Sagemcom defective bridge mode and port forwarding... - Bell Canada

Author	All Replies
kovy join:2009-03-26 kudos:8	reply to Gone Re: Sagemcom defective bridge mode and port forwarding... said by Gone: Fair enough. If it's not a matter of swapping out shelves and then laying the fibre infrastructure to the home, what else is involved? At the CO ? The actual equipment is all at the CO... these things are a different monster all together. Just for telephone service... it's no longer the same equipment giving the dial tone. And there's a fiber splitter somewhere outside. Also, there's a few equipment needed to install at the customer.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 14:51:21 ·
BliZZardX Premium join:2002-08-18 Toronto, ON Reviews: ·WIND Mobile ·Bell Sympatico	reply to Gone Rogers buries cables all the time, the permits are very inexpensive. Since the ground is warming up again there's actually a line burial job ad up for one of their contractors now »toronto.kijiji.ca/c-jobs-constru···67932442 IMO the cost of doing FTTH now with borrowing costs as low as they are is almost always less than doing DSL then scrapping it in 5 years to convert to GPON. There was also a Bell tech here awhile ago saying they have started replacing old copper lines that failed with fiber.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 15:03:52 ·
Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews: ·Start Communicat..	reply to kovy I would expect the dialtone side would be something IP based with the ONU handling the conversion for distribution to internal copper wiring. As I understand it the data/television side should be the same Alcatel headend equipment at the CO regardless of whether the final segment to the customer is being delivered by copper or by fibre. The only thing that changes is what's outside the plant. If it's copper it should be a 7330, if it's fibre it should be a 7340. I suppose without the distance limitations you could put the 7340s right into the CO, though.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 15:04:52 ·
kovy join:2009-03-26 kudos:8	said by Gone: I would expect the dialtone side would be something IP based with the ONU handling the conversion for distribution to internal copper wiring. As I understand it the data/television side should be the same Alcatel headend equipment at the CO regardless of whether the final segment to the customer is being delivered by copper or by fibre. The only thing that changes is what's outside the plant. If it's copper it should be a 7330, if it's fibre it should be a 7340. I suppose without the distance limitations you could put the 7340s right into the CO, though. I'm pretty sure the equipement at the CO needs to be changed in order to handle 175/175mbps profiles and probably more into the future. Also I'm pretty sure puting multiple 7342 into JWI would be more costing the puting it straight at the CO.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 15:09:21 ·

Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews: ·Start Communicat..	reply to BliZZardX said by BliZZardX: IMO the cost of doing FTTH now with borrowing costs as low as they are is almost always less than doing DSL then scrapping it in 5 years to convert to GPON. There was also a Bell tech here awhile ago saying they have started replacing old copper lines that failed with fiber. You're probably right, but as a simple matter of economics they'll stretch copper as far as they can before they give it up. If they can save a few bucks by only having to pay for the permits to get fibre from the CO to the OPI and then using what they already have from there to the subscriber, they will. We've got all sorts of FTTH down here in Niagara at various new developments, though. There's even a serviced area without any houses built on it here in Fort Erie that has the Bell fibre coiled up waiting for something to be built. More amusingly, there's a part of Niagara Falls on St. Michael Avenue where one part of the street is FTTH, a little further south one side of the street is VDSL2 with Fibe TV, and then the other side is only get 6/0.8k ADSL.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 15:10:34 ·
Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews: ·Start Communicat..	reply to kovy said by kovy: I'm pretty sure the equipement at the CO needs to be changed in order to handle 175/175mbps profiles and probably more into the future. Shouldn't need to. It's the same equipment headend equipment regardless of whether the subscriber is receiving VDSL2 or FTTH (I think it's a 7450?). What changes is the subscriber modules, be it a 7330 or a 7340. But, seeing as how fibre isn't limited by distance, they could put the 7340s right into the CO and run the fibre out from there rather than putting them in a box at the side of the road like they do for DSL.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 15:14:54 ·
kovy join:2009-03-26 kudos:8	said by Gone: said by kovy: I'm pretty sure the equipement at the CO needs to be changed in order to handle 175/175mbps profiles and probably more into the future. Shouldn't need to. It's the same equipment headend equipment regardless of whether the subscriber is receiving VDSL2 or FTTH (I think it's a 7450?). What changes is the subscriber modules, be it a 7330 or a 7340. But, seeing as how fibre isn't limited by distance, they could put the 7340s right into the CO and run the fibre out from there rather than putting them in a box at the side of the road like they do for DSL. It's a 7750 for FTTH. Well right now all the FTTH is at the CO except for the fiber splitter.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 15:19:09 ·
Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews: ·Start Communicat..	Right, the 7450 is the Ethernet switch and the 7750 is the router. You'd still use those even with just 7330s for copper deployments. But yeah, if distance isn't an issue you can locate all of the subscriber-end fibre equipment in the CO and then just split it once it gets into the neighbourhoods. But, as I was alluding to, you could bring that equipment out of the CO if you wanted to, but I suppose upon reflection you wouldn't really need to.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 15:30:15 ·
urbang33k join:2010-02-13 Canada kudos:1	reply to kovy Something makes me think, that some ftth in my neck of the woods is on a 7342 OLTS in the co - on my next fiber job I will confirm it. Which is also what the 7330's feed back to. I wonder if, the CO side being the same, they could theoretically unplug the fiber at the 7330 and plug in a GPON splitter if they wanted to convert to ftth? -- Opinions and ideas expressed in my post are my own and in no way represent those of Bell Canada Enterprises, Bell Canada, Bell TV, Bell Internet, Bell Mobility, Bell Technical Solutions, Expertech, or any other partners under the BCE umbrella.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 17:03:50 ·
Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews: ·Start Communicat..	said by urbang33k: I wonder if, the CO side being the same, they could theoretically unplug the fiber at the 7330 and plug in a GPON splitter if they wanted to convert to ftth? That's what I was trying to get at. The back-end infrastructure is already there and there's also neighbourhood side infrastructure already in place that can be converted from copper to fibre. It's just a matter of laying the physical cabling. I have to wonder how it works in a place like Fort Erie that has no Bell FTTN infrastructure at all but has areas that are wired up for FTTH once houses are built.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 17:42:35 ·
kovy join:2009-03-26 kudos:8	Well one thing for sure, this will never happen. This means Bell would open FTTH to everybody (wholesales)... heck even just the down time would be impossible. I'm pretty sure the way it's done in quebec city that they had to do a side by side network for not to have any impact for the customer. But for the heck of it... I'm not sure if replacing a 7330 by a 7342 is even possible to start out with. I don't think anybody here has the knowledge on both equipment of the hardware requirement around this question.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 18:25:36 ·
Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews: ·Start Communicat..	All of the American FTTH rollouts have been built alongside copper and once you get switched over to fibre you're never allowed back onto the copper network. Once they reach a certain point of voluntary transition they then make it mandatory for everyone to switch to fibre and then retire the copper network. I suspect Bell's overlays would be done in an identical way. From a purely hardware level it should be theoretically possible to replace the 7330. If you've already got fibre running to the OPI it's just a matter of splitting more fibre rather than switching to copper. Whether it is logistically possible is another matter entirely.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-24 18:42:08 ·
sunday8pm join:2010-05-24 Reviews: ·voip.ms	reply to kovy This works for me: Let the Sagemcom do its own PPPoE business Plug the router's WAN port in one LAN port of the Sagemcom Set the Sagemcom to assign a specific IP to the router Set the Sagemcom to have the router in the DMZ Do all the NAT, routing, QoS etc on the router itself Works perfectly for me, I am getting full speed and no NAT problems.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-25 23:43:28 ·
Gone Premium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3	You still have double NAT, which is far from ideal.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-25 23:45:21 ·
kovy join:2009-03-26 kudos:8	reply to sunday8pm said by sunday8pm: This works for me: Let the Sagemcom do its own PPPoE business Plug the router's WAN port in one LAN port of the Sagemcom Set the Sagemcom to assign a specific IP to the router Set the Sagemcom to have the router in the DMZ Do all the NAT, routing, QoS etc on the router itself Works perfectly for me, I am getting full speed and no NAT problems. If it's in DMZ in the router, isn't the sagemcom doing the routing and all ? Because for me it did... and couldn't portforward for my local PC when doing TeamSpeak server.
	to forum · permalink · 2013-03-26 08:20:54 ·

O Canada! > Canadian > Bell Canada > Sagemcom defective bridge mode and port forwarding...

Re: Sagemcom defective bridge mode and port forwarding...