Print

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

[Reformed]

No, the Pensando DSC-100 Distributed Services Card in it is doing the business. The PC doesn't have to be especially fast.

[burakkucat]

Here is a link to the product brief of the Pensando DSC-100. (A PDF document.)

[Weaver]

Wow that looks like some piece of kit. I would like to read some detail. It seems to be a hardware and software three ring circus.

[burakkucat]

Wow that looks like some piece of kit. I would like to read some detail. It seems to be a hardware and software three ring circus.

If you start from here, you may find some further reading material.

[Reformed]

https://youtu.be/_zSqft0cSfk might well be interesting.

[aesmith]

Just for fun I punched the figures into Cisco's performance estimator (ngfwpe.cisco.com).  With all firewall features enabled it recommends an FPR4125 which would be running at 70% capacity assuming default mix of packet sizes.  There's a lot of high level security going on, so you could go a lot smaller and less expensive if you only want Layer 3 firewall.

For most of us I suspect 10gig to the home is so far away that current products aren't really relevant.

[Weaver]

I wonder what is preventing 10G to the home. I suspect there will be little demand because of the limitations of WLANs for people who think that ‘wi-fi’ is the internet and the rest of us alike. But isn’t it true to say that once fibre is run in then the only thing preventing more speed is the PON hardware and replacing that is cheap and easy relatively speaking?

[burakkucat]

. . . isn’t it true to say that once fibre is run in then the only thing preventing more speed is the PON hardware and replacing that is cheap and easy relatively speaking?

Yes. The fibre has a massive bandwidth. So to upgrade just replace the optics in the OLT at the head-end and replace each ONT at the users' ends.

[Reformed]

Ofcom / ASA regulations. Selling 10G over XGSPON isn't feasible for residential customers. It is only capable of 9.2 or so after overheads and any other usage on the PON will cause visible contention.

Elsewhere in the world this is okay as services may be sold at 'up to' but this isn't the case in the UK so we'll probably have to wait for 25G or higher before 10 is a residential product.

I may be able to purchase 10G over XGSPON in the near future but don't think even I can justify it 

[Alex Atkin UK]

Plus if they roll out straight to XGSPON it could be contended with up to 64 users vs GPON 32.

I wonder if Openreach will switch to XGSPON once a PON reaches its limit as presumably "technically" a PON might cover more than 30 customers and there is an assumption they wont all go on FTTP any time soon?  Or are they literally laying it where a PON will only ever cover 30 customers so XGSPON would have less contention than other countries rollouts?

Even I can't see a huge benefit in over a Gigabit any time soon, though XGSPON makes symmetrical more practical.

Are CityFibre using GPON or XGSPON given their service IS symmetrical?

[Weaver]

A symmetrical service would be a big draw for me, given that backups are a nightmare.

[aesmith]

There's also backhaul and ISP peering to consider.  If an exchange had say 100 - 1000 10Gig customers, how much backhaul would the ISP need to keep those customers happy?  Then at the ISP end multiply that by say 100-100 exchanges, how much Internet capacity would be needed, also I guess DNS and content caching performance.

[j0hn]

Plus if they roll out straight to XGSPON it could be contended with up to 64 users vs GPON 32.

Some networks run GPON on a 128:1 split.

I wonder if Openreach will switch to XGSPON once a PON reaches its limit as presumably "technically" a PON might cover more than 30 customers and there is an assumption they wont all go on FTTP any time soon?

Very unlikely any time soon. On the 1000/115 product Openreach only guarantee the provider 110Mb/s.
It would take a lot to saturate a PON beyond that.

Are CityFibre using GPON or XGSPON given their service IS symmetrical?

Same as Openreach. GPON at 32:1

[Reformed]

Plus if they roll out straight to XGSPON it could be contended with up to 64 users vs GPON 32.

I wonder if Openreach will switch to XGSPON once a PON reaches its limit as presumably "technically" a PON might cover more than 30 customers and there is an assumption they wont all go on FTTP any time soon?  Or are they literally laying it where a PON will only ever cover 30 customers so XGSPON would have less contention than other countries rollouts?

Even I can't see a huge benefit in over a Gigabit any time soon, though XGSPON makes symmetrical more practical.

Are CityFibre using GPON or XGSPON given their service IS symmetrical?

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.

[Reformed]

There's also backhaul and ISP peering to consider.  If an exchange had say 100 - 1000 10Gig customers, how much backhaul would the ISP need to keep those customers happy?

A pair of 40G links would be ample both for capacity and resilience - should run fine even with just one of the 40G in place. Source: the 10/25G ISPs being able to run 25G services with dual 100G backhaul - quadruple your largest customer's capacity per OLT seems to be the sweet spot especially as it's so difficult to consume that much bandwidth.

Then at the ISP end multiply that by say 100-100 exchanges, how much Internet capacity would be needed, also I guess DNS and content caching performance.

At this point you have a CDN in the exchange next to your edge router. Sky already have CDNs in the largest exchanges and this number will only grow as time goes on.