1 / 44

FTTx Options Technology Comparison

FTTx Options Technology Comparison. BAN Marketing Broadband BU. Agenda. FTTx Market Study GEPON Technology – NOW and FUTURE! Technology Options and comparison GEPON vs. GPON PON vs. Active Ethernet Q&A. FTTx Market Trends. Fiber deployment in access network is more rapid than expected

keena
Télécharger la présentation

FTTx Options Technology Comparison

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FTTx Options Technology Comparison BAN Marketing Broadband BU UTStarcom Confidential

  2. Agenda • FTTx Market Study • GEPON Technology – NOW and FUTURE! • Technology Options and comparison • GEPON vs. GPON • PON vs. Active Ethernet • Q&A UTStarcom Confidential

  3. FTTx Market Trends • Fiber deployment in access network is more rapid than expected • Over 10% broadband installations are FTTx (Source: DSL Forum) • Fiber-to-the-home networks will reach more than 85 million homes by 2011, representing 5% of all households, Heavy Reading forecasts • APAC is leading the way • Japan and Korea are main drivers; China will catch-up • Number of Asian FTTH users will grow eightfold in the next five years, from five million in 2005 to more than 40 million in 2010 (Source: TDG) • NTT expects to have 30 million subscribers by end of 2010 • Next generation broadband network in US and Europe is FTTx based • FTTH: Verizon, France Telecom • FTTN: at&t, Telecom Italia, DT • FTTC: BellSouth UTStarcom Confidential

  4. FTTx Options Splitter/ Active Switch Fiber FTTH GEPON/GPON/Ethernet IP Network Includes fiber to both individual houses and to apartment blocks (aka FTTH) Splitter/ Active Switch Ethernet ONU GEPON/GPON/Ethernet Fiber FTTB IP Network iHFC ONU To an office/apartment block IPDSLAM FTTN IP Network GEPON/GPON/Ethernet ADSL2+/VDSL2 Up to about 1,500 meters from the premises Cabinet FTTC GEPON/GPON/Ethernet IP Network ADSL2+/VDSL2 Up to about 150 meters from the premises (aka FTTCab) UTStarcom Confidential

  5. FTTx Market Drivers • Increasingly limited capacity of traditional networks • ADSL2+ is not enough to handle future broadband needs • VDSL2 adoption is very slow, cost is high (comparable to PON) • Continuing innovations and cost reductions in optical infrastructure and active equipment • Ability to leverage existing infrastructure to capture incremental revenues and an accelerated ROI • Broadband viewed by governments as tool for national competition UTStarcom Confidential

  6. Global Broadband and FTTH Installations Source: Corning Presentation UTStarcom Confidential

  7. FT Business Case for FTTH Source: France Telecom UTStarcom Confidential

  8. Why FT has chosen FTTH? Source: France Telecom UTStarcom Confidential

  9. A closer look into US Market Source: Adventis Corporation UTStarcom Confidential

  10. FTTx Market Forecast • GEPON demand will continue to be strong thru 2008 until GPON becomes mature and cost effective • GPON will mostly fill-in for BPON, which will retire in coming years • Active Ethernet demand is projected to significantly lower than PON in next three years Source: Infornetics Research Source: Infornetics Research UTStarcom Confidential

  11. Agenda • FTTx Market Study • GEPON Technology – NOW and FUTURE! • Technology Options and comparison • GEPON vs. GPON • PON vs. Active Ethernet • Q&A UTStarcom Confidential

  12. GEPON Technology Overview NB GEPON Access Network Structure CC: Cross Connect Voice NB: Narrow Brand ONU BB: Broad Brand Upstream (TDMA) Data Up to 1:64 Splitter ration CC Video OLT GbE ONU BB Voice Access Node Downstream (Broadcast 802.3 frames) ONU Data 0-20 Km physical reach range UTStarcom Confidential

  13. GEPON Technology Overview (Contd.) GEPON Overview OLT ONU EPON Down Stream 1490nm 1 . 25 Gbps EPON Up Stream 1310nm 1 . 25 Gbps 10 km – 20 km UTStarcom Confidential

  14. GEPON based RF Video Overlay Solution Overlay / Broadcast Video: PSTN POTS EPON Subsystem FE/GE • 1490nm DS Data • 1310nm US Data • 1550nm Video OLT 1:N Splitter IPTV IP Network WDM WDM RF 1550nm Video RF TV EDFA RF enabled ONU Media network Video Transmitter • Leverages existing CATV infrastructure • Reduced IP bandwidth requirement • Easy inside-home wiring CATV/DBS UTStarcom Confidential

  15. GEPON – The Future • IEEE P802.3av Task Force - 10Gb/s Ethernet Passive Optical Network (10GEPON) • As Ethernet evolves from GE to 10GE, EPON physical interfaces will evolve to 10GEPON • IEEE 802.3 Work Group has approved the “10Gbps PHY for EPON” Study group with the following Objectives • Provide physical layer specifications:– • PHY for PON, 10 Gbps downstream/1 Gbps upstream, single SM fiber • PHY for PON, 10 Gbps downstream/10 Gbps upstream, single SM fiber • Define up to 3 classes of PMD. Define PMD(s) to operate with split ratios of 16 and 32, and with distances of 10 or 20 km. Investigate split ratios of 64 and 128. • Support subscriber access networks using point to multipoint topologies on optical fiber • PHY(s) to have a BER better than or equal to 10-12 at the PHY service interface GEPON : A Future-proof Technology UTStarcom Confidential

  16. Key Operators’ Expectation from 10G EPON • World’s largest EPON network operator - NTT and Taiwanese incumbent CHT has the following expectations from 10G EPON: UTStarcom Confidential

  17. 10G EPON Market Drivers Digital TV Digital HOME Source: IEEE 10GEPON Call for Interest,; Denver May 2006 UTStarcom Confidential

  18. 10G EPON Market Drivers (Contd.) MDU/MTU Application Source: IEEE 10GEPON Call for Interest,; Denver May 2006 UTStarcom Confidential

  19. 10G EPON Feasibility Study Completed Source: IEEE 10GEPON Call for Interest,; Denver May 2006 UTStarcom Confidential

  20. Migration from 1G EPON Objectives Possible Solution Source: IEEE 10GEPON Proceedings,; Denver May 2006 UTStarcom Confidential

  21. 10G EPON Wavelength Plan • Objectives • Backward compatible with 1G EPON • Allow for co-existence of 1G EPON for smooth migration • Continue to support 1550nm for RF Video Overlay • Proposals • Downstream: 1574nm ~ 1580nm • Upstream: 1260nm ~ 1360 nm • Still under study Source: IEEE 10GEPON Proceedings,; Geneva May 2007 UTStarcom Confidential

  22. 10G EPON Timeline and Conclusion • Most of the studies are complete • First technical draft to be released in July 2007 • Standard to be ratified by May 2009 “10G EPON” is ultra-high-bandwidth, simple, and cost-effective FTTx solution for next-generation broadband networks UTStarcom Confidential

  23. Agenda • FTTx Market Study • GEPON Technology – NOW and FUTURE! • Technology Options and comparison • GEPON vs. GPON • PON vs. Active Ethernet • Q&A UTStarcom Confidential

  24. The Technology Debate • The hottest topic among carriers hoping to provide FTTH services is the debate on the technology choice • The major contenders in the race are • PON • EPON or GEPON • GPON • Active Ethernet • What will determine the result is • Market Success • Technical Advantages • Technology Roadmap UTStarcom Confidential

  25. Technologies and Targeted Applications UTStarcom Confidential

  26. Comparison at glance UTStarcom Confidential

  27. CAPEX & OPEX Comparison • GEPON is both low on CAPEX and OPEX • P2P has much higher OPEX because of active electronics in the field; Also two fibers are needed to offer triple play services • GPON has high CAPEX - Infrastructure Cost - Fiber (Material) - Fiber Installation - Labor - Customer Acquisition CAPEX GPON P2P GEPON OPEX - Manpower - Equipment Mtce. - Truck-roll repairs - Power for CO/RO UTStarcom Confidential

  28. Agenda • FTTx Market Study • GEPON Technology – NOW and FUTURE! • Technology Options and comparison • GEPON vs. GPON • PON vs. Active Ethernet • Q&A UTStarcom Confidential

  29. Why GEPON? • Key Benefits • Low Risk • Low CAPEX and OPEX • Built for Ethernet Infrastructure GEPON: “Cost Effective FTTH Solution” WHY? Simplicity Proven Technology Cost Advantage “GePON is still the dominant [FTTH] technology, and this trend will not change in the next two years,” Dittberner said Source: Telephonyonline.com UTStarcom Confidential

  30. Cable Services and GEPON • Cable MSO Services • All IP-based • Voice over IP • RF Video or IPTV • High Speed Internet Access • In future, multimedia services also to be IP-based • E.g., Online Gaming, Movie/Music download, etc. GEPON GPON • Simple Technology like EP2P with PON efficiency • Ethernet based architecture • End-to-end bandwidth efficiency • Cost Effective • Designed by Telcos for Telcos • Complex mechanism to accommodate ATM and TDM transport  Useless feature for Cable MSO • Still very expensive UTStarcom Confidential

  31. GEPON Market Success • Proven deployment success • GEPON accounts for 66% of all PON deployments in 2005 • Continuing growth in worldwide demand – 5 million lines deployed by 2006. • 10 million lines installed CO Capacity. • Many major carriers including SBB, NTT and Korea Telecom have announced EPON deployments. • Larger Manufacturing Base • EPON has a much larger base of system and component manufacturers. • Marked decrease in price of systems and optics since the IEEE 802.3ah was standardized in 2004 UTStarcom Confidential

  32. GEPON Value Proposition • Supports bandwidth-intensive, high margin applications • Smooth migration to triple play (video / voice / data) • Can match all GPON services • TDM over EPON with jitter and wander within ITU-T specs. • Seamless Integration with IP/Ethernet Core Network • Provides strict quality of service support • Ability to provide guaranteed QoS / SLA on each flow • Guaranteed minimum bandwidth • Controlled maximum bandwidth • Market trends forecast higher EPON subscribers by 2010 than GPON subscribers (3X) – which will translate into much cheaper EPON MAC chips and transceivers Simplifies Migration to New revenue generating services UTStarcom Confidential

  33. Very Large Scale Deployment More than 5 million lines installed by end 2005 NTT Japan, More than 3 Million FTTH installed Expects to have 30 million subscribersby end of 2010 Korea Telecom More than 1.5 Million FTTH installed CNC/CTC China Will deploy more than 1 Million FTTH in 2007 CHT, Taiwan has chosen EPON for FTTH application Only Trials and Small Networks Verizon, USA Still deploying BPON, because GPON solution is not ready for prime-time AT&T and Bell South Decided to stay with FTTN and FTTC with GE backhaul European incumbents So far only FT has announced its plans to offer FTTH using GPON Deployed in small MUNI networks MOC, Kuwait Major Installations – Current Situation GE-PON GPON UTStarcom Confidential

  34. End-to-end Bandwidth Efficiency • Factors to consider • Backhaul for all multi-play applications (voice, video, data, gaming, etc.) HAS to be IP • Ethernet links to the network in multiple of 1Gbps or 10Gbps • End-to-end efficiency should be compared instead of just between OLT and ONU • Both GEPON and GPON support up to 64 splits per OLT 1x GE 3x GE GEPON OLT GPON OLT 900 Mbps 2300 Mbps / 1150 Mbps • Symmetrical IP uplinks • Ethernet based design • Effective throughput: • 960 Mbps (DS); 900 Mbps (US) • Per OLT • 1GE uplink (complete non-blocking) • Uplink efficiency (US): 91% • Uplink efficiency (DS): 96% • Under-utilized & asymmetric IP uplinks • SDH/SONET based design • Effective throughput: • 2300 Mbps (DS); 1150 Mbps (US) • Per OLT • 3GE uplink (complete non-blocking) • Uplink efficiency (US): 38% • Uplink efficiency (DS): 76% UTStarcom Confidential

  35. GEPON Interoperability • Open and matured technology • More than 4 chipset vendors with complete interoperability • Choice of chipset technology on both OLT and ONT side Source: China Telecom UTStarcom Confidential

  36. Agenda • FTTx Market Study • GEPON Technology – NOW and FUTURE! • Technology Options and comparison • GEPON vs. GPON • PON vs. Active Ethernet • Q&A UTStarcom Confidential

  37. PON vs. Active EthernetTriple Play (FTTH) Service Model GEPON Based Triple Play Solution Active Ethernet Based Triple Play Solution • Simplicity of Ethernet based architecture • Single fiber to home (premise) • Reuse of existing RF video infrastructure • Use of 1550nm for RF video transport – Needs WDM triplexer • Easy to expand; Planning is much easier - Local Power and backup - Remote Site or Outdoor Cabinet - Added Maintenance IP Network IP Network Single Fiber for Triple-Play Optical Fiber (100 base FX) CO CO RO 1:N PON Splitter GEPON OLT ME Switch EPON Link Cu GE Optical Fiber (RF Video) Optical GE Fiber Ring WDM Optical Fiber EDFA L2/L3 Aggregation Switch L2/L3 Aggregation Switch 1:N PON Splitter Video Headend Video Transmitter Video Headend Video Transmitter • Two fibers to each home – one for data/voice, other for RF Video • Optical FE based access to each home • RF distribution plant can’t be reused for data/voice, however no need for WDM triplexer • Higher CAPEX and very high OPEX UTStarcom Confidential

  38. PON vs. Active EthernetFTTH Service Model GEPON Based FTTH Solution Active Ethernet Based FTTC/FTTH Solution • Simplicity of Ethernet based architecture • One time investment in outside plant; Low OPEX • RF Overlay support • Reuse of existing RF video infrastructure • Easy to expand; Planning is much easier • Fiber sharing allows for optimum bandwidth allocation to each subscriber • Connection to aggregation device using inexpensive Cu GE IP Network IP Network CO CO Cat5e/Cat6 (FE/GE) RO 1:N PON Splitter GEPON OLT ME Switch EPON Link Very Expensive Optics (SFP) Cu GE Optical Fiber Optical GE Fiber Ring Optical Fiber (FE/GE) L2/L3 Aggregation Switch L2/L3 Aggregation Switch - Local Power and backup - Remote Site or Outdoor Cabinet - Added Maintenance Business Business < 20Km < 20Km < 100m (Cu) • Significant OPEX spending on Active Ethernet outside plant (OSP) • Expansion needs more OPEX and very good planning • Cat5e/Cat6 has limited reach (only up to 100m) • Fiber access (GE/FE) using Active Ethernet solution is very expensive • Additional GE ports and SFPs are needed on L2/L3 switch to terminate the ring UTStarcom Confidential

  39. PON vs. Active EthernetMDU/MTU Service Model GEON Based FTTB Solution Active Ethernet Based FTTB Solution • Common architecture for FTTH and FTTB applications • RF overlay support • Reuse of existing RF Video infrastructure • Low-cost MDU/MTU ONU for each building • Easier network expansion • Flexibility to offer MDU/MTU service from same optical infrastructure – can serve via existing cat5/cat6 IP Network IP Network CO CO GEPON OLT 1:N PON Splitter Optical Fiber Cu GE Optical GE Fiber Ring EPON Link ME Switch L2/L3 Aggregation Switch L2/L3 Aggregation Switch MDU/MTU Power Backup is essential MDU/MTU ONU Power Backup is optional • More expensive MDU/MTU units • Optical fiber ring reliability is low because of active components – Building-node failure will have network-wide impact • Network expansion still a challenge, especially when a new node to inserted in an active (operational) ring UTStarcom Confidential

  40. Triple Play service over existing coax • Reuse of existing coax for providing triple-play service • FTTH may not be viable for all customers • FTTB based architecture – 60 subscribers per CLT • IP VoD can be supported by providing 2 CNUs to the customer Building RF Video over coax CNU Video Headend IP Network MDU/MTU CO iHFC CLT (basement) GEPON OLT 1:N PON Splitter Cu GE EPON Link L2/L3 Aggregation Switch Optical Fiber UTStarcom Confidential

  41. Cat6 Copper vs. Optical Fiber • What is Cat6? • Cable standard for 1000 Base-TX • Based on TIA/EIA-854 standard • Operates over broader spectrum – up to 200 MHz • Reach up to 100 meters • Recommended for green-field installations • About 20% more expensive than Cat5e • Cat6 advantages over Cat5e • Better performance than Cat5e (Higher SNR and reliability) • Offers access to full 1000 Mb/s 1000 Base-TX over 4-pair Cat6 • Is Cat6 an alternative to Fiber? • Major argument for deploying copper instead of fiber has been higher cost, however as the speed goes up, cost of copper goes up and becomes comparable to fiber • Limited reach makes Cat6 only usable for indoor wiring (FTTB scenario) • Fiber is immune to EMI, which makes it suitable for industrial installation • Unlike Fiber, Cat6 or Cat5e not suitable for RF video transmission Cat6 complements Fiber access, it is not an alternative to Fiber UTStarcom Confidential

  42. PROS Very low cost terminal equipment for Cat5/Cat6 access Ubiquitous availability of end user equipment with Ethernet interfaces and customer familiarity Overall simple system – end to end CONS Higher fiber plant cost No support for RF overlay Much Higher OPEX Network expansion is expensive Power backup mandatory for ME nodes Higher cost and larger interfaces in Upstream Routers (higher CAPEX at CO) PROS PON reduces CAPEX Accommodates a large number of FTTx users efficiently Significant OPEX savings Reduces the footprint and power consumption of central office equipment Reduces outside-plant deployment and repair cost Support for CATV using RF overlay Reuse of existing video distribution infrastructure Knowledge/skill already exists for optical installation CONS Relatively higher cost of Customer Premise Equipment PON vs. Active EthernetTechnology Advantages/Disadvantages Active Ethernet PON UTStarcom Confidential

  43. Agenda • FTTx Market Study • GEPON Technology Now and Future! • Technology Options and comparison • GEPON vs. GPON • PON vs. Active Ethernet • Q&A UTStarcom Confidential

  44. Thank You This presentation is provided by UTStarcom for planning purposes only. Changes in market conditions and/or other changes in circumstances, can affect the assumptions upon which this presentation was based or otherwise impact the contents of this presentation and therefore such contents cannot be guaranteed and are subject to change at any time without notice. Nothing contained in this presentation shall be deemed to create, modify or supplement any commitments or warranty made by the company, whether expressed, implied or statutory, in connection with the products, technology and/or services referenced herein. *Some features may require addition development and may not be ready for immediate implementation. UTStarcom Confidential

More Related