPON to Ethernet converter (I = added "magic" because these don't exist AFAIK). >=20 > 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. Each ODU then has a reverse converter, which gives us EPON again. >=20 > Once we are back on EPON, we can insert splitters, for example, = pre-connectorized outdoor 1:16 boxes. Every customer install now = involves a 100 meter roll of pre-connectorized 2-core drop cable, and a = $20 EPON ONU.=20 >=20 > Using this deployment method, we could connect up to 16 customers to a = single $200 endpoint, so the enpoint CAPEX per customer is now $12.5. = Add the ONU, cable, etc. and we have a per-install CAPEX of $82.5 = (assuming the same $50 of extras we had before), and an even shorter = break-even. In addition, as the endpoints support higher capacity, we = can provision at least the same, if not more, capacity per customer. >=20 > Other advantages: the $200 ODU 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. As a result, churn has a much lower financial impact on the = operator. >=20 > 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. Having wireless hops and media = conversions will introduce latencies which can break down the = communications (e.g. one ONU may transmit, get delayed on the radio = link, and end up overlapping another ONU that transmitted on the next = slot). Thus, either the "magic" box needs to account for this, or an new = hybrid EPON-wireless protocol developed. >=20 > My main point here: the industry is moving away from the unconnected. = All the claims I heard and saw at MWC 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... >=20 > Best, >=20 > Mike > On Mar 14, 2023 at 05:27 +0100, rjmcmahon via Starlink = , wrote: >> To change the topic - curious to thoughts on FiWi. >>=20 >> Imagine a world with no copper cable called FiWi (Fiber,VCSEL/CMOS >> Radios, Antennas) and which is point to point inside a building >> connected to virtualized APs fiber hops away. Each remote radio head >> (RRH) would consume 5W or less and only when active. No need for = things >> like zigbee, or meshes, or threads as each radio has a fiber = connection >> via Corning's actifi or equivalent. Eliminate the AP/Client power >> imbalance. Plastics also can house smoke or other sensors. >>=20 >> Some reminders from Paul Baran in 1994 (and from David Reed) >>=20 >> o) Shorter range rf transceivers connected to fiber could produce a >> significant improvement - - tremendous improvement, really. >> 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. >> o) By authorizing high power to support a few users to reach slightly >> longer distances we deprive ourselves of the opportunity to serve the >> many. >> o) Communications systems can be built with 10dB ratio >> o) Digital transmission when properly done allows a small signal to >> noise ratio to be used successfully to retrieve an error free signal. >> o) And, never forget, any transmission capacity not used is wasted >> forever, like water over the dam. Not using such techniques represent >> lost opportunity. >>=20 >> And on waveguides: >>=20 >> o) "Fiber transmission loss is ~0.5dB/km for single mode fiber, >> independent of modulation" >> o) =E2=80=9CCopper cables and PCB traces are very frequency = dependent. At >> 100Gb/s, the loss is in dB/inch." >> o) "Free space: the power density of the radio waves decreases with = the >> square of distance from the transmitting antenna due to spreading of = the >> electromagnetic energy in space according to the inverse square law" >>=20 >> The sunk costs & long-lived parts of FiWi are the fiber and the CPE >> plastics & antennas, as CMOS radios+ & fiber/laser, e.g. VCSEL could = be >> pluggable, allowing for field upgrades. Just like swapping out SFP in = a >> data center. >>=20 >> This approach basically drives out WiFi latency by eliminating shared >> queues and increases capacity by orders of magnitude by leveraging = 10dB >> in the spatial dimension, all of which is achieved by a physical = design. >> Just place enough RRHs as needed (similar to a pop up sprinkler in an >> irrigation system.) >>=20 >> Start and build this for an MDU and the value of the building = improves. >> Sadly, there seems no way to capture that value other than over long >> term use. It doesn't matter whether the leader of the HOA tries to >> capture the value or if a last mile provider tries. The value remains >> sunk or hidden with nothing on the asset side of the balance sheet. >> We've got a CAPEX spend that has to be made up via "OPEX returns" = over >> years. >>=20 >> But the asset is there. >>=20 >> How do we do this? >>=20 >> Bob >> _______________________________________________ >> Starlink mailing list >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > _______________________________________________ > Rpm mailing list > Rpm@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/rpm >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Come Heckle Mar 6-9 at: https://www.understandinglatency.com/=20 > Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink