|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: carlos@race.com From: Carlos Alcantar <carlos@race.com> To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org> Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 19:51:06 +0000 In-Reply-To: <000501cf66d6$6eb1e320$4c15a960$@iname.com> Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org +1 here we do the same exact thing with our ftth and ont=B9s separate vlan with h.248 gw=B9s sitting on it and you just point the profile of the voice port to the gw. There is a reason why they are doing things this way, as current regulation does not force them to give you access to there fiber network. Carlos Alcantar Race Communications / Race Team Member 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / carlos@race.com / http://www.race.com On 5/3/14, 6:48 AM, "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk@iname.com> wrote: >We use H.248 in our CLEC area. The voice service for that ONT runs on a >specified VLAN for that ONT, so if we had to share our infrastructure with >other CLECs we could do that. > >Frank > >-----Original Message----- >From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Francois >Mezei >Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 10:50 PM >To: nanog@nanog.org >Subject: CLEC and FTTP H.248/Megaco > >I need a sanity check. > >An incumbent in Canada has revealed that its voice service on FTTP >deployments is based on H.248 MEGACO (Media Gateway Controller). > >Are there any examples of CLEC access to such FTTP deployments ? > >(for instance, an area where the copper was removed, leaving only fibre >to homes, do CLECs retain competitive access via fibre to homes, or is >it going out of business or going with pure SIP/VoIP over the regular >internet connection, instead of using the "quality" voice link in the >GPON with garanteed bandwidth ? > >Can this protocol support the programming of one OLT/MG connecting to >the Telco's MGC, while the OLT/MG next door connects to the CLEC's MGC ? > >Or does the protocol result in MG's "discovering" the nearest MGC and >connecting to it (making it hard to have multiple MGCs from competing >telcos). > > > > >I have been lead to believe that most OLTs came with a SIP based ATA. It >appears that H.248 is more telco friendly and scales better. Does this >mean that H.248 is more widely deployed in FTTH ? > > > >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |