Hi Joel,
> On Dec 17, 2021, at 09:36, Joel Wirāmu Pauling <j...@aenertia.net> wrote:
>
> The XG PON ONT units from Nokia/Huawei are coming with only 10G NbaseT
> (usually singular port) only in the consumer access space. No SFP+
Yes, ISPs are not that keen on distributing SFP/SFP+ modules, but there are
some CPE that already come with SFP ports (AVM's Fritzbox 5530 Fiber, Telekom's
Speedport Pro), IMHO only a question of time until these or their successors
will sport SFP+ cages. I probably should add, that Germany (in unusual
leadership in consumer-focus) actually has a "router-freedom" rule on the
books, requiring ISPs to allow end-users to use any (compatible) router they
like, and there is a current discussion about extending this right to choose
your own also to ONTs; and at least in the enthusiasts' circles there seems to
be a desire to use SFP-type ONTs to directly add to the router. (Personally I
have no strong opinion on this, and will probably happily use my ISP's ONT once
FTTH comes to my home, but I clearly see others already jumping through hoops
to use SFP-GPON-ONTs).
>
> We have rolled out XG PON on the PON side to 70% of the country here (NZ)
> over the last 2 years. Only a small % of that are actually making use of the
> XGPON on the consumer side
So these are OLT's then that allow simultaneous GPON and XGPON? Any
idea how much more expensive such OLTs are compared to either pure GPON or pure
XGPON OLT's and do you know whether XGPON capability is something an ISP needs
to pay for per connected customer (so some sort of per-user license)?
> and retailers vary in offering it as a service mainly due to having to truck
> roll a new ONT and lack of in home 10G kit on the market. But the access
> network is there.
Sweet! Sees like a reasonably forward looking deployment! That is
something probably going to happen here as well, but since almost all CPE are
explicitly rented out for an additional fee from the ISP (and shipping is
charged extra) I do not think that the "truck-roll" part is going to be a big
hurdle (not that any ISP here actually offers XGPON, but at least they are
testing it).
>
> Similar stories in other regions I know of that offer XGPon - lack of
> consumer demand, lack of ONTs in the market that are suitable for residential
> use.
Yah, I am not surprised, you need to invest heavily into the home
network before > 1 Gbps access results in any noticeable improvement, and IMHO
there are diminishing returns for adding more "bandwidth" to a link. E.g. I am
currently on a 100/40 plan, so a far cry from GPON's local max of 1000/200 let
alone XGSPONs yet unkown rate-plans, but I rarely think "if I only had faster
internet access" (I will still switch to FTTH ASAP, since I would like not
having to bother/monitor the DSL link parameters to check for errors and
changes in sync rates).
Best Regards
Sebastian
>
>
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 9:18 pm Sebastian Moeller, <moell...@gmx.de> wrote:
> To add to Joel's point,
>
> I can do my own catX cable runs and connect sockets/plugs to the cables, but
> I lack the tools for fiber-splicing... as cool as that would be it is going
> to be hard to justify multi-100s EUR for a splicer.. That still leaves short
> distance in the main computing area of an appartment/house, but I doubt that
> many consumers have a concentration high enough to justify the costs even
> there.
>
> What I do see over here in Europe, with FTTH-roll out speeding up, is CPE
> that offer SFP/SFP+ cages for the WAN side though, SFP+ becoming more common
> since ISPs started to deploy XGS-PON (gross 10Gpbs bidirectionally, after FEC
> ~8.5 Gbps).
>
>
> Regards
> Sebastian
>
> P.S.: I have not started jumping on the 2.5 Gbps or higher train just yet,
> none of my devices seems massively underserved with just 1Gbps yet (with the
> potential exception of a single link where >= 2Gbps would be nice since I am
> one cabe short and >2Gbps would allow to multiplex two 1Gbps connections over
> that cable).
>
>
> > On Dec 16, 2021, at 22:57, Joel Wirāmu Pauling <j...@aenertia.net> wrote:
> >
> > Yes but as much as I like fibre; it's too fragile for the average household
> > structured cabling real world use case. Not to mention nothing consumwe
> > comes with SFP+ in the home space.
> >
> > On Fri, 17 Dec 2021, 10:43 am David Lang, <da...@lang.hm> wrote:
> > another valuable featur of fiber for home use is that fiber can't
> > contribute to
> > ground loops the way that copper cables can.
> >
> > and for the paranoid (like me :-) ) fiber also means that any electrical
> > disaster that happens to one end won't propgate through and fry other
> > equipment
> >
> > David Lang
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Dec 2021, David P. Reed wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks, That's good to know...The whole SFP+ adapter concept has seemed
> > > to me to be a "tweener" in hardware design space. Too many failure
> > > points. That said, I like fiber's properties as a medium for distances.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thursday, December 16, 2021 2:31pm, "Joel Wirāmu Pauling"
> > > <j...@aenertia.net> said:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Heat issues you mention with UTP are gone; with the [ 803.bz ](
> > > http://803.bz ) stuff (i.e Base-N).
> > > It was mostly due to the 10G-Base-T spec being old and out of line with
> > > the SFP+ spec ; which led to higher power consumption than SFP+ cages
> > > were rated to draw and aforementioned heat problems; this is not a
> > > problem with newer kit.
> > > It went away with the move to smaller silicon processes and now UTP based
> > > 10G in the home devices are more common and don't suffer from the
> > > fragility issues of the earlier copper based 10G spec. The AQC chipsets
> > > were the first to introduce it but most other vendors have finally picked
> > > it up after 5 years or feet dragging.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 7:16 AM David P. Reed <[ dpr...@deepplum.com ](
> > > mailto:dpr...@deepplum.com )> wrote:
> > > Yes, it's very cheap and getting cheaper.
> > >
> > > Since its price fell to the point I thought was cheap, my home has a 10
> > > GigE fiber backbone, 2 switches in my main centers of computers, lots of
> > > 10 GigE NICs in servers, and even dual 10 GigE adapters in a Thunderbolt
> > > 3 external adapter for my primary desktop, which is a Skull Canyon NUC.
> > >
> > > I strongly recommend people use fiber and sfp+ DAC cabling because
> > > twisted pair, while cheaper, actually is problematic at speeds above 1
> > > Gig - mostly due to power and heat.
> > >
> > > BTW, it's worth pointing out that USB 3.1 can handle 10 Gb/sec, too, and
> > > USB-C connectors and cables can carry Thunderbolt at higher rates. Those
> > > adapters are REALLY CHEAP. There's nothing inherently different about the
> > > electronics, if anything, USB 3.1 is more complicate logic than the
> > > ethernet MAC.
> > >
> > > So the reason 10 GigE is still far more expensive than USB 3.1 is mainly
> > > market volume - if 10 GigE were a consumer product, not a datacenter
> > > product, you'd think it would already be as cheap as USB 3.1 in computers
> > > and switches.
> > >
> > > Since DOCSIS can support up to 5 Gb/s, I think, when will Internet Access
> > > Providers start offering "Cable Modems" that support customers who want
> > > more than "a full Gig"? Given all the current DOCSIS 3 CMTS's etc. out
> > > there, it's just a configuration change.
> > >
> > > So when will consumer "routers" support 5 Gig, 10 Gig?
> > >
> > > On Thursday, December 16, 2021 11:20am, "Dave Taht" <[
> > > dave.t...@gmail.com ]( mailto:dave.t...@gmail.com )> said:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> has really got cheap.
> > >>
> > >> [ https://www.tomshardware.com/news/innodisk-m2-2280-10gbe-adapter ](
> > >> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/innodisk-m2-2280-10gbe-adapter )
> > >>
> > >> On the other hand users are reporting issues with actually using
> > >> 2.5ghz cable with this router in particular, halving the achieved rate
> > >> by negotiating 2.5gbit vs negotiating 1gbit.
> > >>
> > >> [ https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=179145#p897836 ](
> > >> https://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?t=179145#p897836 )
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> I tried to build a better future, a few times:
> > >> [ https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org ](
> > >> https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org )
> > >>
> > >> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > >> [ Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net ](
> > >> mailto:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net )
> > >> [ https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel ](
> > >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel )
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > > [ Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net ](
> > > mailto:Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net )
> > > [ https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel ](
> > > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> > > )_______________________________________________
> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Cerowrt-devel mailing list
Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
