RE: [EFM] EFM Requirements [really Oregon Trail Etherloop?]
Frank,
What data rates are you able to offer when your subscribers are out to
21kft? Do you believe that to be sufficient? Are you offering a video
service over that access link?
Thanks,
Mark
> Fletcher,
>
> I have been trying to stay vendor neutral in this discussion.
> Per your request, here is our experience in DSL deployment utilizing
> Etherloop
> as a copper broadband solution.
>
> The following data is based upon the last two years of broadband
> provisioning
> for Oregon Trail Internet in the rural Pacific
> Northwest. I have watched many of our competitors leave the
> DSL market
> as ADSL/SDSL has been too difficult to provision.
>
> The main advantage for us is:
>
> * The ability of Etherloop to function on challenging loops
> with bridge taps
> and gauge changes. This is not marketing; we have hit 100%
> of our circuits,
> within 21Kft, at all of our DSLAMs with 3 different ILECs,
> without any line
> conditioning (bridge tap removal, etc) other than load coil removal.
> Depending
> on tariffs, CLECs have limited options for conditioning of
> unloaded pairs.
>
> * The ability of Etherloop to hit distance beyond ADSL and
> SDSL(even though
> Elastic
> states 21Kft, we have some customers over 23Kft).
>
> * The simplicity of utilizing Ethernet over DSL, with native
> integration
> from the DSLAM into
> our traditional IP architecture without utilization of ATM.
>
> The bottom line, to us, is that Etherloop is cost effective
> to deploy and
> provides
> ample margin to continue our broadband deployment into rural America.
> For 802.3 EFM, here is a 'best-of-breed' solution that
> currently employs
> 802.3 over copper
> to 21Kft, with near term futures of 100Mbs EFM according to
> the last 802.3
> EFM meeting
> in Portland.
>
> Frank
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fletcher E Kittredge [mailto:fkittred@xxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 11:43 AM
> > To: Frank Miller
> > Cc: 'Vladimir Oksman'; 'Hugh Barrass'; Lough, Andy; Sherman Ackley;
> > Stds-802-3-Efm (E-mail)
> > Subject: Re: [EFM] EFM Requirements [really Oregon Trail Etherloop?]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > My burning question for you all at Oregon Trail is: how has
> your work
> > with Etherloop gone and why is it that Etherloop is not just the
> > standard for copper 10/100mb/sec EFM? It has been around
> for a while,
> > does it really work as specified?
> >
> > If does have problems, it would be nice to get the problems into the
> > public knowledge base so that the standard could avoid them.
> >
> > thanks,
> > fletcher
> >
>
****************************************************************************
Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and
confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is
not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for
delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from
your computer.
Thank you. Hatteras Networks, Inc.
****************************************************************************