FTTP Outside Plant
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FTTP Outside Plant Considerations and Case Study Analysis for the CATV Provider FTTP OSP Considerations for the MSO: 1. FTTP Market Drivers 2. FTTP Technologies 3. PON-Based Architectures and Components 4. A MSO Case Study 5. Summary Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 2 But First, Some Terminology: FTTx and FTTP Fiber-to-the-X. A generic industry term that is applied to: Fiber-to-the-Home Fiber-to-the-Business Fiber-to-the-Curb Fiber-to-the-Node Fiber-to-the-MDU Hybrid Fiber Coax Fiber-to-the-Premise. Applies to: Fiber-to-the-Home Fiber-to-the- (small) Business Fiber-to-the-MDU / Fiber-in-the-MDU Today’s topic is FTTP Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 3 FTTP Market Drivers Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 4 What are the reasons for FTTP? First cost CapEx parity with other wireline solutions Reduced Operating expenditures Futureproofing Unbundling relief Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 5 FTTP Cost Convergence with Competing Technologies First Cost per Subscriber 9000 8000 FTTP Cost 7000 FTTN/HFC Cost 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 Source: OFS and Industry Data and estimates 1988 – 2000: Equipment and fibre cabling infrastructure innovation and volume 2000 – 2003: Cost innovation “dividend” resulting from R&D during the boom 2004 – 2008 + Volume deployments drive cost to equal copper Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 6 FTTH First Cost Cost per Subscriber 1400 Column 5 1200 1000 Electronics 800 $ 600 Electrical Passives 400 Optical 200 Passives 0 Labor FTTH FTTC FTTN HFC OFS Estimate Aerial Greenfield or Brownfield with no existing cable Buried about 50% higher cost vs. aerial, $delta between options about equal to that of aerial Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 7 FTTH Operating expense Savings Why? Fewer truck rolls and no power – Remote provisioning though software – Increased reliability – Fully Passive plant eliminates battery back-up in the field and powering of field electronics Savings estimates vs. DSL/HFC – FTTH Opex cost savings justifies $150 higher first cost Source: RBOC Analysis – FTTH Opex saves $100 to $250 per subscriber vs. DSL or HFC Source: Industry estimates Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 8 FTTH First Cost with OPEX Savings 1400 1200 1000 Total Installed 800 Cost $ 600 Total plus NPV of Opex Savings 400 200 0 Greenfield or Brownfield FTTH FTTC FTTN HFC with no existing cable OFS Estimate Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 9 FTTP Technologies Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 10 FTTP Technologies: Ethernet Switched Optical Network (ESON) ONT Ethernet Switch(s) 1 or 2 SM or 1 - 10 SM fibers 2 MM fibers to each home 100 - 1000 OLT subscribers Typical distance range 5 – 40 KM 300 m to 20 KM • Low cost ports but twice the number of ports as PON • Voice, video, and data all over IP •10 to100 Mb/s per subscriber today Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 11 FTTP Technologies: Passive Optical Network (PON) ONT Splitter(s) up to 1:32 1 fiber OLT 1 fiber per home (in CO) up to 32 subscribers Typical distance range 5 to 20 km •No remote actives - enables low life cycle cost •Voice over TDM or IP •Data over IP or ATM •Video – CATV type Broadcast and/or IP Video •20 – 100 Mb/s per subscriber today •Verizon, AT&T, many non-RBOC •DOCSIS-based FTTP solutions are usually a variation on PON. Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 12 FTTP Technologies: Telco-Style PON 1310 nm EDFA CATV 1 1550 nm 1 2 3 … 32 ONT WDM 2 1 2 3 … 32 Splitter(s) Video OLT 1490 nm … Servers 1 fiber per 32 subscribers 1 fiber per subscriber Internet/ 32 Switched voice IP Video network Voice, Data, IP Video TO subscriber - 1490 nm FROM subscriber – 1310 nm Optional Broadcast Video CATV service to subscriber – 1550 nm Analog + Digital Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 13 FTTP Technologies: PON Standards All Share the same basic OSP footprint and wavelength plan. 1310 nm •BPON •EPON •GPON CO/HE EDFA CATV Power 1550 nm Splitter 1:32 WDM 1 fiber per subscriber OLT 1490 nm 1 fiber per 32 subscribers Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 14 DOCSIS-Based Solutions: Can adhere to the standards-based OSP footprint Power 1550 nm Splitter 1:32 NODE 1 fiber per subscriber 1 fiber per 32 subscribers 1310 nm Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 15 FTTP Technologies: The Roadmap? λ1, λ2 λ3, λ4 λ15, λ16 CO or Head End CWDM Mux/DeMux CWDM Mux /DeMuxs λ1, 3 −15 (4) 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 CWDM Mux/DeMux CWDM 1 fiber per subscriber Mux/DeMux 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 CWDM λ2, 4, −16 Mux/DeMux 4 fibers per 32 subscribers 4 CWDM OLTs, Each fiber carries 16 wavelengths 16λ each OLT 64 wavelengths for 32 subscribers 8 homes/OLT Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 16 The PON Technology Roadmap: 10 Gb/s EPON/GPON 1310 nm (?) -10 Gb/s symmetrical bandwidth through a standard PON footprint. -Supported by IEEE 10 Gig-E standard. EDFA CATV Power 1550 nm (?) Splitter 1:32 WDM 1 fiber per subscriber OLT 1490 nm (?) 1 fiber per 32 subscribers CO/HE Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 17 PON With Premium Business Services: 1450 CWDM 1470 1410 Multiplexer 1430 1360-1480 1370 1390 Premium service Dedicated bandwidth CWDM-PON OLT CO/Head End Power Splitter for PS-PON <= 32 PS-PON E-Band E-Band subscribers OLT Add/Drop Up to 20 KM Add/Drop Full Spectrum Needed Standard service –shared bandwidth Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 18 Technology Roadmap: Full Spectrum-CWDM Wavelength Legend for Upgrade Options λ1 1271 O1 λ2 1291 O2 CWDM Full Spectrum Wavelength grid λ3 1311 O3 λ4 1331 O4 • ITU G.694.2 (1271 – 1611 nm) λ5 1351 O5 • 18 wavelengths λ6 1371 E1 • 20 nm spacing between wavelengths λ7 1391 E2 λ8 1411 E3 λ9 1431 E4 λ10 1451 E5 λ11 1471 S1 λ12 1491 S2 λ13 1511 S3 λ14 1531 C1 λRF 1550 C2 1571 L1 λ15 1591 L2 λ16 1611 L3 Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 19 PON-Based Architectures and Components Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 20 PON Components: EDFA TXMT Feeder Cable Distribution Cable 1 x 32 Subscriber WDM ONT OLT Drop Cable CO/HE Splice Closures Splitters Drop Closure = Fusion Splice Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 21 PON Architectures: Splitter Placement Home Run Splitters In Frames Centralized Splitters In Cabinets Decentralized/ Distributed Splitters In Closures Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 22 PON Architectures: The TAP 90/10 Split Ratio 80/20 Split Ratio BL/BL BL/BL BL/BL 1x2 1x2 1x4 1x4 Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 23 Splitter Efficiency: TAP Architectures Uses low-cost, uneven split-ratio wideband FBT couplers/splitters. Typically employed where a limited amount of fiber is already installed. Some potential downtime issues associated with adding new customers. FBT technology does not typically operate over the full CWDM optical spectrum. For the purposes of this presentation, the tap solution will be considered a variation of distributed architecture. Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 24 Point to Point (P2P) OSP: All Fibers Feed From CO Splitters to Living Units Home Run Splitters In Frames Single fiber Drop Cables to each home P2P NO SPLITTERS In Field Single fiber Drop Cables to each home Drop Closure Drop Closure 8 Drops Common 8 Drops Common CO/ Headend Distribution Closure Drop Closure Drop Closure 8 Drops Common 8 Drops Common Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 25 Distributed Splitter Application: Decentralized/ Distributed Splitters In Closures Single fiber Drop Cables to each home Distributed Splitter Structure Individual Spliced Drops Single fiber Drop Cables Drop Closure Drop Closure to each home 8 Drops Common 8 Drops Common CO/ Headend Distribution Closure Drop Closure Drop Closure 8 Drops Common 8 Drops Common Splitter Managment Closure Locates 1x32 Splitters Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 26 Centralized Splitter Application: Splitters In Cabinets Aggregated Splitter Structure Individual Spliced Drops Single fiber Drop Cables to each home CO/ Drop Closure Drop Closure Headend Distribution Closure Cabinet Feeder Closure 8 Drops Common 8 Drops Common Fiber Distrubution Cabinet/Hub Locates 1x32 Splitters Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 27 PON Centralized Architecture: Common Telco Solution The FDH – Fiber Distribution Hub Very efficient use of OLT capacity and splitter capacity in an overbuild with unpredictable take-rates. Can achieve 100% efficiency. More fiber + more connectors + fiber management + real estate requirements = greater expense. FDH EDFA TXMT Dedicated Fiber from WDM FDH to each 1 - 96 Home. OLT 1 - 3 OLT (1x32) PLC x 3 = 96 Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 28 OLT Cost-Per-Subscriber: If the OLT cost-per-sub is $250, what is the cost of inefficiency? $250 Per-Subscriber OLT Cost $7,000 $6,000 $5,000 Cost of $4,000 Unused OLT $3,000 Capacity $2,000 $1,000 $- 1x32 1x16 1x8 1x4 Split Ratio Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 29 Why Do Telco’s Deploy Cabinets? $250/Sub OLT ELECTRONICS VERSUS CENT. CABINET COMPARISON 2400 2200 2000 1800 INCREMENTAL 1600 ELECTRONICS $/SUB 1400 1200 1000 800 $ PER SUBSCRIBER 600 400 200 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 TAKE RATE % Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 30 Why Do Telco’s Deploy Cabinets? $60/Sub Cabinet ELECTRONICS VERSUS CENT. CABINET COMPARISON 800 600 CENT. CABINET $/SUB 400 $ PER SUBSCRIBER $ 200 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 TAKE RATE % Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 31 Why Do Telco’s Deploy Cabinets? $250/Sub OLT and $60/Sub Cabinet ELECTRONICS VERSUS CENT. CABINET COMPARISON 2400 2200 2000 INCREMENTAL 1800 ELECTRONICS $/SUB 1600 1400 CENT. CABINET $/SUB 1200 1000 800 $ PER SUBSCRIBER $ 600 400 200 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 TAKE RATE % Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 32 Take-Rates, OLT Costs, and OSP Design: Centralized •Efficient Take- Rate Management •High OSP Material Costs •Efficient Take- Home Run Rate Management •Moderate to High OSP Material Costs Decentralized/ •Inefficient Take- Rate Management Distributed •Low OSP Material Costs Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 33 The Drop Options: Centralized Drop Issues are common to all Home Run architectures Decentralized/ Distributed Copyright © OFS 2008 Page 34 The Drop: A significant portion of the overall cost to deploy FTTP is in making the connection (or “drop”) to the subscriber.