[160148] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Muni fiber: L1 or L2?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Jan 31 21:08:57 2013
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <201302010036.AAA08295@sunf10.rd.bbc.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:06:40 -0800
To: Brandon Butterworth <brandon@rd.bbc.co.uk>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jan 31, 2013, at 4:36 PM, Brandon Butterworth <brandon@rd.bbc.co.uk> =
wrote:
>> I'm saying you put the splitter next to the OLT and then
>> run multiple fibers from there to the subscribers IN THE MMR
>=20
> That's the way I'd expect it to be done if planning ahead,
> GPON is today technology and new things always come
>=20
> I can see why they don't do this though
>=20
> 1. reduced build cost today - smaller MMR, fewer fibres to the
> roadside.
Tradeoff: It only works for one provider and a competitive provider
has to put in their own full build of fiber.
>=20
> 2. gpon makes it harder for competing unbundlers to get share
> in your investment
>=20
Which is why this whole discussion is about ways to implement
an MMR and take the L1 out of the service provider picture and
make it an independent municipal service.
> 3. no home run fibres means no competitors running their own
> GPON or Ethernet. Why invest in making it easier for the
> competition
>=20
The point here is to eliminate that problem. Thank you for making
my point.
Owen
