@EindeutigerUserName @millernet Fiber7 does not use such OLT. They use Cisco switches, which is why there was such an uprising at the ComCo because the two different technologies don’t work together.

But all other ISPs like SALT, Sunrise/UPC operate such OLT.

Quote from Fiber7:

The optical fibers - created by various municipal utilities, energy suppliers and the ex-monopolist - are operated by our own infrastructure. With Easy7 and Fiber7 there is nothing from subcontractors from layer 2 onwards - the pops and infrastructures are built and operated by Init7. We rely on quality: access switches from Cisco, optics from FlexOptix, every Fiber7 pop with a non-overbooked backhaul capacity of 100 gigabit or more to our own IP backbone AS13030 with thousands of peerings and cache servers from Akamai and Netflix - Everything is dimensioned so that Gigabit isn’t just written on the package. And all at an unrivaled price-performance ratio.

Unfortunately, Fiber7 and Easy7 are not available everywhere. That’s why we offer replacement services with Crossover7, Hybrid7 and Copper7 (nothing from sub-suppliers from Layer 3):

Crossover7: 1 Gbit/s, on Litecom’s LiteXchange platform. Crossover7 uses DHCP to address the IP addresses. This allows a fixed IPv4 address per Anschluss, but not a /29 subnet. IPv6 is supported. Please contact us directly by email. Backhaul capacities can be oversubscribed (not 10 gigabits everywhere).

Hybrid7: 1 Gbit/s, based on the BBCS platform from Swisscom.

I’ve asked myself that too. Now with the (involuntary) change in strategy towards P2P, the headquarters respectively. POP’s have a “central” meaning to:

• Every household receives a P2P connection with 1 - 2 fibers directly from the central office, comparable to POTS. Every household or The usage unit once had a two- or even four-wire line to the headquarters.
• Many of these fibers (e.g. feeders) now need to be tightened. In my case, the entire community would have to be connected to the nearest central office > 5 km away. At least one fiber must be provided for each usage unit (apartment, house, business, etc.), which is a major effort. I understand the approach with P2MP or PON and splitters to make better use of the existing fibers.
• Old POTS equipment required a lot of space and generated a lot of waste heat, so the control centers were generously sized accordingly.
• Unbundling of the last mile now also on fiber optics. ALO: Competitors like Init7 want to rent an air-conditioned, heated and dry home. This requires corresponding space in the headquarters.

I really wonder what strategy Swisscom is pursuing here. In my more rural area, entire villages and small towns over several kilometers have to be connected to a central station. I don’t know where exactly these are and which ones were even abandoned in the past due to the FTTS/FTTC/FTTB strategy.

If you were to build a new fiber optic network on a “greenfield” in a completely new geographical area, you would certainly build far fewer control centers than was the case in the “copper age”, because the distances over which an FFTH signal can still be transmitted " From a technical point of view, the data that can be transmitted “loss-free” is simply much larger than via conventional copper cables.

However, moving an existing headquarters or removing them completely will certainly involve a lot of renovation effort, so from a business perspective there will be a spread-off as to whether removing an existing headquarters will ever be worthwhile in individual cases.

But one thing is certain: from a purely network perspective, there are already more than enough existing headquarters locations for a pure FTTH network.

@millernet the ISP usually don’t need much space, a maximum of a 42 U 19″ rack. Emergency power supply is provided by the old battery storage of the EWSD in the headquarters. In the country, the headquarters are not very big, around 400m2 of floor space on the ground floor and in the basement.

Since all of the EWSD in the headquarters have already been dismantled, there is a lot of empty space available that can be rented out again with renovation work.

OLT can also be installed in small AVE ((max 20m2 area) (remote control center)).

Um, maybe a stupid question, but if I now order FTTH on demand from SC, is that also XGS-PON? Or is it AON?

@cybi arrives depending on the headquarters’ equipment. Trend more XGS-PON.

@user109 Thank you, I’ll probably find out at the IBN at the latest 😉

user109 It’s about layer 1 of the OSI model. Through direct access to the fiber to the end customer or Init7 has full flexibility regarding the usage unit. It could also “beam” quantum through the fiber 😂 or offer ⅒/25/50/100/400 Gbit/s or terabit internet, the physics of the fiber optic is basically the limit and not the layer 2 technology of it respective PON technology. With PON or GPON or XGS-PON you are bound to the limitations of the technology. The whole discussion and argument with the ComCo is not about PON vs. AON, but rather the topology (P2MP vs. P2P) of the fiber optic network between headquarters and end customers, so to speak about the discussion of where the splitters are located. Originally these were not only in the headquarters, but between feeder and drop or even in the BEP. So there is no chance for a competitor to get an ALO or Rent layer 1 access from the headquarters. You had to rely on Swisscom’s PON tree for better or worse, or you could buy your own PON tree between the headquarters and the usage unit for a lot of money as a cooperation partner (e.g. Salt). As a relatively small number, you would have had no chance of getting to Layer 1 and would have only had to purchase your services via BBCS from Swisscom and therefore via Swisscom’s technology (Layer ⅔). The nice thing about P2MP or PON is the possibility of saving fibers in the feeder. to make much better use of existing fibers. Swisscom would have to add fewer fibers and would certainly be able to expand more quickly. But that’s no longer up for debate, because a discussion about would have been couldn’t get us anywhere. The status of the old telephone network has now been restored, so to speak: one or even two direct connections (P2P) between the usage unit and the central office. PON or AON can be used flexibly by any provider in this central office. No technology is dictated.

Here is the structure at Init7:

The lower 4 switches of the access level are Cisco Catalyst with 48 SFP28 ports, where 1, 10 or 25 Bidi Gigabit Ethernet modules can be flexibly installed. The top two switches of the aggregation layer are also from Cisco and have 32 QSFP28 ports for 100 Gigabit Ethernet. Each switch is connected to an aggregation switch with 1× 100 Gigabit/s. So in this example, if we assume full occupancy with 50% 25 Gigabit/s and 50% 10 Gigabit/s (completely unrealistic, most customers are probably still on 1 Gbit/s):

• 0.5 * 48 * 25 Gbit/s = 600 Gbps
• 0.5 * 48 * 10 Gbit/s = 240 Gbit/s
• Total: 840 Gbit/s
• Uplink: 200Gbps
• Ratio on aggregation switch: 1: 4.2

Now the connection of the two aggregation switches, each with 1 × 100 Gbit/s, into the core network of Init7 comes into play:

• 4 access switches with 2 × 100 Gbit/s each (multimode AOC) on the aggregation switches: 800 Gbit/s
• Uplink per aggregation switch: 100 Gbit/s
• Ratio: 1:4

Total Ratio: 1: 16.8

Another advantage of the setup: off-the-shelf hardware and no proprietary telco equipment.

(I don’t know where these 4 DACs are going. Photos come from [https://ipng.ch/s/articles/2021/08/28/fiber7-x.html](https://ipng.ch /s/articles/2021/08/28/fiber7-x.html) )

---

@cybi wrote:

Um, maybe a stupid question, but if I now order FTTH on demand from SC, is that also XGS-PON? Or is it AON?

---

Only P2P is built. The provider of your choice decides on the technology and provides it at the headquarters. the POP or the point where your fiber “arrives”. If the control center is a POP, Init7 will use AON and Swisscom, Sunrise etc. will use XGS-PON. Many providers will offer advance services via BBCS from Swisscom and thus XGS-PON.

Whoaahh. You simply write too much, nobody wants to read who should (have to) still be working 😁

Just briefly: I cannot (and am not allowed to @user109) say exactly how our network is/will be structured.

• Much of what is written here is not entirely true.
• This means we can monitor the utilization of the PON trees through constant monitoring and use HU/KI (Human Intelligence with the help of AI) to decide when we want to expand the FAN uplinks many times over.
• The overbooking calculation here is a bit pessimistic.

About the distance:

• No, it doesn’t matter at all!
• The biggest problem is splices and the longer a fiber optic cable, the more such splices there are. Of course you try to avoid them as much as possible, but they are unavoidable if there are junctions.
• It is also known that these splices age, so the “attenuation” can increase over time.
• Further, SFPs lose their diode performance and become blind over time, which affects distance.

Strategy:

• Copper will be used for >10 years.
• In 2024 there will be a significant fiber push, even in rural areas where feasible (e.g. in my case 😁)
• There may be money from the federal government to develop areas that are not economically viable (first this has to be analyzed… and that will certainly take time)
• The development of remote areas can also be done using alternative technologies (SAT, 5G,…).
• 1 fiber per usage unit in the central office is enough (who the heck decided to install an OTO with 4 plugs)
• In the central office, this fiber can be switched to any of the ISP’s equipment. The comparison with POTS is good because xgsPON is also a type of TDM technology and only one line runs into the apartment.

It was short, right?

Many greetings and enjoy the holidays

Tom_40 These are optical splitters. The market is moving towards NG-PON2 (also known as TWDM-PON). Mainly for the advanced network capabilities, less for the pure speed.

Hello together

Here you can read about it:

50 Gbit/s on a fixed line - world premiere!

https://www.swisscom.ch/de/about/news/2020/10/08-weltpremiere.html

Greetings Lorenz

Lori-77 Did I miss something? It’s 2025 now. World premiere was 2020.

user109

No, you didn’t, the link contains the year, it was previously about what doesn’t come after XGS PON, I just came across this link again.

What was once tested…..

You know yourself how few users effectively utilise the 10GB…..

Greetings Lorenz

user109

Thanks for the info and the link, I know this entry. However, it does not show how to react if rationing alone is not sufficient and a PON tree is really utilised over a longer period of time. The backbone is then not the problem as the PON tree is probably connected via a 100G/bits link.

Greetings Tom

user109

Thank you, I am interested in PON and the design of this network technology, hence the question. There are Youtube videos about it on the internet. But not how bottlenecks are counteracted or reacted to.

I currently have fibre optic and the M subscription and this is completely sufficient. Yes, the internet is definitely lagging behind the bandwidths available now.

Greetings
Thomas

Tom_40 Here is another official document from the ITU: https://de.scribd.com/document/537223958/T-REC-G-9807-1-201606-I-PDF-E#