FTTH/FTTB Basics & Solutions

Report
KEYMILE
FTTH/FTTB: Point to Point vs. PON
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
COMMERCIAL
COMPARISON OF
PON VERSUS PTP ETHERNET
18.03.2011
I Page 2
© KEYMILE
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
Comparison of PON vs. PtP Ethernet
Bandwidth / Resilience
Network Components
Fibre-to-the-Building (FTTB)
Power Consumption
Technical Summary
Commercial Aspects
18.03.2011
I Page 3
© KEYMILE
TV SERVICES
COMMERCIAL
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET
BANDWIDTH, RESILIENCE
18.03.2011
I Page 4
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
Bandwidth Comparison
100/1000 Mbps
100/1000 Mbps
DOWNSTREAM
UPSTREAM
1 ... 480 subscriber lines
DOWNSTREAM
39 Mbps*
UPSTREAM
1 ... 32 subscriber lines/splitter
* Depending on splitting factor
18.03.2011
I Page 5
2.5 Gbps
© KEYMILE
DS
SPLITTER
78 Mbps*
1.25 Gbps
US
TV SERVICES
COMMERCIAL
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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
18.03.2011
I Page 6
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
Resilience Comparison – Line Measurement
Reflexion measurement easy due to point to point
REFLECTED SIGNAL
1 ... 480 subscriber lines
REFLECTED SIGNAL
REFLECTED SIGNAL
1 ... 32 subscriber lines/splitter
REFLECTED SIGNAL
18.03.2011
I Page 7
© KEYMILE
SPLITTER
Reflexion measurement complicated due to optical splitter
TV SERVICES
COMMERCIAL
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
Resilience Comparison – broken Line, bad Fibre Quality
Only one customer connection affected
1 ... 480 subscriber lines
1 ... 32 subscriber lines/splitter
18.03.2011
I Page 8
© KEYMILE
SPLITTER
Depending on location up to 32 customer connections affected
TV SERVICES
COMMERCIAL
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
Resilience Comparison – defect CPE, unfriendly Attack
Only one customer connection affected, easy to identify/isolate
SIGNAL DIRECTED TO ONE DSLAM PORT
NO INFLUENCE
1 ... 480 subscriber lines
NO INFLUENCE
CONTINIOUS SIGNAL
TRAFFIC BLOCKED
1 ... 32 subscriber lines/splitter
TRAFFIC BLOCKED
18.03.2011
I Page 9
© KEYMILE
SPLITTER
Continuous Signal from one CPE affects entire GPON port,
difficult to identify/isolate
CONTINIOUS SIGNAL
TV SERVICES
COMMERCIAL
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
Telecom Italia Study regarding GPON Safety
Source: ETSI Security Workshop, France, January 2009
18.03.2011
I Page 10
© KEYMILE
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
COMMERCIAL
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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
18.03.2011
I Page 11
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET
NETWORK COMPONENTS
18.03.2011
I Page 12
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
Network Components
ETHERNET PtP
SPLITTER
PON
18.03.2011
I Page 13
© KEYMILE
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
COMMERCIAL
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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
18.03.2011
I Page 14
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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 $
18.03.2011
I Page 15
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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

18.03.2011
I Page 16
© KEYMILE
Not needed
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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
18.03.2011
I Page 17
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET
FIBRE-TO-THE-BUILDING (FTTB)
18.03.2011
I Page 18
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
COMMERCIAL
Fibre-to-the-Building (FTTB) – Challenges
 Questions to be answered
18.03.2011
I Page 19

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?
© KEYMILE
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
Fibre-to-the-Building in GPON Networks
Standard interface:
78 Mbps downstream speed is shared by all customers*
* New GPON systems allow dynamic bandwidth allocation
Several lines can not be used
due to increased bandwidth on other lines*
Direct OLT connection
possible – but expensive
Enhanced interface:
n x 78 Mbps downstream speed is shared by all customers*
18.03.2011
I Page 20
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
Fibre-to-the-Building in PtP Ethernet Networks
For all scenarios the appropriate line speed can be used
Operate at 100 Mbps
Operate at 100 Mbps
Operate at 100 Mbps
up to 1 GbE
Operate at full GbE
NTU = Network Termination Unit (VDSL2 or Ethernet)
18.03.2011
I Page 21
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
Homes passed – Homes connected influence in GPON Networks
Even for customers without service, a splitter port is occupied
and the OLT port needs to be operated
18.03.2011
I Page 22
© KEYMILE
Customer out of service
Customer in service
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
Homes passed – Homes connected influence in PtP Networks
Customers without service don’t need to be connected to a DSLAM port
18.03.2011
I Page 23
© KEYMILE
Customer out of service
Customer in service
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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



18.03.2011
I Page 24
© KEYMILE
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
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET
POWER CONSUMPTION
18.03.2011
I Page 25
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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
18.03.2011
I Page 26
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
Comparison: Power Consumption GPON versus PtP – Compared Bandwidth
Power Consumption per Subscriber in W
12
11.4
10.7
10
10
10
8
6
6
OLT
CPE
4.5
Total
4
3
2
3
3
1.5
1.4
0.7
0
GPON - 32 Splitter
18.03.2011
I Page 27
GPON - 16 Splitter
© KEYMILE
Ethernet PtP 100 Mbit/s
KEYMILE
Ethernet PtP 100 Mbit/s
Competitor
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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

18.03.2011
I Page 28
© KEYMILE
In an Ethernet PtP environment only the
subscribers which are taking the service are
connected to an active port
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
Comparison: Power Consumption GPON versus PtP – Practical Case
Power Consupmtion per connected Subscriber in W
30 % Homes connected
16
14.66
14
12.33
12
10
10
10
OLT
8
6.5
Total
6
4.66
4.5
4
3
3.5
3
2.33
1.5
2
0
GPON - 32 Splitter
18.03.2011
CPE
I Page 29
GPON - 16 Splitter
© KEYMILE
Ethernet PtP 100 Mbit/s
KEYMILE
Ethernet PtP 100 Mbit/s
Competitor
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET
TECHNICAL SUMMARY
18.03.2011
I Page 30
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
FTTx: PON vs. Point-to-Point (PtP)
PON
PtP
Number of optical
interfaces (CO)
low
high (1:1)
TV support
IPTV/CATV
(Broadcast support)
IPTV/CATV
(Broadcast support)
LLU
Not supported
supported
Flexibility
low
high
(architecture, technology,
Subscriber basis)
technical upgrade of OLT leads to replacement
of all ONUs
per subscriber
Resilience
Low
high
one faulty ONU can jeopardize the whole PON
individual subscribers can be isolated –
no impact on the whole region
complex
simple
Trouble shooting
18.03.2011
I Page 31
But higher demand on ONU
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
PON vs. PtP Ethernet – Technical Summary
Bandwidth
Standard
Conformance
PON
PtP Ethernet
18.03.2011
I Page 32
© KEYMILE
Resilience
Troubleshooting
Maintenance
Upgradeability
Flexibility
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
COMPARISON PON VS PTP ETHERNET
COMMERCIAL ASPECTS
18.03.2011
I Page 33
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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
 The passive infrastructure takes
75% - 85% of the total investment
18.03.2011
I Page 34
 PtP Infrastructure

Needs about 5% more initial investment
 From the first day on the most sustainable
infrastructure – lives for the next 20 – xx years
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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 [email protected] 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
18.03.2011
I Page 35
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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
 The equipment costs are only
15% - 25% of the total investment
18.03.2011
I Page 36
 PtP Equipment

Initial investment higher for pure residential
applications due to number of lasers
 Advantages for business applications and FTTB
connections
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
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
18.03.2011
I Page 37
© KEYMILE
CONTENT
MOTIVATION
NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
BANDWIDTH/RESILIENCE
COMPARISION PON VS PTP
COMPONENTS
FTTB
KEYMILE SOLUTION
CONSUMPTION
TECHNICS
TV SERVICES
CONCLUSION
COMMERCIAL
PON vs. PtP Ethernet – Commercial Summary
Pure Residential,
Low Bandwidth
3 Years Horizon
Residential,
Business, FTTB
medium Bandwidth
5 Years Horizon
All Applications
High Bandwidth
Sustainability
10 – 20 Years Horizon
PON
PtP Ethernet
Do not compare only port prices – Compare all aspects in a real network environment
18.03.2011
I Page 38
© KEYMILE
CONCLUSION
18.03.2011
I Page 39
© KEYMILE
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
18.03.2011
I Page 40
© KEYMILE

similar documents