1 / 40

KEYMILE

KEYMILE. FTTH/FTTB: Point to Point vs. PON. COMPARISON OF PON VERSUS PTP ETHERNET. Comparison of PON vs. PtP Ethernet. Bandwidth / Resilience. Network Components. Fibre-to-the-Building (FTTB). Commercial Aspects. Technical Summary. Power Consumption. COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET

mairwen
Download Presentation

KEYMILE

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. KEYMILE FTTH/FTTB: Point to Point vs. PON

  2. COMPARISON OFPON VERSUS PTP ETHERNET © KEYMILE

  3. Comparison of PON vs. PtP Ethernet Bandwidth / Resilience Network Components Fibre-to-the-Building (FTTB) Commercial Aspects Technical Summary Power Consumption © KEYMILE

  4. COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET • BANDWIDTH, RESILIENCE © KEYMILE

  5. Bandwidth Comparison 100/1000 Mbps 100/1000 Mbps DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM CPE 1 ... 480 subscriber lines Optical DSLAM ONT CPE ONT CPE 78 Mbps* 39 Mbps* 2.5 Gbps 1.25 Gbps DOWNSTREAM UPSTREAM DS US ONT SPLITTER 1 ... 32 subscriber lines/splitter GPON OLT * Depending on splitting factor © KEYMILE

  6. Bandwidth Comparison • GPON • Depending on splitting factor > typically 39 Mbps upstream / 78 Mbps downstream with 32 fold splitter • Not sufficient bandwidth for business customers and for further distribution e.g. for FTTB • Bandwidth upgrade means either • Change splitter fold + CPEs • Change OLT card + CPEs • PtP Ethernet • 100 Mbps / 1 Gbps symmetrical for upstream and downstream • Able to serve business customers • Bandwidth upgrade affects only one CPE and one DSLAM port © KEYMILE

  7. Resilience Comparison – Line Measurement Reflexion measurement easy due to point to point REFLECTED SIGNAL CPE 1 ... 480 subscriber lines Optical DSLAM CPE CPE ONT ONT Reflexion measurement complicated due to optical splitter ONT REFLECTED SIGNAL SPLITTER REFLECTED SIGNAL 1 ... 32 subscriber lines/splitter REFLECTED SIGNAL GPON OLT © KEYMILE

  8. Resilience Comparison – broken Line, bad Fibre Quality Only one customer connection affected CPE 1 ... 480 subscriber lines Optical DSLAM CPE CPE ONT ONT Depending on location up to 32 customer connections affected ONT SPLITTER 1 ... 32 subscriber lines/splitter GPON OLT © KEYMILE

  9. Resilience Comparison – defect CPE, unfriendly Attack Only one customer connection affected, easy to identify/isolate SIGNAL DIRECTED TO ONE DSLAM PORT CPE NO INFLUENCE 1 ... 480 subscriber lines Optical DSLAM NO INFLUENCE ONT CPE CPE ONT Continuous Signal from one CPE affects entire GPON port, difficult to identify/isolate ONT CONTINIOUS SIGNAL CONTINIOUS SIGNAL SPLITTER TRAFFIC BLOCKED 1 ... 32 subscriber lines/splitter TRAFFIC BLOCKED GPON OLT © KEYMILE

  10. Telecom Italia Study regarding GPON Safety Source: ETSI Security Workshop, France, January 2009 © KEYMILE

  11. Resilience Comparison • GPON • Due to optical splitter 32 customers are using a shared medium • Line qualification and maintenance difficult • Failures or unfriendly attacks could affect the entire PON system and all connected customers • Not acceptable for business customers • PtP Ethernet • Line qualification and maintenance on single fibre connections well known • Failures only affects one line and customer • Unfriendly attack can be identified through standard security mechanism © KEYMILE

  12. COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET • NETWORK COMPONENTS © KEYMILE

  13. Network Components ETHERNET PtP CPE Optical DSLAM PON ONT SPLITTER GPON OLT © KEYMILE

  14. Network Component Comparison – Central Location (OLT) • GPON OLT • New system architecture, often different platform for business customers needed • Fixed line rates on OLT ports (GPON, EPON, ...) • GPON Network management, different operational processes • PtP Ethernet (KEYMILE) • Optical DSLAM, same architecture and chassis as copper DSLAM • 100 Mbps / 1 Gbps symmetrical for upstream and downstream switchable speed for each optical interface (subrates can be configured) • Same Network management, configuration and operation exactly identical compared to xDSL DSLAM © KEYMILE

  15. Network Component Comparison – Customer Equipment (ONT, CPE) • GPON ONT • Vendor dependant devices, ONT portfolio limited • Operates on full OLT downstream speed(GPON: 2.5 Gbps) • Depends on GPON NMS • Price evolution vendor dependant • PtP Ethernet • Vendor independent through Ethernet standard interfaces • Price evolution:Price decrease through tough competition • Could support e.g. TR069 (remote modem configuration) • Cheapest device:Lowest cost media converter 30-50 $ CPE ONT © KEYMILE

  16. Network Component Comparison – Optical Splitter • GPON • Passive optical device but effects optical parameters • Wavelength dependent attenuation • Limits transmission range • Must be removed, if network shall be upgraded to Ethernet Point-to-Point • Eventually needs to be changed for PON upgrade • PtP Ethernet • Not needed © KEYMILE

  17. GPON versus Ethernet-PtP: Vendor Interoperability GPON • GPON is standardized acc. ITU-T G.984.2 • In practice there is no interoperability between different GPON vendors given ONT <> OLT • Due to system aspects also in future the optimal performance of a GPON system can only provided by one vendor delivering the ONT and OLT Ethernet-PtP • Optical Ethernet Interfaces are standardized acc. IEEE 802.3 • Interoperability has been proven in practice by lots of vendors for years – due to optical Ethernet interfaces are used in transport networks for a long time © KEYMILE

  18. COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET • FIBRE-TO-THE-BUILDING (FTTB) © KEYMILE

  19. Fibre-to-the-Building (FTTB) – Challenges • Questions to be answered • How to connect the different buildings – for each household one fibre or per building one fibre? • How to connect subscriber inside buildings – copper pairs, fibre or Ethernet cables? 1 – 2 households OLT 3 – 16 households 16 – x households © KEYMILE

  20. Fibre-to-the-Building in GPON Networks * New GPON systems allow dynamic bandwidth allocation Standard interface:78 Mbps downstream speed is shared by all customers* Several lines can not be used due to increased bandwidth on other lines* 1 – 2 households GPON OLT ONT ONT ONT 3 – 16 households ONT Direct OLT connection possible – but expensive Enhanced interface:n x 78 Mbps downstream speed is shared by all customers* 16 – x households © KEYMILE

  21. Fibre-to-the-Building in PtP Ethernet Networks For all scenarios the appropriate line speed can be used Operate at 100 Mbps 1 – 2 households Optical DSLAM Operate at 100 Mbps Operate at 100 Mbps up to 1 GbE ONT ONT ONT 3 – 16 households ONT Operate at full GbE 16 – x households NTU = Network Termination Unit (VDSL2 or Ethernet) © KEYMILE

  22. Homes passed – Homes connected influence in GPON Networks GPON OLT Even for customers without service, a splitter port is occupied and the OLT port needs to be operated Customer out of service Customer in service © KEYMILE

  23. Homes passed – Homes connected influence in PtP Networks Optical DSLAM Customer out of service Customers without service don’t need to be connected to a DSLAM port Customer in service © KEYMILE

  24. FTTB Architecture Comparison • GPON • OLT up- and downstream line rate is fixed to 1.25/2.5 Gbps (GPON) • Customer line rate depends on splitting factor and ONT capacity • For ONTs taking more than one timeslot (upstream), bandwidth for other users need to be reduced or oversubscription has to be activated (DBA) • Customers without service (homes passed) are occupying a splitter port and 1/32 from the OLT port • PtP Ethernet • Line rate can be switched for each customer from 100 Mbps to 1 GbE • Due to direct point to point connections each customer line can be upgraded individually • Only customer in service have to be connected © KEYMILE

  25. COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET • POWER CONSUMPTION © KEYMILE

  26. Comparison: Power Consumption – Basic Information • GPON • Due to the splitter inside the passive network the laser power is much higher on OLT and ONT side • The optical splitter has the same insertion loss in both directions and depends on the splitting factor (32-fold splitter: ca. 17 dB) • GPON needs about 22 W per GPON port • 32-fold splitter: 0.7 W per port • 16-fold splitter: 1.4 W per port • GPON simple CPE: 10 W consumption • PtP Ethernet • New low power designs require less laser power: KEYMILE typical 1.5 W for 100 Mbps • Ethernet PtP simple CPE: 3 W consumption © KEYMILE

  27. Comparison: Power Consumption GPON versus PtP – Compared Bandwidth © KEYMILE

  28. Comparison: Power Consumption – Practical Case • GPON • In a typical GPON deployment there are unused splitter ports due to a not 100% customer take rate • Calculation Basis: • Homes passed. 100% • Homes connected: 30% • PtP Ethernet • In an Ethernet PtP environment only the subscribers which are taking the service are connected to an active port © KEYMILE

  29. Comparison: Power Consumption GPON versus PtP – Practical Case © KEYMILE

  30. COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET • TECHNICAL SUMMARY © KEYMILE

  31. FTTx: PON vs. Point-to-Point (PtP) © KEYMILE

  32. PON vs. PtP Ethernet – Technical Summary © KEYMILE

  33. COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET • COMMERCIAL ASPECTS © KEYMILE

  34. PON vs. PtP Ethernet – CAPEX • PON Infrastructure • Cheaper for the initial investment > optical splitters are saving number of fibres in the aggregation network • Passive splitter to be changed or removed in the network for bandwidth upgrade • Upgrade to PtP infrastructure needs additional investments • PtP Infrastructure • Needs about 5% more initial investment • From the first day on the most sustainable infrastructure – lives for the next 20 – xx years • The passive infrastructure takes 75% - 85% of the total investment © KEYMILE

  35. The right Investment in optical Networks • Laying optical fibres causes the major share of costs • Important: choose the right topology now (Compare Ethernet shared medium with PtP) • Any network architecture has to be future-proof for the next 20 to 30 years • Today’s optical fibres (single mode) have an almost unlimited transport capacity:160 colours@10 Gbps = 1.6 Tbps) • FTTC demands much lower investments • The right way for an evolutionary approach • Further investments into the network structure will follow after 5 to 10 years © KEYMILE

  36. PON vs. PtP Ethernet – CAPEX • PON Equipment • Cheaper for the initial investment for pure residential applications > uses less number of lasers in OLT • Depending on FFTB and business customer strategy CAPEX will be heavily increased • Complete Equipment comes from one vendor – normal price erosion in question • PtP Equipment • Initial investment higher for pure residential applications due to number of lasers • Advantages for business applications and FTTB connections • The equipment costs are only15% - 25% of the total investment © KEYMILE

  37. PON vs. PtP Ethernet – OPEX • PON Equipment • Needs less installation space • Maintenance and failure localisation takes more time • New system concept needs dedicated skills and different way of operation • PtP Equipment • Needs more installation space • Easy operation of customer lines due to point to point connection • Same operational concept like today for residential and business customers Optical DSLAM © KEYMILE

  38. PON vs. PtP Ethernet – Commercial Summary Do not compare only port prices – Compare all aspects in a real network environment © KEYMILE

  39. CONCLUSION © KEYMILE

  40. Conclusion • FTTx investments are mandatory to ensure operators’ revenues • FTTB/FTTH point-to-point is the network architecture of the future • PtP Ethernet technology offers the best scalability and is future proof for a FTTB/FTTH point-to-point applications • For a sustainable fibre network strategy PtP Ethernet delivers cost effective solutions • KEYMILE delivers a complete product spectrum for FTTH / FTTB applications © KEYMILE

More Related