Transcript
Fiber-Based Indoor Networking Bas Huiszoon, Sales Director Southern-EU, Turkey, and Latam, Genexis 12th March 2013, CIEMI, San José (Costa Rica)
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
Facts & Figures of Genexis • One-stop-shop for FTTH end-user equipment • Distinctive, awarded product portfolio • Tailored solution for any GPON, Point-to-Point or WDM-PON network • High-level development and knowledge in fiber optics • Focus on European production • Wide range of different customers such as KPN, Waoo!, JT and Deutsche Glasfaser • Over 2 million home gateways shipped • Acquisition of Swedish PacketFront CPE division in 2012
• HQ in Eindhoven, the Netherlands, founded in 2002 • Corporate offices in Sweden & Germany • Sales offices in Spain & USA • Development office in Shanghai
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2
Enabling FTTH around the world Benelux • KPN • Reggefiber • CAIW • CIF • SKV " Scandinavia: • Canal Digital • Waoo! • GET • Conscia • NetNordic • Gagnaveita • PacketFront • Onninen
UK:
• Jersey Telecom • FiberOptions • Gigaclear "
DACH:
• Deutsche Glasfaser • Bornet • Trigon • Wilhelm.tel • SWN • Axians • Fionis • Kuster Netcom
Southern Europe / ME: • Besorak • Telecom Slovenia • Optisis • BHT • Tawasol
North America
• Case Western Reserve University • Telamon " LATAM • Ticoplaza (Costa Rica) • InfoCenter (Paraguay) • Logicalis (Paraguay) • Grupo EBIS (Central America)
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3
The worldwide FTTH panorama
North America
"
• 10.9M subscribers • 20% Active Ethernet • 80% PON
Europe" •
5.95M subscribers
• •
78% Active Ethernet 22% PON
Worldwide
• 82M subscribers • 198M expected in 2015 • 5% Active Ethernet • 95% PON
CIS"
• 6.3M subscribers • 15% Active Ethernet • 85% PON
Asia"
• 58M subscribers • <1% Active Ethernet • 99% PON
Source: IDATE, June 2012
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
4
We offer a tailored solution for different networks GPON"
Point-to-Point Active Ethernet
Choose GPON for:
Choose Point-to-Point for:
• Lowest port cost for residential
• Future-proof
• Fiber-scarcity scenario
• Unbundling and open access
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
5
A well-defined vision on home gateways • Design and develop for both the operator and end-user • Make it easy to install and use • Give the customer something to choose: make it flexible and modular • Make it attractive! The home gateway is the ‘face’ of FTTH for the end-user • Make it efficient to operate and manage • Open access capable
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
6
Key factors in every FTTH network • How does the fiber enter the home? • How to terminate the fiber inside the home? • How to spread the bandwidth throughout the home? There is no single answer to these questions!
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
7
IP Services Today
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
8
Video Drives Access Bandwidth 2D Video Format
Product phase Mature
Growing Fast New Standards
Standard Definition (SD) High Definition (HD)
Mb/s Native Mb/s (compressed) per stream H.262 or MPEG- H.264 or 2
MPEG-4
480p
249
7
2
1080i/720p
1,493
16
8
Very High Definition (VHD)
1080p
2,986
32
16
Super HD
2160p
14,930
100
50
Ultra HD
4320p
59,720
400
200
• Multiple simultaneous MPEG streams to the home • 2011: “Average two TV’s per household, across the board” [IDATE Report 2012] • A 3DTV stream requires 40%-100% more bandwidth per channel [M. Boxer, FTTH Conference 2012, paper PC-101-G, Sep. 2012, Dallas (USA)] [R. Montagne, FTTH Conference 2012, paper T-204-G, Sep. 2012, Dallas (USA)] [J.O. Farmer, FTTH Conference 2012, paper T-101-I, Sep. 2012, Dallas (USA)]
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
9
Access Bandwidth Per User – ISP Offers Operator (Country)
Type
Speed (Mb/s)
Technology
Availability
NTT (Japan)
ILEC
100/100
FTTH EPON
March 2008
GVT (Brasil)
CLEC
100/10
FTTH
July 2009
HKBN (Hong Kong)
CLEC
1000/1000
FTTH
April 2010
Altibox (Norway)
CLEC
400/400
FTTH PTP
June 2010
Comcast (USA)
MSO
105/10
HFC/FTTH RFoG DOCSIS3.0
April 2011
ONO (Spain)
MSO
100/10
HFC DOCSIS3.0
September 2011
KPN (Netherlands)
ILEC
500/500
FTTH PTP
January 2012
Verizon (USA)
ILEC
300/65
FTTH GPON
May 2012
Comcast (USA)
MSO
305/65
HFC/FTTH RFoG DOCSIS3.0
July 2012
Google (USA)
CLEC
1000/1000
FTTH PTP
November 2012
Gigaclear (UK)
CLEC
1000/1000
FTTH PTP
November 2012
B4RN (UK)
CLEC
1000/1000
FTTH PTP
January 2013
Source: Public press releases, Internet
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 0
Available User Access Bandwidth: 1983 - 2013 10 Gbps
1 Gbps
Twisted pair Cable Fiber Growth trends
~50% annual increase
100M
1G 10G
2015 2019 2023
Based on: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/980405.html
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 1
Bottleneck Shifts From Access To Home • With abundance of bandwidth in access, the home is the next bottleneck • Network requirements for typical in-home services (2011):
• A short-term service scenario (3x IPTV, 2x Internet, P2P): 70 Mbps
[B. Huiszoon, et al., in Proc. POF 2011, Sept. 2011, Bilbao]
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 2
The Struggle of In-Home Delivery of FTTH Services
ONT
IP-TV
FTTH network
RG
• How to get a decent connection to the IP-TV? • How to realize in-home networking with multiple devices and rooms? • How to support different locations of the ONT and RG?
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 3
Optical FTTH Gateway As Home Demarcation Point • Don’t push, create pull • The customer takes its own choices and creates services • Open access at WAN-side, and ideally supports all transport technologies • Same principles apply to in-home network, gateway should be an open platform • Current LAN interfaces available at Gateway: • RJ-45 Ethernet (Fast Ethernet, Gigabit Ethernet)
• RJ-11 twisted pair (POTS, HomePNA, G.hn) • WiFi 802.11n/g/b wireless LAN • F-connector coaxial (CATV, MoCa, HomePNA, G.hn) • FOT (OptoLock, DieMount) polymer optical fiber (POF) (KDPOF, G.hn, Innodul) • Power line communication (PLC) mostly done via external converter box
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 4
Comparison of In-Home Wired Mediums: Specs
• Wireless LAN easy to install for 100's Mbps. Issues: reliability and reach • Glass fiber not considered: do-it-yourself-installation too complex for residential users
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 5
Comparison of In-Home Wired Mediums: Cost
• Media converter cost represents conversion to CAT5e • Glass fiber: do-it-yourself-installation too expensive for residential
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 6
In-Home Networking Evaluation: Setup
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 7
In-Home Networking Evaluation: Manufacturers • Homefibre (POF) • Arteixo (PLC) • Motorola (PLC, PLC-Coax, PLC-Powerline) • Amper (PLC) • Sumitomo (PLC) • Netgear (PLC, Moca) • Comtrend (PLC-Coax, WiFi) • Coppergate (HomePNA3.1 Phone and Coax bridge) • Broadcom (WiFi) • Qualcomm (WiFi)
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 8
In-Home Networking Evaluation: Tests • Tools used in evaluation: • iPerf/jPerf (UDP/TCP: connection quality, jitter, packet loss) • Ping (ICMP: latency) • Netmeter (bandwidth monitoring) • VLC player (video stream for QoE) • Test scenarios: • Point-to-point, unicast traffic • Point-to-multi point, unicast traffic • Multicast traffic, e.g. Telefonica's Imagenio HD-TV service • Video transmission for subjective tests
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
1 9
Mbps
In-Home Networking Evaluation: Throughput
✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✗ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 70 Mbps
• Unicast video stream results shown • Take away: High throughput does not guarantee high QoE
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 0
PER (10log)
In-Home Networking Evaluation: Packet Error Rate
• Unicast video stream results shown • Take away: High throughput does not guarantee low PER
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 1
In-Home Networking Evaluation: Conclusions • Coax ✓ Network performance is solid ✓ Do-it-yourself connector installation ✗ In-home coverage may be low in brownfield situations ✗ Filtering may be needed against neighbor’s traffic since network is broadcast • Power line ✓ Full coverage of the home ✗ Additional components typically needed in switch board ✗ Performance low when traffic crosses 2 circuits, i.e. no direct connection ✗ High sensitivity to EMI and generates EMI • Twisted pair and UTP ✓ Network performance is solid ✗ In-home coverage may be low in brownfield situations ✗ Complex connector installation for additional cabling • Plastic optical fiber ✓ Best network performance is solid ✓ Do-it-yourself connection installation ✗ Requires new cable deployment
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 2
Wired-Wireless Convergence In The Home
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 3
Plastic Optical Fiber • POF has an outstanding performance and is future-proof • State-of-art technology provides 1 Gbps over >50 meters • Self-user installable connector • Very thin cable with bend resilience • Three types of POF: step-index, graded-index, and multi-core
Coaxial cable (ø ~1 cm)
Polymer fiber (ø 1 mm)
Silica fiber (ø 125 mm)
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 4
POF Cable Bandwidth and Loss Figures Transmission windows
• POF is inherently bound to very-short reach deployment scenarios • Low bandwidth of step-index requires advanced signal processing and modulation • Graded-index and multi-core POF are difficult to manufacture
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 5
POF 1:2 Splitter Insertion Losses
• Additional excess loss due to non-optimal fiber-splitter coupling • Split ratio 50%-50% and low crosstalk so suitable for POF PON networks
[Y. Shi, et al., in IEEE JLT, pp. 1-8, 2013]
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 6
POF Technology Standardization • POF cable has been standardized in IEC 60793-2-40 • Section A4a.1 describes general purpose applications like sensors and illumination • Section A4a.2 describes data communication applications • POF transmission equipment is (being) standardized by different bodies, namely • European Telecommunications Standardization Institute (ETSI): TS 105 175-1-1 • German DKE VDE: 0885-763 • European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization (CENELEC): 50173-1& -4 • ITU-T G.hn: G.9960 and related recommendations
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 7
POF Chip Set Vendors: KDPOF • Knowledge Department for POF (KDPOF) has been established in 2008 in Madrid, Spain • Produce a Gigabit POF chipset following the ETSI, DKE/VDE, and CENELEC standards
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
2 8
POF Chip Set Vendors: G.hn • HomeGrid Forum is marketing and certifying the ITU-T G.9960 protocol suite (a.k.a. G.hn) • Several companies are currently developing the G.hn chip sets • Sigma Designs, Marvell, Lantiq, Metanoia, Xingtera and TangoTec • Early 2012, POF has been added as Annex F in G.9960 and uses COAX profile G.hn Coax BB MoCA 2.x
Coax
MoCA 1.1 G.hn Powerline with MIMO
Powerline
(2-80 MHz)
G.hn Powerline (2-80 MHz)
UPA IEEE1901 FFT (2-50 MHz) PHY rate
IEEE1901 FFT (2-30 MHz)
Application rate
IEEE1901 Wavelet HomePlug AV 1.1 0
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
0,5
1,0
1,5
2,0
Bit rate in Gbps
2 9
POF Chip Set Vendors: Innodul • Innodul is a Suisse based company and produces chip sets based on DMT • DMT is adaptive discrete multi-tone modulation that originates from DSL • Their current product ID200 provides a 200 Mbps over 50 meters performance
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 0
POF FOT Vendors: Firecomms and DieMount • Firecomms is producer of the OptoLock POF transceiver, and is based in Ireland • The OptoLock uses duplex POF cables • The IDL300T model allows for 250 Mbps with 8B/10B NRZ coding
• DieMount is a German based manufacturer of the OptoSpider 650 mm FOT • It allows for Fast Ethernet transmission and uses simplex POF cables • DieMount also makes POF splitters
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 1
POF End-User Appliance Vendors
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 2
POF Multi-Dwelling Unit Deployment Scenario
• The verticals of a 10-story MDU are considered here with FTTB • No more than 70 meters is required to connect all SDU
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 3
POF SDU Installation Cost Comparison: Ducts On-the-wall mounted cable
Buried cable
• The installation cost of POF is lowest per meter of cable • Considering a few cables per duct, the difference between buried and on-the-wall is low [A.M.J. Koonen, et al., in OSA Optics Express, pp. B399-B405, 2011]
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 4
POF SDU Installation Cost Comparison: TCO
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 5
POF SDU Operational Cost Comparison
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 6
POF SDU Field Installation – Ground Floor
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 7
POF SDU Field Installation – Ground Floor
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 8
POF SDU Field Installation – Ground Floor
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
3 9
POF SDU Field Installation – First Floor
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
4 0
Research Experiments of POF: The Future is Giga
• 10 Gbps over 50 meters SI-POF is a reality
[Y. Shi, et al., submitted to IEEE Comm. Mag., pp. 1-7, 2013]
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
4 1
Research Experiments of POF: G.hn over POF
• World’s first 3-play service trial of G.hn over POF PON held in August 2012 [Y. Shi, et al., submitted to IEEE Comm. Mag., pp. 1-7, 2013]
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
4 2
Conclusions
• Fiber to the home shifts the bottleneck to the in-home network • Current in-home networking technologies cannot fulfill short-term service requirements • Plastic optical fiber is a cost-efficient solution in many ways to provide Gigabit connectivity • Lowest OPEX • Lowest CAPEX • Lowest installation costs • Technological and market developments provide a solid base for operators to choose POF
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
4 3
Thanks for the attention. " Any questions? Bas Huiszoon –
[email protected] +34-645689992
© Genexis 2013 | All Rights Reserved
