srobmw
join:2005-10-01
New Windsor, NY
1 edit | reply to bbskeptic
Re: awesome
This is totally lost on you. Later
P.S. Stick your sarcasm somewhere. |
|
sweintz
Premium
join:2002-03-01
Hamden, CT
| reply to bbskeptic
said by bbskeptic  :Imagine 50,000 strands of fiber running into a central office. That's what they do with copper now already.... I understand it's expensive to redo the xact same with fiber, but...
as far as WD multiplexing goes, assuming 32 channels, that's still only 32 cusomers on a fiber before someone has to share bandwidth. I was under the impression it was way more than 32 cusomers to a fiber... |
|
bbskeptic
join:2005-09-12
Burlington, VT | reply to srobmw
who does PON with 32 wavelengths...genious...? |
|
srobmw
join:2005-10-01
New Windsor, NY
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to bbskeptic
The point is you have an unlimited pipe at your disposal. If future network upgrades are only dependant on upgraded PON cards and ONT's to higher transmission rates you are at a huge advantage over any other company transmitting over any other medium. Not to mention today's technology allows you to use at least 32 different wavelengths at a time, if not more.
But what do I know, I only do this shit for a living. Lol. |
|
bbskeptic
join:2005-09-12
Burlington, VT
| reply to srobmw
said by srobmw :Doesn't matter. It's just a way of multiplexing. They will be able to offer as much bandwidth as they want. The bandwidths that are being offered are after the splitter. Not before. It is absolutely the same as if one fiber was dedicated all the way from the C.O.. It just requires a broader band signal leaving the office.(In this case by a factor of 32) And as for your comment about spending the $$$. Are you kidding me? Where do you get your information? Do you have any clue how BPON ITU G.983 works....? |
|
srobmw
join:2005-10-01
New Windsor, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to sweintz
Doesn't matter. It's just a way of multiplexing. They will be able to offer as much bandwidth as they want. The bandwidths that are being offered are after the splitter. Not before. It is absolutely the same as if one fiber was dedicated all the way from the C.O.. It just requires a broader band signal leaving the office.(In this case by a factor of 32)
And as for your comment about spending the $$$. Are you kidding me? |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to compton
said by compton :said by sweintz :um, yes it is beautiful. But the fact that it is a PON is not so beautiful. (PON = shared system. they use optical splitters and everyone uses one fiber) why couldn't they have spent the $$$ and pulled fiber from CO to each customer? PON = shared system. That's probably the only way they can get fiber to multiple dwelling buildings. they aren't doing multiple dwelling units(yet). meaning apartments/condos
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
bbskeptic
join:2005-09-12
Burlington, VT
| reply to sweintz
Imagine 50,000 strands of fiber running into a central office. Imagine that fiber bank gets cut during a street project.... even with mass fusion splicers, you may see your service again in about a month if you are lucky.... my point is that it is not practical for everyone to get a strand of fiber all the way back to the equipment. GPON can give a shared 2.4 Gbps down and 1.2 Gbps up per 32 customers. That is a GUARANTEED 75mb per customer.... GPON ain't so bad... However, Verizon's BPON at 622Mb down, 155 Mb up only guarantees 19Mbps... quite sad seeing ADSL2+ is more than double that... |
|
compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY
| reply to sweintz
said by sweintz :um, yes it is beautiful. But the fact that it is a PON is not so beautiful. (PON = shared system. they use optical splitters and everyone uses one fiber) why couldn't they have spent the $$$ and pulled fiber from CO to each customer? PON = shared system. That's probably the only way they can get fiber to multiple dwelling buildings. |
|
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
 ·Charter Pipeline
| reply to sweintz
said by sweintz :um, yes it is beautiful. But the fact that it is a PON is not so beautiful. (PON = shared system. they use optical splitters and everyone uses one fiber) why couldn't they have spent the $$$ and pulled fiber from CO to each customer? Because this solution works for the price point they are staying under.
My goodness, people can find ways to complain about anything...and not want to spend a dime out their own pocket to pay for it.
--
:: my trivial ramblings :: |
|
sweintz
Premium
join:2002-03-01
Hamden, CT
| reply to royalpalm
um, yes it is beautiful.
But the fact that it is a PON is not so beautiful.
(PON = shared system. they use optical splitters and everyone uses one fiber)
why couldn't they have spent the $$$ and pulled fiber from CO to each customer? |
|
