We think it makes sense for cost reduction for semi rural or suburban aerial distribution- reducing the fiber count to like. 12. Reduces costs dramatically vs say a 288 count and all the splicing. (Ribbons are better)
-Ben > On Dec 11, 2018, at 10:49 AM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > > >> On Dec 11, 2018, at 10:01 , Ben Cannon <b...@6by7.net> wrote: >> >> Sure but I can fit quite a lot of fiber in very little space. eg an 864 is >> approx 1” dia. >> >> Fan-outs can be done each floor, etc. And a single single mode strand has >> prodigious bandwidth available with the right optics. >> >> Bonus: if you did this 30 years ago, you’re still good. Anything else >> (remember FDDI grade Multi-mode?) is not future proof IMO. Basic 9/125 >> Singlemode always will be. >> >> In city wide deployments, a bit different, especially for eg residential >> service at economical pricing. GPON for sure has it’s place, I just don’t >> personally feel it’s inside a building all else being equal. > > I’d actually argue that even if you’re going to do GPON on a wide > distribution, the economics these days make a pretty good case for > future-proofing with home-run fiber and putting your splitters and GPON gear > in the same location. The link budgets turn out to be identical regardless of > how far upstream the splitter is and once you dig the trench, the cost of the > fiber itself is relatively cheap. > > Home run means you aren’t locked into the PON topology if something better > comes along in the future. It also opens up the potential to support > competition (which I realize may be considered a detractor by some). > > Owen > >> >> - Ben Cannon, AS15206 >> >>> On Dec 11, 2018, at 9:24 AM, Jason Lixfeld <jason+na...@lixfeld.ca> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Dec 11, 2018, at 11:32 AM, Ben Cannon <b...@6by7.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> Rip it out and run 9/125 SMF fiber home runs. Use BiDi SFPs to re-use your >>>> existing (likely SMF thankfully) cable plant. My opinion. >>> >>> There’s only so much space in conduits, risers and ducts. At some point, >>> scale would press this up against physical infrastructure realities >>> depending on how far the active gear at the head end is from the subscriber. >> >
