nanog mailing list archives
RE: Last Mile Design
From: "Tony Wicks" <tony () wicks co nz>
Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2019 09:31:34 +1300
It also significantly reduces the requirement to distribute active equipment into the field while massively reducing the feeder fibre requirement. Point to point has its place to be sure, but mass market FTTH is not viable without PON's economics. On 02/08/2019 12:48 PM, Aaron wrote:
I've always felt PON is a tool for people who don't know how to design a proper network.
Why is that? I always thought PON was a technology that reduced the number of active ports, thus altering the port cost per subscriber significantly by not actually needing dedicated ports. -- Grant. . . . unix || die --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Current thread:
- Re: Last Mile Design, (continued)
- Re: Last Mile Design Mark Tinka (Feb 15)
- Re: Last Mile Design Mark Tinka (Feb 15)
- Re: Last Mile Design Alain Hebert (Feb 15)
- Return to NANOG, last mile, municipal facilities Howard C. Berkowitz (Feb 14)
- Re: Last Mile Design Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 14)
- Re: Last Mile Design valdis . kletnieks (Feb 07)
- Re: Last Mile Design Aaron (Feb 08)
- Re: Last Mile Design Miles Fidelman (Feb 08)
- Re: Last Mile Design Aaron (Feb 08)
- Re: Last Mile Design Grant Taylor via NANOG (Feb 08)
- RE: Last Mile Design Tony Wicks (Feb 08)
- Re: Last Mile Design Aaron (Feb 08)
- RE: Last Mile Design Aaron Gould (Feb 08)
- Re: Last Mile Design Chris Gross (Feb 08)
- Re: Last Mile Design Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 08)
- Re: Last Mile Design Ben Cannon (Feb 08)
- Re: Last Mile Design Baldur Norddahl (Feb 09)
- Re: Last Mile Design Ben Cannon (Feb 09)
- Re: Last Mile Design Mark Tinka (Feb 09)
- Re: Last Mile Design Mikael Abrahamsson (Feb 09)
- Re: Last Mile Design Miles Fidelman (Feb 09)
- Re: Last Mile Design Miles Fidelman (Feb 08)