|
Archive
Flanagan
Consulting
Network Analysts and Consultants
"We Have the
Experience"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ViewsLetter on Provisioning 5 Feb 2004
#35
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A fortnightly look at provisioning automation--chips to business
software.
IN THIS ISSUE:
LOCAL EXCHANGE CARRIERS FIND PASSIVE OPTICAL
NETWORKS READY TO DELIVER THE 'TRIPLE PLAY'
--by Vladimir Kaminsky, Contributing Editor
This ViewsLetter reports on recent progress in Passive Optical Networks
(PONs). It is the first in a series that will cover the structure of
such networks, standardization processes, and evolving
technologies. PON deployment will contribute to automated
service provisioning by delivering "enough" bandwidth for a wide
variety of services, which may be introduced over time by upgrading the
software in the customer premises equipment (CPE).
ECONOMIC DRIVERS
The basic principle of a PON network is to share its Central Office
(CO) equipment (Optical Line Terminal, OLT) and the feeder fiber (in
the local loop) among as many end units (Optical Network Terminations,
ONTs) as possible--within constraints set by physical properties,
bandwidth,and optical power loss. So far, these constraints put a
typical practical limit on the number users who can share a fiber at
32, but some newer standards support N=64.
PON places more users on each fiber than traditional
point-to-point or ring architectures. Fewer fibers to cover a given
service area means less equipment at the CO (one optical interface
serves N users). As a result, the PON solution makes high-speed
optical connections economical for business or residential units in
scenarios that could not be served by other broadband access
technologies.
When using an optical power splitter, the optical fiber transmission
channel is dedicated to the N customers. The bandwidth to the
customers is shared, reducing costs. As an alternative to a
single-splitter 1-to-N "tree" topology, PONs can combine multiple
smaller splits in tandem to achieve the eventual 1-to-N split.
PONs can also be configured as rings and buses. The splitter
can be moved closer to or farther from the service provider, to
optimize costs and ease of future upgrading without affecting the
active terminations or the protocols. Glass is transparent, so to
speak.
Because of the lack of electronics except at the ends of the network,
reliability can be high and there is no requirement for standby power
except at the ends.
SOME HISTORY
The first commercial PON activity was initiated in the mid-1990s when a
group of major network operators established the Full Service Access
Networks (FSAN) consortium. The group's goal was to define a
common standard for PON equipment so that vendors and operators could
come together in a competitive market for PON equipment. The
result of this first effort was the 155 Mb/s PON system specified in
the ITU-T G.983 series of recommendations (standards, really).
That system became known as B-PON. It uses ATM as its link-level bearer
protocol (the APON protocol). The name B-PON was introduced
since "APON" led people to assume that only ATM services could be
provided to end users. Changing the name reflected the fact that
these systems can offer many broadband services including Ethernet
access, video distribution, and high-speed leased line services.
APON was later enhanced to support 622 Mb/s rates with protection,
Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation (DBA), and other features. On a
parallel track, in early 2001 the IEEE established the Ethernet in the
First Mile (EFM) group, recognizing the prospects for optical
access. The group works under the auspices of the IEEE 802.3
committee, which also developed the Ethernet standards. As such, EFM
is restricted in architecture to comply with existing 802.3
standards. Currently, the EFM's work is standardizing a 1.25 Gb/s
symmetrical system for Ethernet transport only.
In 2001 the FSAN group initiated a new effort for standardizing PON
networks operating at bit rates above 1 Gb/s (GPON). Apart from
the need to support higher bit rates, the overall protocol has been
opened for reconsideration, with a goal of efficient support for
multiple services; scalability; and operation, administration,
maintenance, and provisioning (OAM&P) functionality.
From this latest FSAN effort, a new solution has emerged in the optical
access market place--Gigabit PON (GPON). GPON offers high bit
rate and transport of multiple services--specifically packet data and
TDM--in native formats and with high efficiency (the ITU-T G.984
series).
PON CONCEPTS AND TECHNOLOGIES
Most telecommunications fiber rings use synchronous optical
network/synchronous digital hierarchy (SONET/SDH) technology.
These rings, which require optical-to-electrical-to-optical (OEO)
conversion at each node, and are optimized for long haul or
metropolitan applications. They are not the best choice for the
local access network. In contrast, a PON uses passive fiber
optic splitters/couplers to route traffic, instead of the more
expensive active elements (electrical and optical) required for
SONET/SDH rings.
Being low in cost, PONs offer a practical solution for upgrading the
critical last mile infrastructure for broadband. Unlike active
networks, which require installation of all nodes up front (because
each node is a regenerator), PONs can be deployed incrementally.
PONs require less initial investment because carriers need to deploy
only the fiber to start. ONUs can be added incrementally to meet
demand for service.
Further cost reductions can be achieved in a PON through the addition
of a wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) layer. WDM is easier
in a PON because the customer nodes sit "off" the backbone. PON fibers
may be upgraded one at a time. In a SONET/SDH ring, WDM requires
optical multiplexing/demultiplexing at each node.
Unlike SONET/SDH, PONs can be asymmetrical, which reduces the cost of
ONUs. For example, a PON can broadcast downstream at the OC-12
(622 Mb/s) rate and upstream at OC-3 (155 Mb/s). Asymmetric
architecture allows the use of lower-speed ONUs, which require less
expensive transceivers. Because SONET/SDH networks are
symmetrical, all the line cards in an OC-12 fiber ring would require
OC-12 interfaces.
The downstream point-to-multipoint architecture contributes to another
key advantage: efficiency for broadcast applications. In a PON,
an analog or digital video signal can be added easily to the time
division multiplexing (TDM) or WDM layer to deliver broadcast
services. The closest competing technology is
Hybrid-Fiber-Coaxial access networks, which so far did not gain
commercial popularity, mostly due to their cost of deployment and
maintenance. Compared to PON, DSL and its variations cannot
compete due to limited bandwidth.
APPLICATIONS
A PON is designed for both Business Customers and Consumers at
home. The magic words for the carrier contemplating PON are
"Triple Play." That is, PONs deliver in one "package" the three
main types of service: voice, high-speed data, and video. This
is the reason that when the regulatory climate and cost parameters
became favorable, the service providers (RBOCs, Local Exchange
Carriers, CATVs, and others will jump on the lucrative PON bandwagon.
Long-term, PONs will become the platform for delivering services to
homes, businesses, multi-tenant buildings, and so on.
It is expected that PON will dominant by the 2005-2006 time
frame. In the 2004 time frame, however, PON's primary benefit
will be to leverage the installed base of copper and coaxial cable in
the local access network. Rather than competing with DSL, cable
modems, and local multipoint distribution system (LMDS), PONs will
complement these technologies by serving as a feeder between the local
exchange (central office) and remote terminals or pedestal
cabinets. From there copper, coaxial, or wireless systems
provide connections to subscribers.
A drawing illustrates general PON
connectivity over a fiber tree, a passive point-to-multipoint network
of fiber and one or more splitters (in cascade). Active
components, optical transceivers, are required only at the root (an
Optical Line Termination (OLT) in the local exchange), and at each leaf
or branch (Optical Network Units (ONUs)on the user side). Bus
and ring topologies are considered less suitable for user connections,
as they run a higher risk of individual users causing disruptions for
other users.
One ONU in a neighborhood can feed many NTs [Network Termination
(units)] over short copper loops. NTs have user interfaces such as
POTS, Ethernet, and serial. Taking fiber all the way to the
customer calls for an ONT, an Optical Network Termination, that
combines the two(ONU and ONT). The passive network constitutes
a shared transmission space. Connections can be made here with various
multiplexing technologies in the spatial, frequency, and time domains:
--Spatial, the number and type of fibers determine the possibilities.
--Frequency, as in Wave Division Multiplexing of light sources with
different wavelengths.
--Time, the familiar TDM concept, but realized by alternating ATM cells
(APON) or Ethernet packets (EPON) from different users.
More on APON and EPON in future issues.
============ + ======= + ======= + =======
Visit www.flanagan-consulting.com when you need independent review,
validation, or verification of network architecture, product
positioning,
or your marketing message.
"Flanagan Consulting" and "ViewsLetter"
are Service Marks of W. A. Flanagan, Inc.
Updated: 5 Feb 2004
|
