Fiber Trends Standards Tes<ng and Architectures – What You

Fiber Trends Standards Tes.ng and Architectures – What You Really Should Know Rodney Casteel RCDD/NTS/OSP, CommScope, Chair TIA FOTC John Kamino RCDD, OFS Adrian Young, Fluke Networks Craig Kegerise, TE Loni Le Van-­‐EIer, 3M David Eckell, Corning Agenda • 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Who Is FOTC OpNcal Fiber Trends – John Kamino Standards Update – Rodney Casteel Fiber TesNng Requirements – Adrian Young POL –  Rodney Casteel –  Craig Kegerise, TE –  Loni Le Van-­‐EIer, 3M –  David Eckell, Corning •  Final QuesNons Fiber Op.cs Technology Consor.um Overview: •  Part of the TelecommunicaNons Industry AssociaNon (www.Naonline.org) •  UnNl this year, we have been known as the Fiber OpNcs LAN SecNon (FOLS). Our new name was chosen to reflect our expanding charter. •  Formed 19 years ago •  Mission: to educate users about the benefits of deploying fiber in customer-­‐owned networks •  FOLS provides vendor-­‐neutral informaNon Fiber Op.cs Technology Consor.um Current Members •  3M •  AFL/Noyes Fiber Systems •  Berk-­‐Tek, a Nexans Company •  Corning •  CommScope •  Fluke Networks •  General Cable •  Leviton www.tiafotc.org
• 
• 
• 
• 
OFS Panduit Ortronics/legrand Sumitomo Electric Lightwave •  Superior Essex •  TE ConnecNvity •  Tellabs TIA Fiber Optics Technology
Consortium
Fiber Op.cs Technology Consor.um
•  Maintains a website with Fiber FAQs, White Papers and other resources – www.Nafotc.org. •  Developed and maintains a free Cost Model that allows users to compare installed first costs of several architectures. •  Hosts a webinar series throughout the year with all webinars available on demand. •  Speak at industry conferences like BICSI •  Contributes to industry publicaNons – check out our arNcle on Making Networks Greener in CI&M and the current arNcle on Encircled Flux in BICSI News. •  Conducts market research Fiber Op.cs Technology Consor.um
•  Recent Webinars Available on Demand
–  The Need for Encircled Flux, Real or Imaginary? –  LAN Standards, News & Trends 2013 update –  The Future VCSEL-­‐LOMMF Landscape in Data Centers –  Standards-­‐based Design & TesNng of Passive OpNcal LAN SoluNons •  Visit www.Nafotc.org or our channel on BrightTalk Webinars are eligible for CEC credit for up to two years aeer they are first broadcast. Email [email protected] if you have completed a webinar and want to receive your CEC. www.tiafotc.org
TIA Fiber Optics Technology
Consortium
Fiber Trends John Kamino -­‐-­‐ OFS Sources include: CRU, IEEE, Cisco, IBM, MaIhew Burroughs, LightCounNng IP Traffic Growth •  Global IP traffic has grown 4x over the past five years •  Global IP traffic is expected to grow 3x over the next five years •  Almost half of all traffic will come from non-­‐PC devices in 2017 •  Mobile and wireless traffic will exceed wired traffic by 2016 Cisco Visual Networking Index:
Forecast and Methodology, 2012-2017
May 29, 2013
8
IP Traffic Growth “Cisco Visual Networking Index (VNI):
Forecast and Methodology, 2012-2017"
May 29, 2013
Mobile: Includes mobile data and Internet traffic generated by handsets, notebook cards, and mobile broadband
gateways
Internet: Denotes all IP traffic that crosses an Internet backbone
Managed IP: Includes corporate IP WAN traffic, IP transport of TV/VoD
9
Internet Applica.ons q YouTube ü July 2013 – 100 hours of video uploaded every minute 1 ü July 2013 – 6 billion hours of video watched/month, 25% on mobile devices 1 q Facebook ü June 2013 – >1.15 billion monthly users, 699 million daily users 1 hIp://www.youtube.com/t/press_staNsNcs/ 4 hIp://newsroom.p.com/Key-­‐Facts 10
Next Genera.on Speeds Coming! Study Group has
begun work on
400G
development
http://www.ieee802.org/3/400GSG/public/13_05/dambrosia_400_02_0513.pdf
11
Server Port Speed Two Basic Op.cal Fiber Types 1. Multimode
62.5 micron
2. Single-mode
50 micron
~8 micron
125 micron
850 nm
& some 1300 nm
Operating
Wavelengths
1310 - 1625 nm
Larger cores and lower wavelengths
drive source and system costs down
Fiber Types Industry Standards
Fiber Type
62.5/125
50/125
50/125
50/125
Std SM
Low Water Peak
SM
(1)
(2)
(5)
ISO/IEC 11801
ANSI/TIA-568-C.3
(cable)
(1)
OM1
(2)
OM2
OM3
OM4
OS1
(5)
OS2
IEC 60793-2-10
(fiber)
TIA/EIA
(fiber)
ITU-T
(fiber)
A1b
A1a.1
A1a.2
A1a.3
B1.1
492AAAA
492AAAB
492AAAC
492AAAD
492CAAA
--G.651.1
----G.652.A or B
B1.3
492CAAB
G.652.C or D
OM1 is typically 62.5µm, but can also be 50µm
OM2 is typically 50µm, but can also be 62.5µm
OS2 is referenced in the standard ISO/IEC 24702 "Generic Cabling for Industrial Premises"
14
Mul.mode Cable Specifica.ons Min Bandwidth
Fiber Type
OM1
62.5 µm
OM2
50 µm
OM3
50 µm
OM4
50 µm
Wavelength
(nm)
850
1300
850
1300
850
1300
850
1300
Max
Cable
Loss
(dB/km)
3.5
1.5
3.5
1.5
3.5
1.5
3.5
1.5
(MHzž km)
OFL BW
EMB
200
500
500
500
1500
500
3500
500
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
2000
n.a.
4700
n.a.
15
Single-­‐Mode Cable Specifica.ons Fiber Type
OS1
Single-Mode
OS2*
Single-Mode
Wavelength
(nm)
1310
1550
1310
1383
1550
Max
Cable
Loss
(dB/km)
1.0
1.0
0.4
0.4
0.4
Min Bandwidth
(MHzž km)
OFL BW
EMB
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
* OS2 is a "low water peak" single-mode fiber that has low attenuation in the 1385nm region.
It is suitable for CWDM applications.
OSx designations are from ISO/IEC 11801 and ANSI/TIA-568-C.3
16
Evolu.on of Short Reach Applica.ons Ethernet Link Distance/ Applica.on Mapping Data Center
Building Backbone
Application
Link Speed
Lg. Data
Center
Building
Backbone
Very Lg. Data Center
Building Backbone
Building
Backbone
Campus
Backbone
Campus
Backbone
Campus
Backbone
100Mb/s
100BASE-FX
OM2 50µm Fiber
OM1 62.5 µm Fiber
OM3/OM4
Multimode Fiber
1 Gb/s
1000BASE-SX
OM4
Multimode
Fiber
10 Gb/s
10GBASE-SR
40 Gb/s
40GBASE-SR4
OM4
Multimode
Fiber
100 Gb/s
OS1/OS2
Single-mode Fiber
100GBASE-SR10
Link Distance
33m
83m
100m
150m
275m 300m
550m
1000m
>1000m
18
Fibre Channel Link Distance Link
Speed
Media Type
OM4
4G FC
OM3/OM4
8G FC
800-M5-SA-I
8G FC
OM4
800-M5-SN-I
OM4
16G FC
Link
Distance
OS1/OS2
100m
125m
150m
190m
300m
380m
400m >400m
Worldwide Mul.mode Fiber Demand by Region Worldwide Mul.mode Fiber Demand by Type Ø IP traffic and server growth drive fiber demand Ø VirtualizaNon increasing server usage and bandwidth demands Ø Servers requiring mulNple Ethernet connecNons Ø 10Gbps server links drive 40Gbps uplinks 21
Worldwide Mul.mode Fiber Demand by Type Ø Increasing OM3 and OM4 market share Ø Over 50% by 2015 Ø Corresponding decline in OM1 and OM2 share over the same period 22
North American Demand Source: Burroughs North America Multimode Market Reports
North American Mul.mode Mix Source: Burroughs North America Multimode Market Reports
Mul.mode vs. Single-­‐mode in the Enterprise – All Cable Types Source: Burroughs North America Multimode Market Reports
Mul.mode vs. Single-­‐mode in the Enterprise – Tight Buffer Source: Burroughs North America Multimode Market Reports
Conclusions •  OpNcal fiber demand conNnues to grow in the enterprise market as bandwidth demand increases •  OM1 and OM2 fibers are becoming obsolete •  Higher grade OM3 and OM4 fiber is the fiber of choice in today’s short reach market •  Worldwide demand for Laser OpNmized OM3 and OM4 fiber is growing Standards Update Material provided by Peter Pondillo, Corning Standards Overview •  What is the process for developing a standard? – Projects are proposed and must be approved – ContribuNons are reviewed – Drae documents are created then balloted to remove or resolve contenNous issues – With consensus, the document is released for publicaNon – Can take a few months or many years Standards Overview •  What is the process for revising a standard? – Maximum 5-­‐year lifespan for standards •  Must be revised, re-­‐affirmed or withdrawn – Addenda may be added to keep the document growing with advances in technology •  Addenda may then be incorporated into the new revision of the standard. Ballot Process New Project
Create Draft
Committee
Ballot
Ballot
Comment
Resolution
Re-ballot
or Industry?
New Draft
Industry Ballot Process
Ballot
Comment
Resolution
Industry
Ballot
Committee Ballot Process
Reballot
or Default?
Default
Ballot
Published
Standard
New Draft
Ballot
Comment
Resolution
Re-ballot
or Final?
Final Default
Ballot
Engineering CommiVee -­‐ TIA TR-­‐42 •  TelecommunicaNons Cabling Systems – Develops and maintains voluntary telecommunicaNons standards for telecommunicaNons cabling infrastructure in user-­‐owned buildings – Covers requirements for copper and opNcal fiber cabling components (such as cables, connectors and cable assemblies), installaNon, and field tesNng TR-­‐42 Documents •  Common Standards –  End-­‐users –  Broadly Applicable •  Premises Standards –  End-­‐users –  Narrow Focus –  ExcepNons/Allowances to Common Standards •  Component Standards –  Manufacturers •  Related Standards –  FOTPs –  Fiber SpecificaNons Common
Standards
ANSI/TIA-568-C.0
(Generic)
TIA-569
(Pathways and
spaces)
ANSI/TIA-606
(Administration)
ANSI/TIA-607
(Bonding and
grounding
[earthing])
ANSI/TIA-758
(Outside plant)
ANSI/TIA-862
(Building
automation
systems)
Premises
Standards
ANSI/TIA-568-C.1
(Commercial)
ANSI/TIA-570
(Residential)
ANSI/TIA-942
(Data centers)
ANSI/TIA-1005
(Industrial)
ANSI/TIA-1179
(Healthcare)
Component
Standards
ANSI/TIA-568-C.2
(Balanced twistedpair cabling and
components)
ANSI/TIA-568-C.3
(Optical fiber
cabling
components)
ANSI/TIA-568-C.4
(Coaxial cabling
and components)
TIA TR-­‐42 Ini.a.ves •  Pursuing the next ediNon of premises standards in TR-­‐42 on 568-­‐D Series –  Mock ballots submiIed prior to the meeNng in Nme for comment resoluNon at the meeNng •  Task Group on ensuring security of cabling (physical) conNnues development towards a working drae document –  Challenge is to create a physical network security “platorm” document that contains necessary security aspects for the physical network infrastructure, while also being able to build on and connect to other security areas outside our scope –  Will be part of TR-­‐42.1 moving forward TR-­‐42.1: SubcommiVee on Generic Cabling and Commercial Building Cabling •  TIA-­‐4966, EducaNonal FaciliNes –  SubcommiIee resolved industry ballot comments –  Approval to issue another industry ballot •  TSB-­‐162 TelecommunicaNons cabling guidelines for wireless access points –  SubcommiIee resolved ballot comments –  Approval to issue another ballot •  Work conNnues for the distributed antenna system (DAS) and places of assembly task groups TR-­‐42.7: SubcommiVee on Copper Cabling Components •  Category 8 drae development conNnuing as the task groups discuss the appropriate requirements and specificaNons –  Interim meeNng scheduled to conNnue work on Next GeneraNon drae specificaNons including scaling, tesNng methods, and modeling configuraNons. •  Two new task groups were formed: –  To create field tester requirements for TIA 568-­‐C.2-­‐1 (TIA 1152-­‐A) –  To invesNgate the concept of adding Class II limits to TIA 568-­‐C.2-­‐1 TR-­‐42.10: SubcommiVee on Sustainable Informa.on Communica.on Technology •  STEP (Sustainable Technology Environment Program) –  Task group established to take proposed drae and develop into a standard –  Mock ballot submiIed prior to the meeNng in Nme for comment resoluNon at the meeNng •  Agreed to circulate resulNng drae for SP ballot TR-­‐42.11: SubcommiVee on Op.cal Fiber Systems •  TSB-­‐4979, PracNcal consideraNons for implementaNon of mulNmode launch condiNons in the field –  Second ballot comments resolved editorially –  Agreed to publish the revised document •  ANSI/TIA-­‐526-­‐14-­‐B addendum 1 –  Change from adopNon to adapNon IEC 61280-­‐4-­‐1 ed2 standard (MulNmode aIenuaNon measurement for installed cable plant) •  Change the normaNve usage of the EF launch condiNons –  Revised drae presented, modified, and was approved to proceed to commiIee ballot TR-­‐42.12: SubcommiVee on Op.cal Fiber and Cable •  TIA 598-­‐D Color Coding Standard –  Ballot comments reviewed and resolved –  Decision to remain with aqua as OM4 cable jacket color •  Task force for Bend-­‐insensiNve mulNmode fiber mission complete –  Key IEC documents related to core diameter, numerical aperture, and the detail specificaNon have been approved to be submiIed for commiIee drae (CD) •  Discussion conNnued for adopNng IEC SMF and MMF specificaNons into the TIA-­‐492 series of fiber specificaNons LAN Applica.ons Update •  IEEE –  NG100G •  125 people in aIendance •  24 PresentaNons from various contributors •  4x25 parallel MMF baseline proposal approved •  No consensus on SMF soluNon for 500m objecNve –  400G •  100 people in aIendance •  23 PresentaNons from various contributors •  Liaison developed to harmonize single mode connector return loss at 35 dB IEEE NG100G MMF MMF baseline proposal approved •  4 parallel links operaNng at 25.78125 GBd uNlize low cost, high performing mulNmode fiber compaNble opNcs and electronics –  FEC supported reNmed interface enables a lowest power, lowest cost, 100m soluNon today –  Uses exisNng, viable semiconductor technologies –  CompaNble with uncooled VCSEL •  The 4 opNcal lanes directly map the 4 electrical lanes, without requiring mulNplexing, translaNon, or de-­‐skewing inside the module •  Proposal is supported by mulNple vendors and users, and is economically feasible and compeNNve compared to other alternaNves •  Distance will be 100m on OM4 and 70m on OM3 IEEE NG100G SMF No consensus yet for another SMF variant •  There is no consensus on a SMF PMD proposal to meet the 500m objecNve at this point •  MulNple proposals on the table –  CWDM –  C-­‐BAND –  DMT –  PSM4 –  PAMn –  Stay with LR4 with CAUI-­‐4 •  This means that more presentaNons are required to build sufficient consensus to allow a decision on how the 500m over SMF objecNve will be met or a decision to just stay with LR4 at 10km Ques.ons ? 15 Minute Break Tes.ng Fiber for Next Genera.on Applica.ons Adrian Young Fluke Networks September, 2013 Objec.ves for this session •  Understand the need for a 1 Jumper Reference •  Encircled Flux explained in < 5 minutes •  OpNons for tesNng MPO/MTP trunks What is o`en done today •  Most folks are sNll sevng a reference this way ? dB
Do not use Bend
Insensitive Fiber Test
Reference Cords
•  Issues –  You have no idea what the loss is in the adapter –  Whatever it is, it’s taken away from your measurement –  The uncertainty is horrendous – negaNve loss What is done today •  So you end up with this y dB
x dB
z dB
Measurement = x + y + z - ?
•  Issues –  You have no idea what the loss is in the adapter –  Whatever it is, it’s taken away from your measurement –  The uncertainty is horrendous – negaNve loss What is o`en done today •  Let’s take an example 0.75 dB
Do not use Bend
Insensitive Fiber Test
Reference Cords
•  Issues –  There is no way to know for sure what that mated loss is –  But it will be zeroed out during the reference procedure What is done today •  So you end up with this 0.1 dB
0.3 dB
0.3 dB
Measurement = 0.3 + 0.1 + 0.3 – 0.75
= -0.05 dB
•  Issues –  Cannot have a negaNve loss in a passive cabling system –  Results will depend on how good that mated connecNon was during the referencing procedure –  If not negaNve, will appear opNmisNc Op.mis.c result? •  It says “1 Jumper” in the result •  But the cable alone @ 850 nm would be 0.03 dB •  Did they really do “1 Jumper” reference? Reference Values •  Should fall within a certain range •  •  The dBm (received power) is too low here •  Suggests poor test cords/ dirty ports on test equipment Check for recommendaNons from vendor What should be done today •  For tesNng an installed fiber opNcal link, should always use the 1 Jumper Reference Method Do not use Bend
Insensitive Fiber Test
Reference Cords
•  Does require the test equipment to have interchangeable adapters on the INPUT ports Removed from INPUT port only •  It is ok to remove the fiber from the input port •  You cannot remove the fiber from the output port, doing so will invalidate the reference you just made Connect known good cord •  To the INPUT ports Connect known good cord •  To the INPUT ports Connect known good cord •  How do I know if those cords are good? Verifying the cords •  Connect them together using a singlemode adapter and measure the loss *
ISO/IEC 14763-3
• ≤ 0.1 dB for Multimode
• ≤ 0.2 dB for Singlemode
ANSI/TIA-568-C.0
• ≤ 0.75 dB?
Cabling Vendors
• ≤ 0.50 dB?
* 0.05 dB Allows for variability of adapters
Why not save this as proof of good test reference cords?
Reference Values •  If the reference values fall within expectaNons, does not necessarily mean the test reference cords are good •  Your test result summary MUST include the results of the test reference cord verificaNon •  Check for recommenda.ons from vendor Disconnect Connect to the fiber op.c link •  ANSI/TIA-­‐568-­‐C.0 ≤ 0.75 dB
•  First and last connecNons ≤ 0.75 dB •  All other connecNons ≤ 0.75 dB ≤ 0.75 dB
Connect to the fiber op.c link •  ISO/IEC 11801:2010 & ISO/IEC 14763-­‐3 ≤ 0.30 dB
•  First and last connecNons ≤ 0.30 dB •  All other connecNons ≤ 0.75 dB ≤ 0.30 dB
Test Reference Cord Values •  ISO/IEC 14763-­‐3 –  1 Jumper method (0.1 dB for MulNmode and 0.2 dB for Singlemode) •  ANSI/TIA-­‐568-­‐C.0 –  Does not call out test reference cord values (≤ 0.75 dB?) •  Require documenta.on of TRCs ?
LC to SC fiber links •  Myth: cannot use 1 Jumper Reference Do not use Bend
Insensitive Fiber Test
Reference Cords
LC to SC fiber links •  Myth: cannot use 1 Jumper Reference LC to SC fiber links •  Myth: cannot use 1 Jumper Reference LC to SC fiber links •  Myth: cannot use 1 Jumper Reference LC to SC fiber links •  Myth: cannot use 1 Jumper Reference The issue – Launch control •  Make an opNcal loss measurement –  Using reference grade connectors •  BeIer than 0.10 dB on the test reference cords –  With a mandrel at the source Power Meter 1
Multimode
Source 1
The issue – Launch control •  Make another opNcal loss measurement –  Using the same reference grade connectors •  BeIer than 0.10 dB on the test reference cords –  With a mandrel at the source –  But using a different source Power Meter 1
Multimode
Source 2
CPR assessment shorcall CPR compares power in center to total power.
It can’t provide assessment of mode power distribution in the outer radii
which is critical to obtain good agreement with different test instruments.
Source 1
Over filled
Source 2
Under filled
EF assessment improvement EF specifies power throughout core using multiple control radii.
EF provides tight tolerance on mode power distribution in the outer radii
enabling improved agreement between EF-compliant test instruments.
Source 1
Over filled
Source 2
Under filled
New document •  TIA-­‐TSB-­‐4979 –  Prac%cal Considera%ons for Implementa%on of Mul%mode Launch Condi%ons in the Field –  Support ANSI/TIA-­‐526-­‐14-­‐B –  Gives two opNons on how to field test and be EF compliant –  In reality there are three opNons for users Prac.cal implementa.on of EF •  Ignore it Prac.cal implementa.on of EF •  Method 1 in TIA-­‐TSB-­‐4979 –  Use an external launch condiNoner (mode controller) –  Replaces the mandrels Prac.cal implementa.on of Encircled Flux •  Method 2 in TIA-­‐TSB-­‐4979 –  EF compliant source –  TRC that is tuned to the source Caution: Putting this TRC on any other
multimode source will not make it EF compliant
Tes.ng MPO/MTP Trunk Cables •  Set a reference Do not use Bend
Insensitive Fiber Test
Reference Cords
Disconnect from INPUT ports only Insert known good cord into INPUT port on main unit Insert known good cord into INPUT port on remote unit Run an AUTOTEST •  If the loss is beIer than 0.15 dB, we know our reference cords are good •  This is criNcal to a successful measurement Disconnect Insert Adapter on main unit Insert known good test reference cord Run an AUTOTEST •  We do not want to see a negaNve loss reading here ≤ 0.15 dB
Referenced out previously
•  We are looking for a loss of less than 0.15 dB •  Anything more than that could cause a negaNve loss reading Set a Reference Remove middle test reference cord Connect hydra (fan-­‐out) cables Connect to MTP/MPO trunk cable Run AUTOTEST (Adapter count = 2) Referenced out
Relies on the user to understand
polarity
Move to the next pair, run an AUTOTEST Referenced out
All LC connectors need to be ≤ 0.15 dB
Sehng a reference •  No different to a normal source/meter Type B Cord
Pinned
Pinned
The measurement •  Disconnect from the meter The measurement •  Insert a known good cord into the meter The measurement •  Connect to the trunk cable The measurement •  Connect to the trunk cable The measurement •  Connect to the trunk cable Example test result #1 •  Expect the values to vary across the fibers Example test result #2 •  Expect the values to vary across the fibers Fiber #3 is out of
spec
Example test result #3 •  Expect the values to vary across the fibers Fiber #1 is broken
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME QUESTIONS ? Passive Op.cal LAN Rodney Casteel RCDD, NTS, OSP, CommScope Craig Kegerise, TE Loni Le Van-­‐EIer, 3M David Eckell, Corning PON & POL Rodney Casteel RCDD, NTS, OSP CommScope, Technical Manager What is PON? •  Passive OpNcal Network. •  Facilitates a higher bandwidth broadband access technology •  Competes with and complements xDSL, cable modem and fixed wireless •  With a PON, opNcal fiber is deployed either all the way or almost all the way to the end user •  Passive because: –  network only consists of passive light transmission components (fiber links, spliIers and couplers), with electronics only at the endpoints –  This creates great cost savings for the provider (more reliable and less costly to operate/troubleshoot) •  PONs use a Point-­‐to-­‐MulN-­‐Point (P2MP) topology –  With a 1:n spliIer PON Types •  APON –  IniNal name for ATM based PON spec. Designed by Full Service Access Network (FSAN) group. •  BPON –  Broadband PON standard specified in ITU G.983.1 through G.893.7 –  APON renamed –  Supports 155 or 622 Mbps downstrean, 155 upstream. •  GPON –  Gigabit PON standard specified in ITU G.984.1 and G.984.2 –  Support 1244 and 2488 Mbps downstream, 155/622/1244/2488 upstream •  EPON –  Ethernet based PON by IEEE 802.3ah –  1000 Mbps downstream, 1000 Mbps upstream How PON Works Downstream Broadcast
Downstream Broadcast
All data goes to all ONUs, and the ONU All data goes to all ONTs, and the ONT address controls the downstream data.
address controls the downstream data.
OLT
Upstream TDMA Opera.on
Upstream TDM Opera.on
ONUs send informaNon ONTs send informaNon to the OLT in a to the OLT in a specific Nwme specific Nme indow.window.
OLT
ONT
ONU
User 1
ONT
ONU
User 2
ONT
ONU
User 3
ONT
ONU
User 1
ONT
ONU
User 2
ONT
ONU
User 3
PON FTTx Architecture What is POL? Enterprise Office Building
• Passive Optical LAN.
Aka “Vertical PON”,
“Optical LAN”
2nd FLOOR
Splitter/
interconnect
• Uses FTTx PON
components in an
indoor environment
Desktop ONT
1st FLOOR
• Data
Splitter/
interconnect
• Video
• Voice
Desktop ONT
BASEMENT
• Again, optical fiber
(single mode) is
deployed almost all the
way to the end user
• Point-to-multi-point
Interconnect to riser
EPON OLT
Service Provider
Network
POL Types •  While there are mul.ple types of transport protocols/
services for the carrier PON solu.ons there are currently only two specific transport protocols/services used in the POL environment. •  GPON –  Gigabit PON standard specified in ITU G.984.1 and G.984.2 –  Fundamentally a transport protocol that requires extra framing/
encapsulaNon to adapt to services like Ethernet services at the OLT and ONT Ethernet interfaces and then transports over an agnosNc synchronous framing structure from end to end •  EPON –  Ethernet based PON by IEEE 802.3ah modified to support P2MP –  Ethernet traffic is transported naNvely across the POL with full support of all standard Ethernet features without the need for addiNonal encapsulaNon Passive Op.cal LAN Network Architectures Craig Kegerise, TE Basic PON Architecture •  OLT-­‐PP-­‐SpliIer-­‐PP-­‐Wall outlet-­‐ONT Split in IDF per Floor 1x32 + Patch
ONT
1x32 + Patch
1x32 + Patch
OLT
HomeRun Splitters
Splihng in Zone Splitters
Campus Distribu.on Redundant-­‐ Split on Floor 2x32 + Patch
ONT
2x32 + Patch
2x32 + Patch
OLT
Passive Op.cal LAN Hierarchical Star versus POL Architecture Loni Le Van-­‐EIer, 3M Singlemode Fiber vs. Copper CAT 6/6A Cabling for LAN Benefits of Singlemode Fiber for the LAN §  Superior Performance
–  Greater bandwidth and distance. –  No cross-­‐talk, interference §  Easier Installation
–  No ladder rack required –  Fiber is easier to test & cerNfy –  No shielding required for EMI and RFI §  Pulling Tension
–  Stronger –  Fiber typically has a 50/100 lb tension; copper only 25 lb pull strength. §  Highly Secure
–  Harder to tap than copper; not vulnerable to emissions §  Easier to Upgrade
–  Future-­‐ready for higher bandwidths –  SM lasts for generaNons of electronics §  Non-Energizing
–  Fiber is glass and will not accidentally arc due to staNc or other electrical charges §  Environmentally Friendly
–  AIenuates signal less than copper –  Consumes far less raw materials §  Much smaller
–  Smaller size and lighter weight –  Less an impact on environmental sustainability Traditional Copper Cabling Lifespan
7-10 YEARS
Singlemode Fiber Lifespan
25 YEARS
Fiber Vs. Copper Characteris.cs Cabling Infrastructure Side-­‐by-­‐Side Copper-based Ethernet LAN
Passive Optical LAN
Splitters
Min 2x Copper Cat6/6a
cables to each Outlet
Stacks of Ethernet
Switches/Floor
Desktop ONTs
Typical 4 GbE Ports
IC/FD
IC/FD with
minimal
passive
inter-connect
or not
needed
IC/FD
Splitter
Simplex Singlemode
Fiber Horizontal
Simplex
Singlemode
Fiber Riser
Duplex MM or SM
Fiber Riser
IC/FD
ICFD
WAN/
Internet
WAN/
Internet
Core Router
Core Router
MC/BD
Redundant Layer-3 Core
MC/BD
Redundant
Layer-3 Core
GPON OLT
Singlemode Fiber Advantages TR Star Passive Op.cal LAN (Field-­‐term & Pre-­‐term) Vs. TR Star Copper Cat 6 Cabling 48 Voice + Data ports
Balanced twisted pair
1,500 ports GPON
Singlemode fiber
Material Savings
Example: 10 Story Building (2500 Ethernet ports)
§  Cat 6 horiz. (fiber in the riser), & all patch cords requires 500K Ft cable @ 24lbs/1000e =12,000 lbs §  POLS (fiber horizontal & riser), & all patch cords requires 150K e cable @ 5lbs/1000e = 1,200 lbs v 10,800 lbs (90% savings) in
plastic and Cu material!
$$$
Copper Jacks Bulk Copper Cabling SpliIers Fiber Connectors Bulk Fiber Cabling Fiber Assemblies Apparatus Wallboxes Singlemode Fiber TesNng Vs. Copper CAT 6 UTP Per TIA standards, compare field testing of the Link & Channel
Singlemode Fiber for POLS
•  Test visually –  Verify installed length (jacket) –  End face scratches/debris •  Measured test parameter: 1.  AIenuaNon/loss If a9enua%on is within the limits of the op%cal budget, it passes for commissioning. SM fiber testing is simple.
CAT 6/CAT 6A* UTP for Active Ethernet
•  Measured test parameters:
1.  Wire Map 2.  Length 3.  InserNon Loss 4.  NEXT Loss 5.  PS NEXT Loss 6.  ACR-­‐F Loss 7.  PS ACR-­‐F Loss 8.  Return Loss 9.  PropagaNon Delay 10. Delay Skew 11. * “Disturbed”/ between-­‐link tesNng (PS ANEXT, PS ACR-­‐F) If any values fall outside test parameter criteria, Troubleshoo%ng is required. Passive Op.cal LAN Case Studies David Eckell, Corning Case Study 1 Case Study 2 Case Study 3 Thank You For Your Time Ques.ons ? Rodney Casteel RCDD/NTS/OSP, CommScope, Chair TIA FOTC John Kamino RCDD, OFS Adrian Young, Fluke Networks Craig Kegerise, TE Loni Le Van-­‐EIer, 3M David Eckell, Corning