ace/rus school and symposium corralling the broadband stampede active vs. passive optical networks...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
ACE/RUS School and SymposiumCorralling the Broadband Stampede
ActiveVs.
Passive Optical Networks
Rob WilkinsonVice President, Planning & Design
Presented By
![Page 2: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Technology Review Passive Optical Network (PON)
Generic GPON technology and topology
OLT (Optical Line Terminal) Splitter ONT (Optical Network Terminal)
Feeder fiber Distribution fiber Drop
Advantages
• Lower cost for equipment
• Smaller cross-section of fibers (lower cost)
• Easy to add splitter for unexpected growth
Disadvantages
• Reduced bandwidth to subscriber (2.4 Gbps shared)
• Limitation of distances to sub (20 Km with 32:1 splits)
![Page 3: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Technology Review Active (Dedicated Plant)
Active Ethernet technology and topology
OLT (CO or field electronics) ONT (Optical Network Terminal)
Feeder fiber Distribution fiber Drop
Advantages
• Maximum bandwidth to each subscriber (1 GB per sub)
• Distance to subscriber could reach 80 Km (50 mi)
• Most future safe – not as concerned about an evolution plan
Disadvantages
• Larger fiber cross sections to meet present and future growth
• Typically higher cost electronics
![Page 4: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Approach Identify and Define Study Areas
Three types of study areas
• Low density, low growth rural area
• High density, high growth rural area
• Urban area
• Design & Costs Used a “square” layout scenario for consistency
Cable sizing was completed using a cable fill chart
• Economic breakeven years
• Percent growth
• Costs do NOT include common costs of both scenarios (not project costs)
![Page 5: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Study Details Study Areas
Low density, low growth rural area
• 100 square miles
• 2 subs per route mile
• 140 route miles/280 subs served
• 2% growth per year
High density, high growth rural area
• 100 square miles
• 10 subs per route mile
• 140 route miles/1400 subs served
• 6% growth per year
![Page 6: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Study Details Study Areas
Urban Area (approx. 5,000 population)
• 144 blocks (12 blocks x 12 blocks)
• 16 subs per block
• 23 route miles/2304 subs served
• 2% growth per year
![Page 7: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Cost AnalysisPon Design
Size $/mile Miles Total
BFO 12 $ 11,580 88 $1,019,040 COE Electronics
BFO 24 $ 13,340 48 $ 640,320 Quantity Per Sub
BFO 36 $ 15,100 4 $ 60,400 280 $ 180 $ 50,400
BFO 48 $ 16,860 $ -
BFO 72 $ 20,380 $ -
BFO 96 $ 23,910 $ - Splitters
BFO 144 $ 30,950 $ - Quantity Each
BFO 216 $ 41,510 $ - 16 $ 1,600 $ 25,600
BFO 288 $ 52,080 $ -
BFO 360 $ 62,640 $ - Elec Total $ 76,000
BFO 432 $ 73,200 $ -
BFO 504 $ 83,770 $ -
BFO 576 $ 94,330 $ -
BFO 648 $ 104,900 $ -
BFO 720 $ 115,460 $ -
140 $1,719,760 Total Cost $1,795,760
![Page 8: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Cost Analysis Summary
Design Plan Subs Miles Fiber PlantCOE
Electronics Splitters Total
Low Density Rural
PON Design 280 140 $1,719,760 $50,400 $25,600 $1,795,760
Active Design 280 140 $1,938,200 $77,000 $0 $2,015,200 11%
High Density Rural
PON Design 1400 140 $3,044,120 $252,000 $148,800 $3,444,920
Active Design 1400 140 $3,163,840 $565,000 $0 $3,728,840 8%
High Density Urban
PON Design 2304 23 $831,610 $414,720 $223,200 $1,469,530
Active Design 2304 26 $1,438,007 $633,600 $0 $2,071,607 29%
![Page 9: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Study Results Low density, low growth rural area
Small difference in cost (11%)
• PON = $1,795,000
• Active = $2,015,000
• High density, high growth rural area• Even smaller difference in cost (8%)
• PON = $3,445,000
• Active = $3,729,000
• High density urban area• Higher difference in cost (29%)
• PON = $1,469,000
• Active = $2,071,000
![Page 10: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Study Results Technical Differences
PON has varying distance limitations which could impact fiber sizes
• Changing splits can extend reach
Standard Active reach is 20 Km, but could go 80 Km with extended lasers
• Enhances reach in low density very rural areas
• Distance is less important in high density areas vs. fiber cross sections
• Place additional electronics within area to keep fiber sizes lower and manageable
• Bandwidth capacity
• PON provides shared bandwidth to customer
• Active provides dedicated bandwidth to customer
• Each has a common bottleneck to the world (10 GigE backplane)
![Page 11: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Conclusions
So what’s the answer?
It’s a bladder control issue!
It DEPENDS!
![Page 12: ACE/RUS School and Symposium Corralling the Broadband Stampede Active Vs. Passive Optical Networks Rob Wilkinson Vice President, Planning & Design Presented](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022083008/56649ef25503460f94c0432b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Conclusions Cost Basis
PON still provides the lowest cost scenario
Technical Basis Active provides maximum amount of distribution bandwidth at minimal cost increase
How do you chose?
Do BOTH!!!