Abstract
When Bell shouted, "Watson, come here!" He probably wanted to debate the
design of the 'last mile' of his planned telephone network. Ever since then,
telephone engineers and executives have been debating the design of the last
mile. The debate continues now with the various FTTX schemes for bringing
fiber to within various distances of the customer. In some ways the debate
really hasn't changed much - it is still about the economics of each approach
- but in a very real way the debate is different now. In the past, this
debate was always about POTS, and the economics of various way of providing
it. Now it is still about economics, but it is also about - maybe even more
so - alternative ways to meet requirements for some very exotic services.
The question is not just, "Which is cheaper?" But also involved are questions
such as, "What services will I provide? "How many of each service will the
customer need?" "How much bandwidth do I provide for these requirements?"
"How will compression advances impact my choices?" The answers to these
questions guide the technology choices for the last mile now, at least, as
much as economics. This report addresses these issues in light of the
activities of the largest telecommunication companies in the US - AT&T,
Verizon, and BellSouth. This report starts with a forecast for demand by end
users for bandwidth, based on forecasting bandwidth demand of those end users
(watching TV, using the Internet, etc.) It then proceeds to review the
available designs to provide bandwidth to the access customer, and finally
evaluates each provisioning technology against the demand. The results of this
analysis are compared to the activities of the large telecom companies and
changes in their strategies are forecast.
While this was never a simple debate, the addition of the new unknowns about
service requirements makes it a much more complex consideration. To see how
complex, one just needs to note that the three (soon to be two) major telcos -
Verizon, AT&T and BellSouth - have studied this issue with all of their
great resources and come up with three completely different answers!
Table of Contents
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
- TABLE OF FIGURES
- THE LIGHTWAVE NETWORK SERIES OF REPORTS
- THE LIGHTWAVE NETWORK SERIES OF REPORTS
- INTRODUCTION
- BANDWIDTH DEMAND
- A Prime Time Usage Scenario -2006
- A Prime Time Usage Scenario -2010
- Time Sharing of Bandwidth Vs. Maximum Requirements
- COMPRESSION IMPACTS
- A Scenario with Compression
- DESIGN ALTERNATIVES
- Fiber to the "X"
- xDSL Versions
- Design Details for Current Plans
- Fiber to the Neighborhood (FTTN)
- AT & T 's Fiber to the Node (FTTN)
- BellSouth's Fiber to the Curb (FTTC)
- Verizon's FTTP
- IPTV Video with Verizon PON
- Capabilities Summary
- HOW DO THE DESIGNS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS?
- Time Sharing
- Link Capacities of PONs
- Statistical Multiplexing
- Usage Scenario
- Capacity
- Need for GPONs
- WHAT ARE THE RBOCS CURRENTLY DOING AND WILL IT CHANGE?
- Current Plans
- Expected Changes in Plans
Table of Figures
- Figure 1. BPON Prime Time Usage 2006
- Figure 2. BPON Prime Time 2010
- Figure 3. Bandwidth Requirements - Current Compression
- Figure 4. BPON Prime Time 2010 with Compression
- Figure 5. Bandwidth Requirements - Improved Compression
- Figure 6. Comparison of Bandwidth Demand
- Figure 7. Fiber to the 'X' Varieties
- Figure 8. Chart of Various xDSL Technologies
- Figure 9. Fiber to the Neighborhood
- Figure 10. Fiber to the Node
- Figure 11. Fiber to the Curb
- Figure 12. PON Basic Arrangement
- Figure 13. Verizon Current PON
- Figure 14. FTTP Architecture for IPTV
- Figure 15. Capabilities Summary
- Figure 16. Capabilities Vs. Requirements
- Figure 17. Compressed Case, Capabilities Vs. Requirements
- Figure 18. 2010 Requirements - Time Shared - Compressed
- Figure 19. Link Capabilities of Various Architectures Vs. Requirements
| 
