Submitted by Sorin61 t3_yybrwu in technology
FriendlyDespot t1_iwvh773 wrote
Reply to comment by doommaster in FCC orders ISPs to show broadband 'nutrition labels' with all fees and limits by Sorin61
> I am not sure but a PON-Splitter is almost certainly more expensive than say blowing in 12 fibers over 300m instead of 2.
Like I said, in suburbs and exurbs you're not just hanging 12 strands in point-to-point deployments, you're hanging 144s or 288s down long roads. If a driver takes out a pole in bad weather at night, then with a PON deployment your fiber guys have to splice maybe 2-4 pairs, while with a point-to-point deployment they're sitting there all night in shitty weather splicing up to 288 strands and taking a whole lot longer to get customers back online.
A splitter for PON is the same as a splitter for anything else, and they're super cheap commodity items. Pig-tailed cassettes are less than $1 per split in bulk.
doommaster t1_iwvmupa wrote
ok, it is all underground here anyways, risks of fibers ever getting damaged like that is down 0.
Even my parents home/village has P2P all the way.
FriendlyDespot t1_iwvnmfn wrote
Almost all suburban and exurban FTTx in the United States (where the article here is about) is aerial fiber slung from utility poles.
rsta223 t1_iwvzwla wrote
Not in my suburb. Our city-run fiber is all buried.
(FTTH is fantastic too - I'll be super disappointed if I ever have to move away from my symmetric gig)
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments