nanog mailing list archives
Re: FTTH Active vs Passive
From: Scott Brown/Clack/ESD <SBrown () clackesd k12 or us>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 12:28:14 -0800
You could deploy 2 or 3 strands and get more bandwidth to the customer, using perhaps less expensive hardware, or you could maintain fewer
strands
in the ground and depend on equipment manufactures to maintain an
adequate
growth in bandwidth capabilities. Neither approach is going to work for everyone. -- Dan White
At my previous job we were deploying a hybrid system - a mix of active and PON depending on the requirements of the customer. For the active systems it wasn't homerun fiber back to the main CO - we had a nice ring of fiber to key locations in the City and then we would place a ped where the spurs would connect to. Top that off with a CISCO Wireless Mesh overlay and no matter what speed and mobility you needed you could get it somehow... Our only limit (at the time I left) was upstream to the Internet. --Scott
Current thread:
- RE: FTTH Active vs Passive, (continued)
- RE: FTTH Active vs Passive Holmes,David A (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Jack Bates (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Alexander Harrowell (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Delian Delchev (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Fletcher Kittredge (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Robert Mathews (OSIA) (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Randy Bush (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 02)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Dan White (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Scott Brown/Clack/ESD (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive bmanning (Dec 01)
- Re: FTTH Active vs Passive Jared Mauch (Dec 01)
