• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Tier 1 and OC-768

don't think so. tier 2s and broadband ISPs do though.

not much of a need at tier1 level. you just use multiple OC-192. Level 3 has bundles between 6 and 20 of them I believe.

 
I understand that there are many unlit fiber around, but what would be the benefit of using bundles of OC-192 than using OC-768 ?

Do you know which broadband provider here in the US uses OC-768?
I've been to a very large ISP datacenter, and yet all the most they have is OC-192 🙂

I guess if verizon really plan to provide 1Gbps to home, they are going to need multiple OC-768 ring
 
Didn't even know anybody supported OC-768c. Sure enough, Juniper's got a PIC.

And I am shocked, tell ya, shocked that I heard about it on the Internet before I heard about it from my Juniper sales team...
 
Originally posted by: azev
I understand that there are many unlit fiber around, but what would be the benefit of using bundles of OC-192 than using OC-768 ?

Do you know which broadband provider here in the US uses OC-768?
I've been to a very large ISP datacenter, and yet all the most they have is OC-192 🙂

I guess if verizon really plan to provide 1Gbps to home, they are going to need multiple OC-768 ring
Click to expand...

heh, hardly.

They'll just oversubscribe like every ISP. It's just good design. But like everything else, the cost of networking goes down and sd will the cost of the optics.

But I can tell you that some broadband providers DO use OC-768. At least the last cable company I helped rearchitect did. The entire thing is built on an optical platform (cisco 15k) Beautiful, I tell ya.
 
I know for a fact that sprint has a hand-tuned (as they all are, currently) OC-768 link between their main Cali pop (interface on a CRS-1) and a midwest pop (also on a CRS-1).

The reason people tend to bundle OC-192s, or increasingly 10GbEs in the metro, is that the operational difficulty of making 40Gbps work is actually 16x that of 10Gbps, which for now directly correlates with cost due to limited tech. As technology gets a bit better, we may see a move from 10Gbps to 40Gbps or 100Gbps (if some ethernet folks get their way), much like the still in progress move from 1-2.5Gbps to 10Gbps.
 
AFAIK there are not too many OC-768s out there, as it is much more cost effective to run 4x OC-192s, simply due to the hardware cost of "the ends". The fiber will carry nearly an unlimited amount of information; it is what is on both ends of the fiber that determines how fast it goes. "The Ends" cost a lot of money though, and as far as value goes, the bang for the buck lies at OC-192s.

IMO, of course.
 
Slightly off topic, I am curious, what are the lease costs on these lines now for ISP's?
I remember reading an article 5 years ago about the excess bandwidth and how the cost of OC12s was plumetting.

 
150-300K list for a OC192 line card (4 port)
500K list for a OC768 line card (1 port)

Take about 50-60% off of that for real price.

that's just the card. not including the interface processor or route processor, chassis, software, etc.
 
Genx87, generally at that level of the game either they own the fiber already (cost = 0), they horse-trade IRUs (cost = already sunk), or, finally and as a last resort, they buy an IRU (big $$ one time). I'm not aware of any of the big boys who lease their fiber. That's for smaller folks who might not be around in a few years anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top