tech challenges

1

Carrier Ethernet over HFC Networks

High Tech Hurdles High Tech Hurdles

25th February 2007

Srividya Iyer MotorolaCharles Bergren CableLabs Brad Bignall Cisco Eli Baruch Arris Eric Doricko Calix

Srividya Iyer MotorolaCharles Bergren CableLabs Brad Bignall Cisco Eli Baruch Arris Eric Doricko Calix

2

Agenda

• Srividya Iyer Overview and perspective• Charles Bergren VPN and OAM basics • Brad Bignall OAM standards • Eli Baruch Provisioning and QoS • Eric Doricko GPON for SMB

3

Abstract

• This session will examine the technology and operational methods used to support the installation, provisioning, monitoring, and maintenance of SLA-backed Carrier Ethernet services on MSO networks. The discussion will cover provisioning of access devices, provider edge and core devices, and OAM. SLA monitoring topics will include OAM protocols (tunneled and un-tunneled) and multi-operator maintenance methods. Additional topics will include the mapping of QoS into DOCSIS and the backbone, and the challenges of a multi-protocol environment spanning DOCSIS and fiber.

4

Objective

• To illustrate the use of Carrier Ethernet across multi technology/ multi service networks, covering such topics as Provisioning (Network Element and Network Level), Subscriber and Traffic/QoS management.

5

Benefits of an Ethernet service

• Provides efficient delivery of voice, data and video service over a single service.

• The Network is converging towards IP and Ethernet is the most efficient mechanism to transport IP.

• The end user is transparent to the transport mechanism, since Ethernet is used in the LAN.

6

Challenges, Ethernet over Multi-protocol Networks

• Different Provisioning methods for Network Elements and Services.

• Quality of Service at Layer 2 is managed differently– DOCSIS uses individual Service Flows and Ethernet

has Class of Service IDs for prioritization of traffic.

• OAM methods are different• Management (EMS/NMS) Interfaces are

different

7

A Multi-step approach

• Managing Multi service and Multi Technology network as a unified entity is the most important aspect of providing a reliable service to the end user.

• As the Networks and Services have evolved over time, the unified management of these services and networks have to be evolved incrementally as well.

• Managing a Carrier Ethernet Network involves several aspects that are independent yet interdependent and are addressed in the next few slides.

8


• Network Element Management– Ethernet Interfaces across all devices supporting Carrier

Ethernet Network should be managed uniformly.– Remote upgrade of devices with new features/technology.– Several Standards exist to support management of Ethernet

Interfaces – ITU- SG15, MEF 15 and TM Forum MTNM 3.5

• Network Level Management – The Network Level management for all the devices

participating in the Ethernet network includes Configuration, Fault and Performance Management across various technologies and devices.

– Specifications include the TMForum’s Multi Technology Network Management (a new Cable WG has been formed), MEF 7.1

9


• Ethernet Services Management– Ethernet E-Line and E-LAN services across the

Network should be provisioned and managed across the network.

– Remote Provisioning of these services are required. – Currently there is no standard way of managing

these services across various devices in the network.

• Subscriber Management– A Radius or LDAP based User authentication to

support Ethernet services across networks.

10


• Traffic and QoS Management– Layer 2 QoS Mapping across technologies – Service

flows in DOCSIS and the 802.1p/CoS ID have to be mapped.

– Traffic Classification across Multiple Protocols (Ethernet, IPv4, Ipv6, MPLS to name a few) to provide end to end QoS.

– Traffic Policing at the ingress port to ensure bandwidth availability for all subscribers.

– PCMM has a Policy based architecture for managing QoS that can be leveraged to manage Ethernet networks.

– Layer 3 (DiffServ) architecture can be used for providing Upstream and Downstream QoS guarantees at the IP layer.

11


• Capacity Management– High Availability/High Performance networks are a

requirement for large service providers.– Capacity Planning should be done in conjunction with

Performance analysis, QoS management best practices and What–If scenario analysis.

12

Agenda


13

• Service is just L2 connectivity• Customer DHCP Server and IP space• No Internet service or traffic management

What are VPNs about ?

Site with DOCSIS L2VPN Accessing Server1 using IPX

Site with DOCSIS L2VPN Accessing Server2 using IP

Site with DOCSIS L2VPN With Server 1, Server 2

Example: Enterprise with 3 sites

14

Another view, implemented with DOCSIS

BESMI interfaces embedded within each CM interface exchangeBESMI frames to continually measure connectivity and performance

CMTS

This L2VPN entity behaves like a 2 port switch

L2VPN CMs

Enterprise Site 1

Enterprise Site 2

L2VPN CMs move Enterprise frames across DOCSIS using their layer 2 headers.

L2TPv3 CMs move Enterprise frames across DOCSIS using layer 3 pseudo-wires

Both technologies make the dotted line entity ‘behave like a 2 port switch’

15

L2VPN – DOCSIS details

5. Legacy core routers

4. PE VPN equipment inspects Tag, then encrypts, forwards as necessary

3. ‘L2VPN’ CMTS (MSO) decrypts BPI, and adds Tag for traffic directed off-site

2. CM encrypts w/ BPI

1. Enterprise PC sends L2 Ethernet frame

6. PE VPN equipment decrypts as needed, then forwards

7. ‘L2VPN’ CMTS (MSO) removes Tag, encrypts with BPI and forwards to PC

8. CM decrypts BPI

9. Enterprise PC gets L2 Ethernet frame

CMs

16

L2TPv3

• Layer 1 agnostic – rides over any transport– Simplified L2 encapsulation techniques, like encapsulation in IP

– No additional protocols required for support in the network i.e. MPLS

• L2TPv3 requires configuration of end-points only– No configuration of intervening network elements required.

– DOCSIS carries IP; DOCSIS edge CMs can encapsulate the L2 frames in IP

• Allows connectivity to VPN from off-net (off plant) locations with minimal coordination between providers.– Simplifies NNI and peering considerations.

• L2TPv3 is point to point, combined with MetroE becomes multipoint capable– Multipoint L2TPv3

– Hybrid approach, L2TPv3 end points combined with VPLS end points for multipoint flexibility

• L2TPv3 tunnel allows HSD and VPN service off of same cable router

17

L2VPN extended across the coreVPLS MAC Addr Learning

Only new, VPLS- aware PE gear does MAC Addr learning, (North of CMTS)

L2VPN CMTS submits VPN Tagged Frames from Enterprise

No MAC Addr learning in the core. So legacy gear works for VPNs too. Tier 1 ISP

Tier 1 ISP

Tier 1 ISP

Tier-2 ISPTier-2 ISP

Tier-2 ISP Tier-2 ISP

Tier-2 ISP

localISPlocal

ISPlocalISP

localISP

localISP Tier 3

ISP

localISP

localISP

localISP

18

OAM frames injected into VPN data New L2 layer shims add OAM frames to VPN data as ‘tracers’Network Element support MEPS inside their interfaces -next slideMEPs check OAM frames for connectivity, loss, latency, and jitter

Tier 1 ISP

Tier 1 ISP

Tier 1 ISP

Tier-2 ISPTier-2 ISP

Tier-2 ISP Tier-2 ISP

Tier-2 ISP

localISPlocal

ISPlocalISP

localISP

localISP Tier 3

ISP

localISP

localISP

localISP

MEPS

19

DOCSIS with simple OAM

BESMI interfaces embedded within each CM interface exchangeBESMI frames to continually measure connectivity and performance

CMTS

This L2VPN entity behaves like a 2 port switch

L2VPN CMs

Enterprise Site 1

Enterprise Site 2

OAM interfaces embedded within each CMCI interface exchange OAM frames to continually measure connectivity and performance

20

DOCSIS with more complex OAMThis slide shows a L2VPN Service spanning two CMs and a third interface across the Internet core

OAM MEPs need only be added at CM interfaces.

Provider Edge Switches (PE/SW) will already support them anyway. Thus, no modifications needed for CMTSs.

L2VPN Cable ModemsCMTSsPE/SW

PE/SW

21

OAM – MEP structure inside an interface

MAC Layer

Input Frame ParserOutput Multiplexer

Control Frame Processor

LLC Layer

OAM MEP

OAM frames get processed

VPN frames go straight through

22

OAM – Multiple Maintenance levels

ME 1 UNI ENNI UNI

ME 4 EVC

ME 5 TEST

ME 6 SUBSCRIBER

ME 2 OPERATORS

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

SUBSCRIBEREQUIPMENT

OPERATOR A EQUIPMENTOPERATOR B EQUIPMENT

SERVICE PROVIDER

= DOWN MEP = UP MEP = MIP

SUBSCRIBEREQUIPMENT

Different parties can initiate and observe OAM frames to accumulate OAM data within their ME level

23

Agenda


24

E-OAM Fault ManagementSummary of Protocols and Mechanisms

Fault Management

Protocol Mechanism

Fault Detection

802.1ag Continuity Check Message (CCM)

802.3ah Link Monitoring

Fault Notification

802.1agRemote Defect Indication (RDI)

Port Status, Interface Status TLVs

Y.1731 Alarm Indication Signal (ETH-AIS)

802.3ahRemote Failure Indication (RFI)

Event Notification OAMPDU

E-LMI Status Message

Fault Verification

802.1ag Loopback protocol (LBM, LBR)

Y.1731 Multicast Loopback (ETH-LB)

Fault Isolation 802.1ag Linktrace protocol (LTM, LTR)

25

Ethernet LMIOverview

• Provides protocol and mechanisms used for:– Notification of Remote UNI status to CE– Notification of EVC addition, deletion or

status (Active, Not Active, Partially Active) to CE

– Communication of UNI and EVC attributes to CE (e.g. CE-VLAN to EVC map)

– CE auto-configuration

• Asymmetric protocol based on Frame Relay LMI, mainly applicable to the UNI (UNI-C and UNI-N)

• Specification completed by MEF:http://www.metroethernetforum.org/PDFs/Standards/MEF16.doc

User Network Interface(UNI)

UNI-C UNI-N

E-LMI

MetroEthernetNetwork

CE

26

Link OAM (IEEE 802.3ah, Clause 57)Overview

• Provides mechanisms useful for ‘monitoring link operation’, such as:

– Link Monitoring

– Remote Failure Indication

– Remote Loopback Control

• Defines an optional OAM sublayer

• Intended for single point-to-point IEEE 802.3 links

• Uses “Slow Protocol”1 frames called OAMPDUs which are never forwarded by MAC clients

• Standardized: IEEE 802.3ah, clause 57 (now in 802.3-2005)

Higher Layers

LLC

OAM (Optional)

MAC

Physical Layer

LANCSMA/CD

Layers

(1) No more than 10 frames transmitted in any one-second period

OSI Model

Application

Presentation

Session

Transport

Network

Data Link

Physical

27

802.1ag (aka “CFM”)

• What is IEEE 802.1ag? Provides for FAULT management of EVC-based service offerings. 802.1ag allows troubleshooting an end-to-end Ethernet Virtual Circuit (EVC) across multiple providers / vendors.

• What is “CFM”? – CFM stands for “Connectivity Fault Management– CFM and 802.1ag are used interchangeably

• 802.1ag is currently at revision 8.1 (CFM 8.1)• Family of protocols that provides capabilities to detect, verify,

isolate and report end-to-end Ethernet connectivity faults• Employs regular Ethernet frames that travel in-band with the

customer traffic– Devices that cannot interpret CFM Messages forward them as

normal data frames

• Standardized by IEEE (P802.1ag) in late 2007– IEEE std. 802.1ag-2007

28

Y.1731

• What is ITU Y.1731? Provides for both – (a) FAULT management– (b) PERFORMANCE management

• Relationship to 802.1ag? – 802.1ag specifies the FRAME FORMAT used by Y.1731– 802.1ag and Y.1731 bodies worked closely together;

hence, the standards provide extremely similar functionality

• Y.1731 provides for both :– (a) FAULT management & – (b) PERFORMANCE management

29

Challenges Implementing Ethernet OAM

• Customer needs and requirements for Ethernet OAM?– Negotiating Parameters, what thresholds are relevant, attainable?– Placement of MEPs, hierarchy, disposition of collected data.– E-NNI with other providers

• Network Management Systems that incorporate Ethernet OAM.– Event/SNMP driven or timing driven?– Operations personnel trained to react appropriately to threshold crossing alerts.

• OAM Interworking– Event translation, not necessarily 1:1 event mapping

CoreCustomer

IP/MPLS

Business

Residential

Business

Residential

UNI UNINNINNINNI

Customer

EthernetLink OAM

AccessConnectivity

Fault ManagementAccessE-LMI

ProviderBridges

ProviderBridges

BackboneBridges

BackboneBridges

30

Challenges with Delivering Carrier Ethernet

• Technical challenges of integrating multiple end-points in a multipoint EVC.– SONET & Dark Fiber End points, i.e. VLAN and/or VPLS,

L2TPv3.

– Maintaining end to end QOS

• Non-Native Ethernet Networks that carry 802 frames– DOCSIS end-points

• Out of Footprint EVC end-points.– Between operating units

– Between Service Providers

– Cross Provider agreements

31

Agenda


32

Ethernet Services Model

• Services described as seen by CE, UNI to UNI• Ethernet Definitions

– Ethernet Line Services (ELINE)– Ethernet LAN Services (ELAN)– Circuit Emulation Service (CES)

• Bandwidth Profiles Parameters– Committed Information Rate (CIR)– Excess Information Rate (EIR)

MetroMetroEthernetEthernetNetworkNetwork

CustomerCustomerEquipmentEquipment

(CE)(CE)

User NetworkUser NetworkInterfaceInterface

(UNI)(UNI)

Service ProviderService ProviderResponsibilityResponsibility

33

CECE

Point-to-Point EVC

MEN

UNIUNI

CE

CE

CE

MEN

CE

Multipoint-to-Multipoint EVC

UNI C

UNI D

UNI B

UNI A

MEN

Service Multiplexed

at UNI A CE

UNI B

CEUNI CCE

EVC 1

EVC 2 CE

CE

CE

MENCE

Multipoint-to-Multipoint EVC 1

UNI C

UNI D

UNI B

UNI A

Ethernet Privet Line (EPL)

Ethernet Virtual Privet Line (EVPL)

UNI E

Service Multiplexed at

UNI D

Multipoint-to-Multipoint EVC 2

Ethernet LAN Service (E-LAN)

Ethernet LAN Service (E-LAN)

Basic MEF Services

34

Use Case 1: P2P EPL, 1 EVC, BE CoS

• Point to Point leased line (Frame Relay) replacement

• 10Mb/s Data traffic (delay tolerant)• Port based mapping of QoS

Sources: Cox Jan 2008

35

Use Case 1: P2P EPL, 1 EVC, BE CoS

Use Case 2: P2P EPL, 1 EVC, BE and RT CoS


36

Use Case 3: Hub & Spoke, 2 EVC, RT and BE CoS

• Three locations, different BW between Site 1 & HQ, and Site 2 & HQ

• VoIP traffic and Data Traffic• Multiplexes services on HQ UNI


37

Use Case 4: ELAN, Multipoint EVC, BE CoS

• Any to any connection (Mash)• Data traffic (delay tolerant


38

Simplified View

39

The Provisioning Challenge

• Administrative and provisioning system that sets up the VLAN connections are essential

• DOCSIS provisioning is usually a single ended solution

• SLA and CoS – difficult to monitor and ensure

• Multiple devices to configure

• Possibly crossing several provisioning domains

• Do we need to make a change every time we add a customer or a VLAN?

• Can we scale effectively without automation?

DOCSISPacket

Switched Network

Packet Switched Network

DOCSIS

Router / Switch MEF Enabled

DOCSIS CPEDistribution

RouterCMTS Core



Distribution Router CMTS

MEF Enabled DOCSIS CPE

End to End Ethernet Service

Ethernet over

DOCSIS

Customer Edge 1

Provider Edge 1

Packet Switched Network (PSN) Network using IP or MPLS as the mechanism for packet forwarding

Customer Edge 2

Provider Edge 2

Ethernet over

DOCSIS

Router / Switch

40

L2VPN provisioning

• CMs– Uses standard DOCSIS provisioning with BPI

• CMTSs– Must provision a table associating the VPN .1Q tag

with the MAC address of the L2VPN CM

• PEs– Must accept different .1Q tags from each VPN– Must connect VPN segments together across:

• DOCSIS only – by associating .1Q tags• The core – by supporting VPLS (or equal)

41

L2TPv3 tunnel provisioning

Two main alternatives:

1. L2TPv3 CPE and Aggregator/Concentrator Architecture

2. L2TPv3 CPE Architecture

42

L2TPv3 tunnel provisioning

• CMs– Uses standard DOCSIS provisioning– Must provision a Pseudo-Wire to the next L2TPv3 hop – Since L2TPv3 adds an extra IP header around the frames, MTU

size may become an issue• L2TPv3 CMs need to cooperate to discover the Path MTU size

and agree to fragment at the edge to keep the core happy.

• CMTSs – should require no special provisioning

• PEs– May need to terminate the L2TPv3 tunnels of each VPN (in

concentrator/Aggregator arch. only)– May need to support VPLS, if backbone is MPLS. – If layer 3 (IP) is used as backbone transport – no change or special

provisioning is required.

43

QoS Provisioning – Goals and outline

• The goals – Transport Enterprise frames with QoS meeting the SLA

• The implementation– The forwarding mechanism for the frames is irrelevant as long as

the SLA is met– OAM provides mechanisms to detect problems

• Forwarding mechanisms– Most forwarding entities examine tags on the data to determine

forwarding needs• IP header – DiffServ Code Point (DSCP)• Ethernet header – .1Q tag p bits, and others• MPLS – cos

– Tags may be used at each network element to give passing data different queue priority, routing, etc based on its tag.

– Most standardization efforts are centering on defining classes of service (like VOIP, video, best effort, etc) so they may be assigned to the different tag values in the different QoS mechanisms

44

QoS Provisioning – Interoperation

• Forwarding mechanisms– Where networks interface, forwarding may change from one

method to another. – Tag usage methods must be changed in a predictable manner (for

interoperation). This is “QoS mapping”. – Often this means changing focus from one tag to another, or

swapping out tags to different types.– QoS for forwarding L2 frames is accomplished by giving QoS to

the container the frames are in, even if it’s an L3 container.

• Standards– Everyone has always been working on this!– MEF has a Class of Service (CoS) team and the NNI specification

team working on these issues using L2 tags– Cable has an MSO backbone group working on peering using IP

tags

45

Possible QoS mapping

46

Agenda


47

Ethernet Business Services

Ethernet is the Hottest Data Service

• Ethernet service is the hottest worldwide data service– Carrier Ethernet revenue will grow to $31 Billion yearly (2012)– Ethernet revenue will soon trump TDM revenue

ITFacts Telecom

$11 Billion(2007)

• GPON is a well equipped FTTx service delivery platform– GPON captures new services revenue growth market– GPON also integrates TDM clocked services growth

48

ETHERNET BUSINESS SERVICES

MEF Optical Ethernet is Easy

E-LAN

E-Tree

E-Line

Simplified service offerings (Ethernet WANs)

– What locations, Mr. Customer?

• How much BW?, What VLANs?

– Uniform Provisioning (Rapid CPE turn-up)

– Simplified Up-sell

• On-demand BW, Self-service

• Simple MEF-9 VLAN switching– Untagged, tagged, add tags

49

(Long reach PON)

Point-to-Multipoint Passive Optical network (like HFC)– Layer 2 technology, just like DOCSIS, One fiber splits to 64 drops (ONTs)– Embedded CWDM enables bi-directional operation (several wavelengths)– Converges multiple networks & services: (voice, data, video, gaming)

– Leverage GPON cost points for Business connections (>5Meg)

• Lowest CAPEX provisioning 10/100 & GE Bandwidth drops & service layering

• Lowest OPEX via embedded service activation, monitoring, OSP immunity

• Point-to-point Active-E is higher cost per megabit provisioning model

(Point to Point)

REMOTEREMOTETERMINALTERMINAL

30k 50+km reach

80km

FIBER ETHERNET BUSINESS SERVICES

What is GPON? (ITU G.984)

Data Center HostingData Center Hosting

TDM & GE

CENTRAL OFFICECENTRAL OFFICE

20km @ 1:32 split

50

GPON Advantages in the SMB

• Small-Medium Business represent opportunity for MSOs– Stable revenue stream, more diverse revenue base

– Sticky customer base that will pay for value added services

• GPON future-proofs delivery of commercial services to SMBs– GPON & optical splitters remain in tact when upgrading system

bandwidth

• Coaxial bandwidth upgrades require changes (e.g. 450MHz 870MHz 1GHz )

– Immune to ingress noise (no sweeping needed)

– Optical passive connection from CO directly into the SMB

– Works in harmony with HFC and current models

– Passive outside plant (no electronics, no power, no amps, etc)

– Simple additions of new customers to the service in surrounding areas

– Low electronics cost, high bandwidth, any service drop-off

51

Targets for GPON Services

Commercial Service Types– Small to medium enterprise

• Home based businesses• Retail services• Mixed use residential/business

– Hospitality and health care– Cell site backhaul– Resorts & smart communities

Transparent LANs, VOIP, Voice

52

GPON Access Solution

– ITU-T G.984.1/.2/.3/.4 compliant– Supports Multi-Gigabit services– Native IP/Ethernet services– Native TDM & RF Transport– Layer 3 provisioning model, Layer 2

Transparent LAN Services– TDM over GE/MPLS Cores

Class 5GR303/SoftSwitch

Internet

IPTV

RF Video

2.4 Gbps

1.2 Gbps

PASSIVE SPLITTERS1:4, 1:8, etc1:32, 1:64

GE/T1 TransportRemote Terminal

Central Office

GE & DS1-over-PON

761

DCCS

IP-MPLSCore

MDU

Cell TowerBackhaul

GE & DS1-over-PON

761

Cell TowerBackhaul

53

Business & Wholesale ONT models

RF Video

TDM/VOIP

10/100/1000 Ethernet

NxDS1- Module

2.5 Gbps GPON

Several Options at the Several Options at the Business Micro-nodeBusiness Micro-node

MDU Business park ONTs– MDU ONTs support 8

unit– Uses only one splitter

PORT of the 32 or 64 way split

Cell Backhaul ONTs– 2-8 DS1s for cellular

traffic– Up to 8 GE ports for

WiFi and WiMAX– PWE3 and TDM modes

54

Internet Access

Voice Sw itch

4 λ CWDM

Satellite

Off-AIr

PEG- Local Content

EDFA

Video Encoders Forw ard Path Tx

Out-of-Band Control

Reverse Path Rx

PON

Set-top Box

Interactive Services Manager

725 ONT

1490 nm GPON1310 nm GPON

1550 nm RF Video1590 nm RF Return

RFOG and GPON Combined Network

• Network Layout – EDFA Output: 19 - 21.5 dBm– ONT RF Optical Receive : +2 to -5 dBm– ONT 1590nm Output (at port): -1.5 dBm– Reverse Path Receive : -8 to -25 dBm– Max Transmission Distance is 17 km– 4W CWDM with RF video overlay

• 2.4 dB loss

55

Service Harmony with HFC+GPON

GPON and HFC are more alike than you may think– Both systems use the same RF video transmitter– HFC and GPON systems have an identical optical architecture

• GPON systems use more fibers• HFC system requires coaxial amplifiers

Benefits of using GPON FTTx– Complementary high bandwidth SMB services where customer

will not pay extra for protected service– Used to augment cable modem services where symmetrical

bandwidth is desired by the customer– Lower operational cost, reducing outside plant trouble shooting

Disadvantages of GPON FTTx– GPON electronics cost is $350 premium over HFC Cable modem– Coax is ubiquitous in businesses passed, fiber is not– CO Electronics cost: GPON OLT port serves only 32-64 max

• A CMTS port serves 100s of businesses served by cable modems

56

Technical Supervision $ 0.00

Service Trouble Truck Rolls (for plant problems) $ 0.00

Plant Maintenance Truck Rolls $ 0.00

Material Inventory $ 0.00

Electricity Consumption $ 0.00

Power Supply Battery Replacement $ 0.00

Power Supply Equipment Repair $ 0.00

RF Line Equipment Repair $ 0.00

Vehicle Accident Loss $ 0.00

Employee Injury Loss $ 0.00

Emergency Cable Repair $ 85.11

Total annual O&M expense per mile of OSP plant $ 85.11

GPON O&M Expenses per Mile of Plant

MSO Presented to ITU, June 2004.

GPON

57

Conclusions

GPON ONTs deliver complete portfolio of commercial services

– Over a future-proofed multiservice operator infrastructure• Integrated 10/100 and GE drops (VLAN rate limiting, QOS and COS)

• Embedded DS1/T1 backhaul for voice and data T1s

• Multiple services over glass the end game

• Fully compatible with existing RF delivery and digital return

– Service stability through passive & optical plant (retain customers)• Annual operating savings of FTTH plant is substantial over copper

– The cost to deploy FTTH is around $350 per business above HFC• HFC is significantly less bandwidth per business

– 2.5 GPON systems support 1GE bursting today• And can be designed for symmetrical 75 Mbps per business; sustained

• DOCSIS systems are designed for much lower bandwidths

– Pay back for FTTx & commercial GPON ranges from 1 to 6 years• GPON prices are declining more rapidly than HFC

58

Q&A


tech challenges

Documents