[177972] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: FTTx Active-Ethernet Hardware
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Carlos Alcantar)
Wed Feb 11 00:11:39 2015
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: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 05:11:28 +0000
In-Reply-To: <54DA77AC.70704@seacom.mu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
We run Calix GPON / AE Platform works fairly nicely but does have it=B9s
cost.
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
<http://www.race.com/>
On 2/10/15, 1:27 PM, "Mark Tinka" <mark.tinka@seacom.mu> wrote:
>
>On 10/Feb/15 21:35, Frank Bulk wrote:
>> Unless each customer has in their own L3 domain, you'll also want some
>>kind
>> of L2 isolation between ports (and also MFF) and IP source address
>> verification (so that people can't spoof addresses) for both DHPC and
>>static
>> IP customers. And don't forget the IPv6 equivalents.
>
>You can get all that in a decent Active-E-based AN (as you would in a
>GPON AN). But then the price starts to go up if you want this in
>software as opposed to doing funky things.
>
>Cisco's ME2600X was, for me, one of the first proper Active-E FTTH AN's
>with features required in FTTH deployments (split horizon for Layer 2
>customer separation, DHCP Option 82 support, per-port level trTCM
>ingress and egress policing and queuing, EVC's, e.t.c.).
>
>I understand it is now being replaced by the ASR920, which is a little
>odd if you look at port density differences between the two alone.
>
>For the GPON-centric, it is also being replaced by Cisco's ME4605 GPON AN.
>
>Final date to buy any ME2600X's will be June 2015.
>
>Mark.
>
>
