Please wait...
Saw it on a tour of a small local fiber ISP on the youtubes. Seems only the small ISPs are using this tech, the big boys are still using TDS.
Sat Jul 22 2023 22:37:27 EDT from IGnatius T FoobarFirst I've heard of that, can you send a link so I can read about it? We do plenty of DWDM in our data centers (when we build or lease dark fiber we mux it to death to get every $$$ out of it we can) but I've never heard of an ISP serving last-mile customers that way.
Sometimes he says he's doing an installation "DIA style" which is, as you described, straight ethernet over a pair of wavelengths all the way out to the customer prem. I aked him about that once and he said it's more flexible if you expect to change the speed and/or put a bunch of routers on the tail end. Everyone else gets PON.
And I'm sure there are plenty of people working for big tech companies who have really bad TDS, but I suppose you meant TDM? (It *is* a form of TDM, but they always call it PON.)
So now broadband is a human right and the below 'classes' of people get it free, and free training on how to watch cat-videos. We must use federal dollars, its a *right*. Even criminals in jail get it..
And no, im not making this up. ( doing more research after the speech i had to sit thru Monday about our new department ) -> https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2022/05/mapping-digital-equity-in-every-state.html
These categories tend to be associated with lower levels of digital inclusion. They may lack reliable broadband services, internet-ready devices or the skills needed to connect and ensure online privacy and cybersecurity.
The eight categories are:
- Individuals living in households with incomes at or below 150% of the poverty line.
- Individuals 60 years of age or older.
- Veterans.
- Individuals living with one or more disabilities.
- Individuals with barriers to the English language (including English language learners and those with low literacy).
- Members of racial and ethnic minority groups.
- Individuals residing in rural areas.
- Individuals incarcerated in a nonfederal correctional facility.
I see free computers coming soon:
"Additionally, the tool shows other factors used in the funding formula, including the percentage of people in households lacking fixed broadband availability (2.0), in households lacking computer or broadband subscriptions (10.8), not using the Internet (14.2), and the percentage not using a PC or tablet (24.2)."
So now broadband is a human right and the below 'classes' of people
get it free, and free training on how to watch cat-videos. We must
use federal dollars, its a *right*. Even criminals in jail get
it..
I keep seeing initiatives to promote digital inclusion and whatever but nobody ever brings a passable broadband line to my home, ever.
I read a comment on a broadband website that suggested Verizon was moving towards "QAM-less" video for FiOS customers who are on the new NG-PON2 plant.
That's quite an interesting development.
(For those who aren't aware, NG-PON2 can be deployed on different wavelengths than GPON, allowing a nice easy migration without having to use separate fiber strands.)
I don't have the television service anymore, and I don't plan on moving past 1 Gbps service, so I probably won't get moved off the GPON service until they retire it. But it's an interesting development. It means that not only is copper becoming obsolete even more rapidly, but multichannel cable in general is also on its way out.
"QAM-less" means that there's no longer going to be a wavelength that gets converted back to a set of 6 MHz channels on a coaxial cable between 50 MHz and 1 GHz. Fiber providers take that cable television spectrum, map it to fiber, and then map it back to RF at the subscriber site so that cable boxes can pick it up. Now it sounds like they are going to IPTV only. And that's a good thing.
Many cable companies are moving to fiber as well. Here in Uncensoredland, the "cable company" (Altice) is stringing up fiber as fast as they can because they figured out how quickly coaxial cable is becoming obsolete. The big holdout seems to be everyone's favorite cable company -- Comcast, who are stubbornly clinging to HFC and coaxial cable to the customer premise, even though their marketing materials are now trumpeting "home of the 10G network".
Harumph. It's the old "speeds up to 10 Gbps" trick and under normal circumstances you'd struggle to get even 500 Mbps throughput.
Heh. Even though I don't watch television, it's fascinating to watch a decades-old technology change so significantly right in front of our eyes.
So now that they're not using those discarded wavelengths, we get to do something else with them, right?
And once we have reliable room temp super conductors, and work out the kinks, we will have quantum networking.. Ditch all the "wires".
AND we get instant communications to mars and some of the moons of Jupiter.. if we survive long enough to colonize.
"speeds up to 10 Gbps"
So now that they're not using those discarded wavelengths, we get to
do something else with them, right?
Yes, if by "we" you mean whoever is making use of the fiber.
BPON and GPON run on 1310nm (transmit) and 1490 (receive). Verizon adds a video overlay using QAM over RFoG at 1550 nm, which as I previously noted is converted back to QAM over RF at the subscriber premise and distributed to set top boxes over coaxial cable.
NG-PON2 runs on a wide range of frequencies between 1460 and 1620 nm, and is provider configurable. The more spectrum they have on the fiber, the more speed and/or subscribers they can provision. Combining NG-PON2 and GPON on the same glass means they have to exclude those wavelengths, similar to the way cable providers have to keep video and data on separate RF channels.
Some providers who are just getting started with fiber are deploying XG-PON, which is essentially just a 10 Gbps version of GPON that runs on the same wavelengths. Those providers could optionally move to NG-PON2 in the future.
As I've said before, I am excited about the move to an all-fiber world and that we can expect the fiber installed today to have a service life that will span many generations of technology lighting it up.
That shit sounds way too convoluted, and quite wasteful. Why transmit channels that aren't currently being watched? Just do what AT&T and Comcast did and use IPTV and VoiP.
Yes, if by "we" you mean whoever is making use of the fiber.
BPON and GPON run on 1310nm (transmit) and 1490 (receive). Verizon adds a video overlay using QAM over RFoG at 1550 nm, which as I previously noted is converted back to QAM over RF at the subscriber premise and distributed to set top boxes over coaxial cable.
NG-PON2 runs on a wide range of frequencies between 1460 and 1620 nm, and is provider configurable. The more spectrum they have on the fiber, the more speed and/or subscribers they can provision. Combining NG-PON2 and GPON on the same glass means they have to exclude those wavelengths, similar to the way cable providers have to keep video and data on separate RF channels.
Some providers who are just getting started with fiber are deploying XG-PON, which is essentially just a 10 Gbps version of GPON that runs on the same wavelengths. Those providers could optionally move to NG-PON2 in the future.
As I've said before, I am excited about the move to an all-fiber world and that we can expect the fiber installed today to have a service life that will span many generations of technology lighting it up.
When did Comcast switch to IPTV? That's news to me. Did they abandon QAM and go all-data on their coaxial plant?
AT&T is the one company that did it the right way, in my opinion. Since they controlled the entire network they transmitted their multichannel service over IP Multicast. That's the "obviously technically correct" way to do it, instead of maintaining separate streams to every subscriber.
I suppose they had no choice, because U-Verse has/had limited bandwidth due to it basically just being souped-up DSL.
Still ... all remaining coaxial and copper-pair services are going to die soon. Gigabit speed is now table stakes, with most providers now either offering or talking about multigigabit speeds. Even the fixed wireless and LEO satellite services are going to have a hard time keeping up with that.
The whole industry is changing right before our eyes and we get to watch!
Ya, when we moved to Hagerstown in 2011, Antietam Cable (whom has a county-wide monopoly) was using IPTV. There were exactly 3 channels that were still available on the QAM side of cable.
Then in 2015 when we moved to Havre de Grace, we were forced to go with Crapcast. Zero channels on QAM, everything was IPTV. Even with cable, IPTV is the only way to offer 50,000 channels.
When did Comcast switch to IPTV? That's news to me. Did they abandon QAM and go all-data on their coaxial plant?
AT&T is the one company that did it the right way, in my opinion. Since they controlled the entire network they transmitted their multichannel service over IP Multicast. That's the "obviously technically correct" way to do it, instead of maintaining separate streams to every subscriber.
I suppose they had no choice, because U-Verse has/had limited bandwidth due to it basically just being souped-up DSL.
Still ... all remaining coaxial and copper-pair services are going to die soon. Gigabit speed is now table stakes, with most providers now either offering or talking about multigigabit speeds. Even the fixed wireless and LEO satellite services are going to have a hard time keeping up with that.
The whole industry is changing right before our eyes and we get to watch!
/me likes the idea of QAM going the way of the dodo and IP taking over everything.
Extra bonus points for providers who actually do real multicast to make the most efficient use of network bandwidth for live channels.
That's purely based on looking at it from the point of view of a network engineer, though. The other, and equally as important view, is this: may the fires of hell burn hottest for providers who use IPTV as a way to jam more crapchannels onto the wire and increase their use of DRM. WHY THE HELL ARE YOU USING DRM TO REBROADCAST OVER THE AIR BROADCAST CHANNELS?
OMG. I just figured something out. Mind blown. Dig:
ATSC 3.0 just came out, and it's making the built-in tuners in everyone's existing televisions obsolete. To receive ATSC 3.0 broadcasts with an antenna, you're going to need an external tuner, just like you needed one to receive ATSC 1.0 broadcasts on a television with an analog tuner. ATSC 3.0 includes DRM, so broadcast stations can encrypt their broadcasts.
Why the @%$*& would free-to-air broadcasters want to encrypt with DRM?
Well, I just figured it out. There's an FCC regulation mandating that if a cable or satellite provider receives a free-to-air channel, they must retransmit it to their cable plant unencrypted. Now that the broadcast channels are going DRM, even if every antenna receiver can view it for free, the cable companies can still encrypt the signal.
Damn.
It's already well known that broadcast stations still prefer viewers to have cable or satellite instead of an antenna. This is because they receive per-subscriber "rebroadcast fees" that they don't receive from antenna viewers.
This is why I don't watch television. Everyone involved, from the writers to the actors to the producers to the broadcasters to every single person involved in the industry ... all of them are ultra hitler scumbags.
I had to crawl across about 40 feet (more than 12 meters) of attic trusses to install it, and that was before I had a bad ankle.
Some sources suggest that you can run 10 Gbps on Cat5e as long as you keep it under 45 meters. I'm not even running it at 1 Gbps right now. The run to the living room goes to a wifi access point with a little built-in switch that is running at 100 Mbps. And so I installed MRTG at home to see how much "Internet" is being used.
My household is a family of four with a lot of things connected to the Internet.
I work from home in a technology role. My wife is a television addict who is *always* streaming, around the clock. My kids are running multiple screens more often than not. In the evening we push video to the big screen. Overnight, I have offsite backups running in both directions.
And yet ... according to the graphs, we seldom consume more than 36 Mbps of Internet.
How much is "more than we'll never need"? I've had a home network longer than most. 30 years ago it was 10 Mbps (unless you count the 4 Mbps token ring I started with). 20 years ago it was 100 Mbps, and 10 years ago many households had 1 Gbps. My current Internet connection is also 1 Gbps, and we only use a fraction of it. 10 Gbps is available today and I can confidently say I have absolutely no use for that kind of Internet bandwidth. Perhaps if I had a NAS it would be useful for file transfer; it's only been recently that a typical computer could push more than 800 Mbps or so.
Even the new 2.5 Gbps ethernet can run over Cat5e at up to 100 meters. That's the reason it exists.
I am 52 years old. Let's say I live in this house another 30 years, until I'm 82. What kind of applications might come into existence that will even make use of 1 Gbps, or exceed it? Even a 4K video stream only consumes 25 Mbps. It stands to reason that even if someone comes up with an "immersive AI virtual reality whatever111" the most bandwidth it can consume is that used by high definition video in both directions.
If I ever do have to re-pull the network cable in this house, I suppose it will be fiber.
Id say leave it. I doubt you ever need it. But if im wrong, at least you have cable there now, and unless you stapled it down, just tie a string to it, and pull it backwards, then reverse with the new line. So no need to shuffle around in the attic again, since you did the hard work already. And i totally agree, even if the magic VR takeover happens, it wont be any worse than a couple more TVs.. I think for normal "households" we have hit the top end of bandwidth needs.
Sort of related, I'm still kicking myself for not running line when my roof was off a decade or so ago. Since i cant scurry around in my attic, at least not where i need to, i cant do it now. Just didnt think about it at the time. ( well short of cutting a hole in a closet, past the 'obstruction' in the middle of my house and climbing up that way. Ironically the last house i built, i did that before the put the walls up. Cat 5 and coax. 2 runs to each room, terminated in the garage, right beside the ladder. It was in the late 90s so coax was still important for TV. Cat 5 was for Ethernet and/or phone.
I am 52 years old. Let's say I live in this house another 30 years,
until I'm 82. What kind of applications might come into existence that
will even make use of 1 Gbps, or exceed it? Even a 4K video stream
only consumes 25 Mbps. It stands to reason that even if someone comes
up with an "immersive AI virtual reality whatever111" the most
bandwidth it can consume is that used by high definition video in both
directions.
Lucky bastard.
I max my LAN pipes doing local backups because I have pipes running at Fast Ethernet that I can't afford to replace.
"As much bandwidth as you will ever need" is the one that allows me to do a full backup from scratch in less than an hour. Maybe 2 gigabYtes per second would make me happy.
For me, that stuff is all done in the closet, not via lines going to bedrooms and such so people can watch CatTV.. I have a 10g switch in there less than a foot away from the server farm.
Thu Dec 14 2023 16:49:20 EST from darknetuser
"As much bandwidth as you will ever need" is the one that allows me to do a full backup from scratch in less than an hour. Maybe 2 gigabYtes per second would make me happy.
2023-12-14 16:58 from Nurb432
For me, that stuff is all done in the closet, not via lines going to
bedrooms and such so people can watch CatTV.. I have a 10g switch
in there less than a foot away from the server farm.
I don't have bandwidth to watch TV at home anyway, lol.
At my jobs I have all the gear necessary to back a day worth of work up in a matter of minutes. At home I use old repurposed equipment. Heck, the NAS I use fo workstation backups has 256 megs of RAM and a fast ethernet itself. It costed me 80 dollar.
A lot of mine is as well. Not quite that old, but a lot of it is 'new to me' in one way or another.
Not all, but most.
Thu Dec 14 2023 19:13:05 EST from darknetuserAt my jobs I have all the gear necessary to back a day worth of work up in a matter of minutes. At home I use old repurposed equipment. Heck, the NAS I use fo workstation backups has 256 megs of RAM and a fast ethernet itself. It costed me 80 dollar.
I max my LAN pipes doing local backups because I have pipes running at Fast Ethernet that I can't afford to replace.
How so? Fast Ethernet (100 Mbps) requires Category 5 cable, which can support 1 Gbps.
Or do you mean that you only have 100 Mbps equipment on the wire?
My home network isn't really that complicated, since I don't have a home lab and I don't run my web properties from here. So it's basically just an access network ... a nice one, but not overkill. Everything is built from low-end Mikrotik devices, most of which I bought secondhand on ebay. I can saturate my 1 Gbps internet pipe from my desk with a bandwidth test. The rest of the time, as previously noted, I seldom see more than 1/20 of that being consumed.
How so? Fast Ethernet (100 Mbps) requires Category 5 cable, which
can support 1 Gbps.
Or do you mean that you only have 100 Mbps equipment on the wire?
Some segments are Cat 4, then I have some Cat5e but it is Chinesse Cat5e, which means if you test the wire you won't get the rated speed lol.
Some of my "Cat5e" won't run past 250 Mbps. That is ok because most of my switches can't handle past Fast Ethernet anyway.
Lol, I am starting to sound so third worldly.