dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2241
share rss forum feed


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to nitzguy

Re: Start.ca - won't offer FTTH (Home)?

Deploying RFoG, at least to the pedestal, makes sense even for existing builds if they want to do stuff beyond 900-1GHz. At that point it's cheaper to do RFoG and only keep the coax from the pole to and into the home than it would be to completely groom and upgrade the entire coax network. This is only further compounded as node sizes continue to get smaller and smaller. Bell is in a completely different boat, switching copper out for fibre is indeed a very expensive venture. You'll probably see the cable companies switch out their coax for fibre before Bell does, the only difference will be that you won't ever know it.

And yeah, Fibrewired was the all-encompassing brand for all of the local municipal fibre networks across Ontario.


koreyb
Open the Canadian Market NOW

join:2005-01-08
East York, ON
Reviews:
·VMedia
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to BriEE

Hurontel, Wightman, etc have done true FTTH for a while now, moving into BELL areas with it, and it's worked well for them. Prices are actually very FAIR! My parents live in Goderich, which is a Bell area, but when you can get true FTTH, TV, Phone and Internet for 115 a month from Hurontel (not just a basic tv package) with FREE INSTALL, it was a very easy decision to make. If these small telcoms can do it, bell sure can!

I wish FTTH was available in all areas. I would Love to see TSI/start offer FTTH where I live I've often said, like sewage, water and hydro.. communities should install DARK FIBRE to each lot, going to one central location that ALL providers, pay to use to serve their customers. Price it at the cost it requires to keep the fibre system running, and upgraded. Each ISP would setup their own equipment on each end of the fibre line to supply service.


Toastertech
Premium
join:2003-01-05
Trenton, ON
reply to nitzguy

Isn't Vianet starting to offer FTTH in Sudbury and Chapleau also.



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

I believe they ripped out all their coax and replaced it with fibre in Chapleau, which could just be RFoG. Not sure what they're doing in Sudbury.


ZombieBanner

join:2012-11-14
Chatham, ON
reply to Toastertech

In Sudbury Vianet are laying fibre just like Bell Alliant, aerial but it seems the project is slow to get going, still very limited areas, and the bad part is every time I try to qualify an address they say no, so I'm asking where they do have service and wont tell me.

I was looking to buy a house in a neighbourhood with fibre, and the company wont even tell me where they currently have it installed.



FiberToTheX
Premium
join:2013-03-14
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

1 edit
reply to nitzguy

said by nitzguy:

said by Gone:

FCI - operating as Futureway - was the company and Rogers didn't fully purchase them until 2007. These guys were doing FTTH (as well as Fibre-to-the-Pedistal) in the late 90s. They contracted Rogers to supply TV with Futureway doing the phone directly, so Rogers outright buying them was a natural evolution. Some Futureway neighbourhoods had Futureway supply the Internet directly over fibre, others had Rogers do plain ol' DOCSIS using RFoG. TPIA will work in an RFoG area, but I can't speak for the other ones because I don't know what Rogers is doing now.

The interesting thing about those neighbourhoods is that there was (and some areas may still have) no Bell infrastructure.

FCI!...I knew there was an F in it...couldn't remember the rest....kept coming up with Fibrewired which I believe was in Hamilton as an arm of the former Hamilton Hydro/Utilities...anywho...

This RF over Glass looks interesting...but you guys forget something.

The same reason why Bell hasn't deployed wide scale FTTH is going to be the same reason that Rogers won't (in currently built neighbourhoods of course)....cost.

They have a perfectly decent Coax network out there now...and to flip around and have the capital cost that they'd incur...will just not fly. Again, in new installations, it makes sense...but retrofitting, especially apartment buildings...with their myriad of issues in regards to ownership and access....I see it happenning, but not in the next 20 years unfortunately....because the cable co's just finished spending money about 10 years ago to upgrade their coax network....and most canadian telecom companies love to squeeze every last cent out of their networks before they even think of spending anything...

Telus in the 1990's began laying massive amounts Fiber Optic cable around Toronto and finished it sometime during the dot-com bubble bust of around 2001-2002. Some portions were re-used in Cityplace but most of it is Dark fiber currently. I believe Beanfield may be using it right now with Lofts and Condo's but I cannot confirm it.

The earliest use of transport fiber optic use was by Saskatchewan and Saskatchewan , Manitoba and the Maritime Provinces are leading in terms of Canadian FTTH deployment with Manitoba/Saskatechwan aiming to finish by 2017/2018 for all major cities/population centers.

FTTH costs are actually much lower in the long-run than that of deploying coax or copper and retro-fitting it. Vectoring DSL is just another example of how DSL technology although outdated and ancient is still trying to be shoved to the masses through small-scale modernization technology and programs. It also isn't that expensive to introduce FTTH to existing homes either through trenching or aerial deployment. Just look at the examples of Bell Aliant which has covered 670,000 Households in a period of roughly 3-4 Years. Progress is a bit slower with Sasktel but they have already covered significant portions of Regina and Saskatoon with the remaining slated for 2014-2017 if they still can meet the roadmap.

Also there is no need to defend or support Canada's coaxial or DSL networks currently. They are ancient/pre-historic technologies that are under-maintained and/or oversubscribed. Think of the analogy of the band-aid solution and FTTN and higher dsl/cable internet bandwidth plans. The modernization capability for those technologies is practically finished and they will never be able to match a true GPON deployment in bandwidth or throughput. With the case of Apartment buildings it's already available in the United States with Verizon Fios and with Bell Aliant. I see Sasktel and MTS also deploying it in city apartments.

Also for example in South Korea and Sweden they are much more advanced in efficient and effective apartment and MDU deployment of FTTH.

Also in certain parts of Ontario especially Toronto I don't see FTTN deployment finished until 2015 if Bell can meet their roadmap. It's still an interim step and a stop-gap band-aid measure. Once the GTA can have FTTN deployment finished then perhaps within a decade FTTH deployment will reach 50-75% of the GTA.

Reference:

»Re: Start communications as of Feb-11-2013 2Mb DSL service


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to BriEE

Coax has a capacity with DOCSIS 3.1 that is similar to the fastest FTTH can do today via 10GPON, so it's not really accurate to say that coax isn't able to deliver.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



FiberToTheX
Premium
join:2013-03-14
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

said by Guspaz:

Coax has a capacity with DOCSIS 3.1 that is similar to the fastest FTTH can do today via 10GPON, so it's not really accurate to say that coax isn't able to deliver.

Just compare how many Subscribers you have to one node with coax and how many subscribers with GPON. Let's not forget that Coax is shared bandwidth and is such is more restricted than that of GPON which while is shared has a significant less subscriber amount to a single node. Typically it is split to 16-28 premises compared with Coax which can be split to thousands of premises.

If Coax was so capable then why are many countries deploying GPON FTTH networks and not deploying Coax over DOCSIS3. That should be self-explanatory.


TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable

said by FiberToTheX:

Just compare how many Subscribers you have to one node with coax and how many subscribers with GPON. Let's not forget that Coax is shared bandwidth and is such is more restricted than that of GPON which while is shared has a significant less subscriber amount to a single node. Typically it is split to 16-28 premises compared with Coax which can be split to thousands of premises.

If Coax was so capable then why are many countries deploying GPON FTTH networks and not deploying Coax over DOCSIS3. That should be self-explanatory.

Can't compare deployments in new construction areas to existing urban and suburban centers that easily. It's perfect sense to lay FTTH in new subdivision and buildings being constructed. But with existing infrastructure, if its able to deliver, it makes less sense to rip it all out for FTTH. Rogers has a profile up to 150/10, the only downside here is the lopsided ration of download to upload but people that would need more than 10Mbps up aren't going to be a large crowd.

Seeing as how in recent years its been revenue that has paid for all of Rogers' network upgrade,they get to decide when they made enough return on their investment. The people invested in Rogers too via shares want to see returns on their investments too.This is the double edge blade of capitalism, sure its a free market, but greed leads just as much of a lack of innovation as it innovates.


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to FiberToTheX

said by FiberToTheX:

If Coax was so capable then why are many countries deploying GPON FTTH networks and not deploying Coax over DOCSIS3. That should be self-explanatory.

... how about because they never had any coax to begin with and fibre has been far cheaper to deploy than coax for about the last decade or so? Contrast this to North America where we've had coax strung to homes for the last 60 years.

You really don't have a good underlying understanding of the capabilities of coax. You go on about node sizes "in the thousands" and mention small GPON "node" sizes, yet the reality is that they are functionally the same. You can have GPON splitters that serve hundreds of homes while you can have coax nodes that are small as 60 homes like what Mountain Cablevision was doing in Hamilton before Shaw bought them. Functionally fibre and coax are no different. How well either one works comes down purely to how they are deployed. With DOCSIS 3.1, the amount of bandwidth will be the same as that for pure GPON.


FiberToTheX
Premium
join:2013-03-14
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to TypeS



Most consumers these days care more about symmetrical speeds for download/upload than being limited to download/upload ratio's simply because of the technology employed. Take for example uploading photos/pictures , cloud storage and backup and so forth...

Capitalism doesn't exist in Canada or the US. It's corporatism based on Oligpolies in Canada backed by lack of effective regulation and lack of open-access technology and networks in Canada. There are exceptions (Sasktel/MTS and Bell Aliant) however those are few in kind.

I've told my friends in various FTTH deployed countries about Canadian Internet access compared to theirs and Canada is decades behind and the implementation of caps is a laughing matter not to mention if it was implemented for their country they would be able to stand-up for their rights to open access networks unlike the passiveness of Canadian's to accept bigger/faster speeds for more and less delivered.



Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to BriEE

Modern cable nodes don't serve thousands of nodes. When Videotron moved to their hybrid fiber network in 2008, they moved to 125 users per node. It's possible (likely?) that they and carriers further along the curve than them like Shaw have moved to even smaller nodes in the following half decade.

10GPON, meanwhile, supports up to 128 users per node. It is, like cable, a shared medium.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
reply to FiberToTheX

You're wrong, most people don't care about symmetrical speeds, most people don't even know what speeds they're paying for. You can't use the consensus of these forums because they represent such a miniscule fraction of the general population.

10Mbps is more than enough for uploading pictures and in most cases compressed HD home videos.

Many of the countries you are using as examples had little to no copper infrastructure to begin with, so Telcos there decided to go with Fibre. And in EU a lot of the FTTH push has been aided by government subsidies. They also pay a lot more in government taxes there than either Canada or the US.

Why don't you go run a campaign and see how much of the population would be in favour of a tax that would go directly to subsidizing FTTH.



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to FiberToTheX

said by FiberToTheX:

Most consumers these days care more about symmetrical speeds for download/upload than being limited to download/upload ratio's simply because of the technology employed. Take for example uploading photos/pictures , cloud storage and backup and so forth...

Bullshit. Most consumers these days don't know the difference. They attach their picture to an email, they hit send and it sends. That's all "most consumers" care about.

We here are not "most consumers" - we are a very small subset of knowledgeable (well, most of us anyway ) users who are technically inclined and use our Internet connections in ways well beyond what "most consumers" would ever do. To some of us return performance is very important. Even then, to many more of us it still doesn't matter. What matters most is downstream performance.

This is all a bit divergent though, since even 10GPON is 10/2.5 asymmetrical. Compare this to DOCSIS 3.1 which is 10/1.

said by FiberToTheX:

Capitalism doesn't exist in Canada or the US.

*sigh* and with that, any last remaining shred of credibility you may have had just got pissed down the drain...


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to BriEE

That's my point, they're pretty similar at this point. 10/1 versus 10/2.5 is not an enormous difference, and I'd argue that a 4:1 ratio between downstream and upstream is probably overkill anyhow. If you've got 125 users per node (it seems like Videotron didn't split nodes farther than that from what I'm seeing), and you're selling people, say, 175/175, that's only a 22:1 oversubscription on the upstream, which sounds low to me. Besides, there may just be a DOCSIS 3.2 next that bumps up the upstream again anyhow.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

Modern cable nodes don't serve thousands of nodes. When Videotron moved to their hybrid fiber network in 2008, they moved to 125 users per node. It's possible (likely?) that they and carriers further along the curve than them like Shaw have moved to even smaller nodes in the following half decade.

Mountain was down to 60 homes per node in Hamilton back before they sold to Shaw. Shaw is in a similar boat with most of their plants. I have no idea what Rogers or Cogeco do but I suspect it would be in the ~100 range depending on traffic requirements.

I had a map of all of Cogeco's nodes in Niagara right down to the individual property sizes from about ten years or so ago. Even back then it wasn't much more than a few hundred.

I can understand a push for FTTH from the telcos since you can only move a 7330 so close to someone's house. For cable it's a bit of an asinine argument, and even then they are light years ahead in FTTH deployment - it's just that most people don't even know they have FTTH from their cable company.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to BriEE

The nice thing for the telcos, though, is that they have a nice upgrade path... If memory serves, you can just swap out the line cards in the 7330 for GPON ones and boom, you've got the head-end of a PON... then you just need to replace the copper.

Where would the cableco be putting the ONT, if they're deploying transparent FTTH using RFoG? You'd think they couldn't install it as CPE because they'd have no power if it wasn't known to the customer, and if they're putting it a bit farther back in the network, it's not really FTTH... I mean, if the ONT is on the pole, that's fine for RFoG, but you can't use it as a proper optical service at that point (as in you couldn't do anything but RFoG).
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

The Cogeco ONTs (or "mini nodes") are mounted in a box on the side of the house. Fibre comes into the box and goes out as coax before being passed into the home. The power comes from an Alpha battery backup unit that passes power over the coax to power the ONT. The Alpha box is either mounted right next to the ONT box getting power from the hydro meter, or inside the house plugged into an electrical outlet near where the coax enters the home.



FiberToTheX
Premium
join:2013-03-14
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

1 edit
reply to Guspaz

said by Guspaz:

Modern cable nodes don't serve thousands of nodes. When Videotron moved to their hybrid fiber network in 2008, they moved to 125 users per node. It's possible (likely?) that they and carriers further along the curve than them like Shaw have moved to even smaller nodes in the following half decade.

10GPON, meanwhile, supports up to 128 users per node. It is, like cable, a shared medium.

That's true it is a shared medium however examples of FTTH GPON deployment in the field usually have less than the maxmimum amount of users supported per node. I'm not really aware of any field deployments that usually do more than 65-75% of the user support capacity per node.

quote:
*sigh* and with that, any last remaining shred of credibility you may have had just got pissed down the drain...

I doubt it. I'd like to be convinced otherwise which I doubt will happen anyway.

said by Guspaz:

The nice thing for the telcos, though, is that they have a nice upgrade path... If memory serves, you can just swap out the line cards in the 7330 for GPON ones and boom, you've got the head-end of a PON... then you just need to replace the copper.

It does provide them with an interim path but FTTN deployment should have been completed by the last decade with FTTH deployment to FTTN areas completed by the mid-2015's. However I doubt this would be met. Japan for example began Deploying Fiber Optic in 1999 and only began subscribing end users in 2001.

yyzlhr

join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:4
reply to Gone

said by Gone:

They could, but then they'd need to get into ONTs and modems just for television the way that Bell does with Fibe TV and overall it would be a far larger effort for the limited amount of return just to get rid of TPIA.

Verizon FiOS still delivers TV over QAM like Rogers instead of IP like Bell so they just need to install ONTs in the homes and integrate their backend provisioning systems. I assume Rogers already has the provisioning and backend systems somewhat ready as they have been delivering GPON business services for a while and they recently got into the residential game with their 250/250 tier.

I'm also not suggesting that they overlay fibre in existing coax areas as that simply isn't feasible considering the large urban areas Rogers serves. I'm just saying it's interesting that homes that have RFoG by Rogers aren't being converted to true GPON to shut out competition by TPIAs.

Lastly, I'm not sure why everyone thinks that everyone in Europe has FTTH. I can't comment on Asia, but I've lived in several major cities in Europe, mostly in new developments and I was only able to get DSL (VDSL if I was lucky), and DOCSIS. Although the DSL was dirt cheap in North American standards the speeds were paltry. DOCSIS speeds were on par with what Rogers was offering and was typically cost the same amount, but it did not come with caps.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to BriEE

It's not clear that RFoG service would be exempt from TPIA. The FTTN hearings at the CRTC seemed to indicate that any amount of copper in the path would cause it to be considered a copper service, and RFoG is ultimately still delivering RF over copper at the end of the chain.

Bell got out of it because they're doing a proper GPON deployment where the fiber is itself the endpoint that gets split up into ethernet and television and such.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


yyzlhr

join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON
kudos:4

said by Guspaz:

It's not clear that RFoG service would be exempt from TPIA. The FTTN hearings at the CRTC seemed to indicate that any amount of copper in the path would cause it to be considered a copper service, and RFoG is ultimately still delivering RF over copper at the end of the chain.

Bell got out of it because they're doing a proper GPON deployment where the fiber is itself the endpoint that gets split up into ethernet and television and such.

Hmm but couldn't Rogers argue that the coax does not come in play until the fibre reaches the inside of the customer's home? Most Rogers RoFG deployments have the fibre coming into the home itself where the ONU is installed indoors and then it travels over the customers internal coax wiring.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to BriEE

In that case, yes, but if they're sticking the ONT on the outside of the customer's home, you could probably successfully argue that should be TPIA...

Ultimately I think FTTH will fall under CRTC wholesale regulation anyhow, but probably not until a significant proportion of customers are served by it.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org



FiberToTheX
Premium
join:2013-03-14
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

1 edit

said by Guspaz:

In that case, yes, but if they're sticking the ONT on the outside of the customer's home, you could probably successfully argue that should be TPIA...

Ultimately I think FTTH will fall under CRTC wholesale regulation anyhow, but probably not until a significant proportion of customers are served by it.

670,000 Households isn't a significant proportion if we use Bell Aliant's penetration in the Maritime Provinces ?

said by yyzlhr:

said by Gone:

They could, but then they'd need to get into ONTs and modems just for television the way that Bell does with Fibe TV and overall it would be a far larger effort for the limited amount of return just to get rid of TPIA.

Lastly, I'm not sure why everyone thinks that everyone in Europe has FTTH. I can't comment on Asia, but I've lived in several major cities in Europe, mostly in new developments and I was only able to get DSL (VDSL if I was lucky), and DOCSIS. Although the DSL was dirt cheap in North American standards the speeds were paltry. DOCSIS speeds were on par with what Rogers was offering and was typically cost the same amount, but it did not come with caps.

Depends really in which country you lived in Europe. There is a FTTH Penetration chart and graph that shows that the most FTTH Deployments occur for Europe in: Sweden , Norway , Lithuania , Latvia and a few other countries. Sweden/Norway/Lithuania being the primary countries where large-scale deployment is occurring.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to BriEE

Has Aliant actually converted all of those homes to fiber, or have they merely passed them with fiber? In any case, that's still only roughly 5% of households in Canada, and the CRTC didn't regulate FTTN/HFC networks until they had hit almost fifty percent...

Somebody might have success trying to get FTTH regulated in Aliant territory, but there aren't any IISPs with a big enough presence there for it to be worth their time, and it would likely still take years to get anything out of the CRTC on the subject.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org