Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Alex Atkin UK]

GPON goes to 128 but it's a bad idea. You've just sliced another 6 dBm from the optical receive power at the ONT and increased loss, forcing transmit power to go higher. With the way the networks are built it adds complication hanging 4 x 32 port splitters off a 4

Openreach have shown no signs of being interested in XGSPON overlay. They have no XGSPON ONTs, and no interest in offering symmetrical even when the deploy XGSPON. New build sites are fibre only, so 30-32 customers per split.

CityFibre have both GPON and XGSPON on their network however the XGSPON tends to be used for mobile backhaul rather than delivery to end customer premises. The GPON is just accepting there may be some visible contention.

Yes I just had a quick read that a 32 split can go for 20km but 64 drops it to 5km.  Plus as fibre is relatively cheap, it makes no sense to add limitations that could bite you in the ass years down the line if you run short of fibre to offer future speed increases, depending on what the technology requires.  What you DON'T want is to have to actually add more fibres later and the insane civils costs that entails.

I know Openreach aren't interested in XGSPON or symmetrical today, but I think its inevitable eventually.  This thread is after all mostly a thought experiment, even I wouldn't go for 10Gbit as the cost would be huge with little to no real-world benefits.  I'm already quite happy with download speeds over Three 5G, the only problem is its unreliability vs a hard line.

[gt94sss2]

Openreach have shown no signs of being inerested in XGSPON overlay. They have no XGSPON ONTs, and no interest in offering symmetrical even when the deploy XGSPON. New build sites are fibre only, so 30-32 customers per split.

To be fair to Openreach, they have looked at 10 and 25 XGSPON and are trialling Symmetric FTTP speeds (for business customers)

[Reformed]

The XGSPON trial closed to new customers in January of 2021.

https://www.openreach.co.uk/cpportal/updates/briefings/ultrafast/nga203020

A gentle reminder to folks that GPON is 2008 technology, so both the line cards and ONTs are relatively really cheap, and that before 10G over XGSPON or close to it could be contemplated CPs would need access to higher capacity cablelinks. XGSPON at the headend is fine, the ONTs with 10G ports are a fair bit more expensive than the tiny GPON ONTs Openreach provide. I would bet those give change from £20 per unit.

[j0hn]

The XGS-PON trial is indeed closed and was only available to order at specific locations for business customers.
In the end it was trialled at a single site.

[Reformed]

In happier news other than Openreach and CityFibre most others seem to be using XGSPON by default now.

CityFibre do have XGSPON around, though. They use it to provide mobile backhaul in some cases.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Considering the huge size of the Openreach coverage area compared to alt-nets, it does make a lot of sense to go for the cheaper technology and upgrade to XGSPON later as and when its necessary.

The only reason I can see it as necessary is if contention kicks in on GPON, as I can't see Gigabit seeming too little for quite some time.  I doubt most people will go for the higher packages anyway.

[Black Sheep]

What he said ^^^^^^.

It's all well and good having 1Gbps symmetrical - but you also have to pay for that privilege - I'm happy with my 50Mbps FTTC circuit, satisfies our family needs.

[Weaver]

For domestic users hooked on wi-fi there is a limit to what wireless LANs can provide and exceeding gigabit throughput seems to me to be unachievable because without new frequencies being allocated there is not the bandwidth available for very wide channels, not even if you’re prepared to be a very greedy anti-social hog eg 160 MHz 5GHz user.

[gt94sss2]

For domestic users hooked on wi-fi there is a limit to what wireless LANs can provide and exceeding gigabit throughput seems to me to be unachievable because without new frequencies being allocated there is not the bandwidth available for very wide channels, not even if you’re prepared to be a very greedy anti-social hog eg 160 MHz 5GHz user.

Such as Wifi 7? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11be

[Alex Atkin UK]

For domestic users hooked on wi-fi there is a limit to what wireless LANs can provide and exceeding gigabit throughput seems to me to be unachievable because without new frequencies being allocated there is not the bandwidth available for very wide channels, not even if you’re prepared to be a very greedy anti-social hog eg 160 MHz 5GHz user.

Oh I do better than that.  I have 160Mhz on my WiFi, and I had 80Mhz on a point to point link concurrently. :p

It didn't really impact anyone at the time as nobody had their routers on DFS channels.  That's starting to become more common now.

Its annoying Apple didn't include 6Ghz in their latest Macbooks as I had planned to move over to WiFi 6e as soon as Zyxel release an AP for it.

To be fair, I don't really use WiFi much other than watching YouTube in bed sometimes but its a nice to have for OS updates or updating games on my gaming laptop, which I haven't really used since the pandemic as I'm not going anywhere.

[Weaver]

I can’t get 5 GHz channels above 100 on my old ZyXEL WAPs. Is that where dynamic frequency selection lives?

Is my problem because of some stupid 30 min delay scanning for radar? Making me thing it’s stuffed when it’s just effect of the huge delay? Or am I just imagining such a thing? - half-understood from misreading something. I wonder if channel 100 will really work given sufficient patience. Not that waiting 30 mins, if true, would be practical.

I don’t have any near neighbours so I could use 80 MHz or 160 MHz with the right APs as long as I keep the power modest. My WAPs are nearly 12 years old now and I need to budget for replacement hardware before they just die on me. I have two working WAPs and also (I think) a third WAP in storage as a backup swap out unit so we are well-covered currently in case of hardware failure.

[meritez]

5Ghz DFS in the UK are channels 50 - 112, 116, 132 - 144.

[Alex Atkin UK]

I can’t get 5 GHz channels above 100 on my old ZyXEL WAPs. Is that where dynamic frequency selection lives?

Yeah its similar to why Zyxel wont enable Band C on their WiFi 6 APs, it requires going through re-certification to add the band, though I believe its even more awkward with Band B where DFS lives so it took many AGES to release units supporting it.

[Reformed]

On the topic I will speak to YouFibre about a month trial of their 10G, strictly for test purposes  and see what happens.

[meritez]

On the topic I will speak to YouFibre about a month trial of their 10G, strictly for test purposes  and see what happens.

I'd be interested to see reults of that for peak, off peak and other stuff