[EFM] RE: [EFM-P2MP] 10G EPONs (it was MPCP: Report message)
Carlos
Assuming we agree with you with the amount of bandwidth that is needed
in the downstream. For this 2.5 Gbps are good enough. In that case why
we need to pay for expansive optic in the upstream. Home users will
still need the same small amount of bandwidth. 622 will be enough. I
guess asymmetric rates are making a lot of sense for FTTH application.
B.t.w - The FSAN ILEC's are very consistent with their asymmetric rates
requirements.
Didi Ivancovsky
e: didi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.broadlight.com
-----Original Message-----
From: carlosal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:carlosal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 8:02 PM
To: bob.barrett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: David Levi; owner-stds-802-3-efm-p2mp@majordomo.ieee.org;
stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org; stds-802-3-efm-p2mp@ieee.org;
vincent.bemmel@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [EFM-P2MP] 10G EPONs (it was MPCP: Report message)
Bob,
> May be we should be specifying 10G-EPON given that the service
> providers are looking at 30x3 channels of HDTV per PON.
> By the time 1G-EPON is standardised it could be too little
> too late (again).
Serious. Why not investigate this? It may look like overkill, but we
should
at least understand the price/performance here. Let us see how do it
fare:
- it does not need to be 1 Gbps, or 10 Gbps. Maybe 2.5 Gbps is a good
compromise for the near future.
- higher bit rate can be used to counterbalance the relative
inneficiency
of the MPCP protocol. It's a diminishing return equation - the faster
the
system, the less efficient it will turn out because of the fixed
parameters
such as laser on/off times. A sweet spot may lie at some point.
- how do the cost increase with higher speed optics (more than 1 Gbps),
compared with a more complex (and efficient) MPCP implementation?
Did someone check this at some point over the past few months?
[Just to remind, once again: traditional Ethernet was half duplex, only
40-60% typical efficiency. It was fast enough for a long time, and
*much*
less expensive than any of the alternatives. As technology evolved, it
was
possible to go full duplex, and the rest is history.]
Carlos Ribeiro
CTBC Telecom