The installation of British ultra-fast broadband ISP technology based on Openreach (BT) Fiber to the Home (FTTP) will soon begin to see a new optical network unit (ONT), which is not only very compact (as shown at the top of the figure), but also One third of the existing unit cost. Obviously, they sacrificed some small things.
ONT is often installed in your home (wall-mounted), usually near the location where the optical cable physically enters the house. Its main job is to convert the optical signal into an electrical signal so that you can hook it up-set up a broadband router through a standard LAN/Ethernet port.
By default, ONTs prior to Openreach tend to be shipped with a battery backup unit (BBU) in a single chassis, but the latter is no longer required (here). Essentially, the new ONT is not much different from the previous ONT in the above case, just a bit smaller (with a data port and a voice port), and obviously there is no battery now.
You can see below the comparison between the old ONT+BBU housing (closed cover) and the new solo ONT. Nothing special, we just thought that readers might want to know that this is what the new FTTP installation starts to include.
Another related FTTP change that may be worth noting relates to remote nodes. The maximum range of the FTTP splitter (a toolkit that divides the fiber from the switching area into attributes) is 58 kilometers. Therefore, customers who live in exchanges far away from remote or rural areas cannot get super fast speeds.
This year, Openreach launched a new type of splitter (aka-Gigabit Passive Optical Network Splitter), which can be installed in street cabinets or small rural switches. "This means that we can now provide FTTP to the distance Customers whose switches are up to 98 kilometers away," Openreach said.
Making space in existing cabinets (or expanding these cabinets) does require some changes, but the actual splitter (aka-mini head end or mini OLT [optical line terminal]) looks like this. Operators tend to call it the "opposing headend":
It seems that the new OLT is Huawei MA5800-X2 Mark. Does that fit your research?
Presumably, it is not used as a layer 2 switch termination cabinet like a conventional OLT, but is connected back to another OLT through a 10GE port, so it is an opposite position. Like a DSLAM, it provides a bunch of VLANs to the OLT (possibly nested according to the CP), and then sends them to the service provider through Cablelink. This will be their way of providing FTTP to remote areas in the highlands.
http://huaweigpon.cz/wp-content/uploads/SmartAX-MA5800-Brochure.pdf
Yes, this seems appropriate.
"Like a DSLAM, it provides a bunch of VLANs to the OLT, which may be nested according to the CP, and then sent to the service provider through Cablelinks."
When I say OLT, of course I mean the front-end OLT!
For nerds, since the old BT Wholesale ADSL era, they used to talk to the DSLAM—connect a DSLAM to other people in the star/daisy chain, and use that DSLAM to backhaul the smaller ones. Instead of installing additional network kits and backhaul in every switch.
It looks like the original Openreach ONT 1+1. It just doesn’t have the big box I suspected. The real new BT ONT is 1+0 from Nokia. So this is just a temporary solution. There is no bulky box and no BBU.
As the article says, it looks almost the same on the surface, but it is a little smaller and the BBU port has been removed.
When you say it is slightly smaller than the current ONT? The current ONT is (H)134mm x (W)115mm x (D)25mm. Do you know what the new size is?
In addition to the well-known debate surrounding Huawei suites, considering how much they have invested in Huawei suites, what are the benefits of OR switching to Nokia ONT. Will they not lose access to ONT diagnostic information and the like?
BT will provide Nokia OLT for Nokia ONT.
They will provide Huawei OLT for Huawei ONT.
Unfortunately, they will provide ECI OLT for ECI ONT.
GPON configuration is not standardized. Operators operate in their own proprietary way, so Openreach will not mix and match vendors in the PON. Doing so will complicate the configuration and cause them to lose a lot of visibility, management, and telemetry.
With this in mind, this is the new Huawei ONT. The new Nokia one is designed for Nokia ONT. The same ECI kit used for bad ECI OLT configuration.
Manufacturers are unlikely to provide a way to use another ONT on their OLT. Why would they sell £££ when they can connect each ONT to their kit?
This is actually another reason why there is no ONT SFP-every supplier needs them to provide comprehensive services. I don't know if they can be obtained from these three.
PS ECI configuration can be DIAF. that is.
When I read it according to G.984.1 (GPON specification), the maximum distance from the OLT to the ONT is theoretically 20 kilometers of fiber (actually it will be a bit less). You can use Quick Google to verify easily. Where do these super long distances come from? Presumably, it is now said to support an 80-kilometer uplink from the OLT to the core network.
For those who would rather cut off a separate ONT, I would also like to see the SFP ONT option. This is not to say that Huawei does not provide them.
https://www.huawei.com/ucmf/groups/public/documents/webasset/hw_415752.pdf
Based on my review of NGA C+ optics with FEC, it can provide 58 kilometers of coverage at a 4:1 split. The other 40 kilometers will be a 10G Ethernet link from the opposite OLT to the headend.
How many people do you think will use SFP and what is the commercial viability of providing and troubleshooting them? you do not?
For a mass market provider like Openreach, does this seem like a worthwhile exercise for you?
I think SFP-based ONT will be very popular among business users. Basically, I connect some single-mode cables from the junction box on the edge of the house to wherever you wish to place the router (maybe in some cabinet in the middle of the building), where you plug the SFP ONT into your router of choice.
Another option is to ideally support 802.3af/at and 12-54V passive PoE powered devices, just like many Mikrotik products.
Dedicated lines at the general enterprise level are rare. In some cases, the provider not only wants to provide NTE to terminate the fiber, but also wants to provide the entire router.
Again, this is a shared network, more similar to a cable modem network, rather than a point-to-point fiber optic network. SFPs can be simply reprogrammed, there may be problems at the operational level, and they are much more valuable. It is much safer to provide only an NTE that is easy to replace and lock, with clear boundaries and easier replacement security.
I can't imagine any case where companies want to put the SFP provided by the operator into their equipment. In my experience, only use wired or managed routers/firewalls.
As for the other parts, I cannot say that I have seen customers/building owners provide their own pigtail PON solutions between the unit and the fiber tray. I have seen the point-to-point situation like this. There is an ODF in the basement, and finally a wired or management router is provided, but not a PON to SFP place.
Without exception, every PON installation I have seen in the UK is transmitted through all-fiber optics in the building, with one or more splitter nodes in the basement or communication room.
I don't know why the alternative must support PoE. The existing ones have run hundreds of thousands of installations. As I said, there are a few things to consider in the future, but unless the fiber is plugged into an Openreach-approved router they can provide, I don't see SFP or just wires are the same thing.
As I said, this whole thing is more similar to a cable/HFC network layout than point-to-point fiber, and must be considered in this way. The only reason American cable operators allow customers to connect to their own devices is because they are legally obligated and they hate to do so.
I also want to say that if the new ONT supports PoE, that would be great. This way, there is no need to have an electrical outlet next to the thing. If they can be hardwired, I will be fine, so there is nothing to show except a small white box on the wall.
Under various failure conditions, this seems impractical. Performing a new fiber fusion splicing every time an ONT fails is not a good way to develop mass market business.
I think more about hard-wiring the Ethernet connection to the back of the ONT that provides PoE power. Instead of letting the ONT spread the cables all over the place for power and network connections.
Although to be honest, the RJ45 socket on the back instead of the bottom is sufficient. I don't mean that you will hardwire in the fiber optic cable.
Another niche case-most people don't have PoE switches, let alone structured wiring in the walls. For these reasons, as far as I know, Huawei will not manufacture such equipment.
Maybe it's a way to the future.
Agree, if it is PoE for those with PoE switches, it would be great, which is common in today's IP-based CCTV systems. I used a PoE splitter on my "MK2" ONT, which made me lose the PSU. I am glad I have a BBU enclosure, because it is very beautiful and neat, with CAT6 on the wall.
I agree with Jonathan's suggestion about PoE. In an existing home where the current NTE location is selected, or in a newly built house where a new ONT is installed in the living room or router under an open staircase, installation problems usually exist. PoE does not require a PoE switch, just a PoE injector (as some WIFI APs have) built in the power transformer. It just provides customers with installation options and provides a Cat 5e/6/7 cable that connects to a router (including ultra-thin and flat cables) or a central power supply location (with UPS enabled, etc.).
As for the diagnostic lights, they may be located under the inspection cover.
I recognize those Huawei CPEs. I live abroad now-for FTTP, they provide a router directly connected to the fiber optic cable, but to use your own router, you need one of these small boxes. They are very reliable, I have to admit. It has no problems and very few settings. It works well with VLANs used to provide TV services (such as BT TV).
I think switching to C+ optics will result in greater distances? This needs to be clarified.
C+ optics and FEC produce a range of 58 kilometers in a 4:1 ratio. The other 40 kilometers come from the 10G link between the opposing OLT and the headend.
Except why stop at 40 kilometers with ER SFP+? It would be trivial to switch to ZR SFP+ and drive 138 kilometers. It is not that Huawei does not do ZR 10Gb SFP+.
Oops, if you only do a 4:1 split and then switch GPON to a CWDM PON solution, discard the opposing OLT and use a symmetrical 1Gbps directly from the switch to 120 kilometers. When ordered separately, suitable SFPs are less than £50 each.
Where do the line cards and chassis for this operation come from? Huawei sells specific kits for specific purposes. I don't know that the OLT used by Openreach supports CWDM, whether it is the opposite equipment or the front-end unit-Huawei actually sells a specific chassis for WDM, OSN 1800.
This ignores the standardization, scalability, etc. of this solution. Openreach must produce essentially the same product everywhere. Providing a small group of customers with point-to-point Ethernet over CWDM is not a real option, though. Supply changes, parts and engineer training have become "problems", and the hardware costs at both ends have become "problems" as mentioned above.
If you are referring to configuring them from an existing router, Openreach does not have them. The only active devices they allow are some transmission kits, which are not connected to CP and OLT via Cablelink. As mentioned above, I think it does not support WDM.
Carl-T bear with me, so I understand. Does this unit mean that we will extend wholesale products to this box where all FTTPs were expected to be served by POPs? This includes using C+ for running up to 80-100 kilometers in the countryside.
In fact, there will be a live cabinet. Is this a factor or just a limitation of the service creation environment?
Wholesale products do not extend to this box. This box is only used to extend the range. Wholesale products start from the front end of this box connection.
This box will live in an electrified cabinet or a small rural exchange. In the Cabinet, it is actually others who ban CityFibre and Openreach as standard delivery methods. This is a way to extend the coverage without modifying the wholesale products in any way-the same Cablelink connects these customers with the customers directly served by the head-end OLT.
This is actually beneficial to both customers and operators. It increases the possibility for rural customers to visit more FTTP providers, not just providers of BT Wholesale services, and provides richer backhauls than rural exchanges.
100 kilometers is not within the range of C+ optics. According to my list under 58 kilometers, there are 4 ways at most.
I should rephrase it-obviously, the entire link from the customer to the front end is part of the Openreach wholesale product, but this will not affect the product, it just expands the coverage of PON.
The same wholesale product, the same terms, and the bonuses I mentioned above related to termination and handover in smaller rural areas.
This is actually a good thing, far better than having a large number of smaller front-ends, these front-ends need to spend a lot of money to build and have relatively few customers, so it is important for operators to obtain interconnection from interconnection or invest in reaching capacity. The appeal is small-Openreach is doing it for them through aggregating customers in larger interconnection points that are more tied together.
This is actually a very good move. Thanks Openreach. I have been waiting for the street OLT for a while.
CarL-T-great, thank you. It was a while ago, but it was a good read.
Carl T Thank you. Passionate about transparency, so that the funds get where they are expected.
This is a very effective and good way to transmit the data of these rural customers to towns with more abundant fiber and backhaul, because the rural data is combined with the urban data to present it to the provider.
The exchange with 50,000 customers connected through it through FTTC/P will get better configuration and better connection options, instead of one of those ONTs serving a thousand customers without rack space for CP installation kits Even so, it will only provide 10G to all customers by BT Wholesale-LLU operators will not be interested because it is not worth their time.
BT Wholesale is not worth it, but they may have no choice.
10G may be transformed into 2G LAG, because the return journey from there is very expensive.
Carl T-No surprises, this is good. Getting people to show up and provide resources for the project has always been a challenge.
There is no problem with the upgrade kit, but extending the range of the splitter to 98 kilometers can indeed achieve any tangible effect. Possibly reduce the physical exchange of buildings
Openreach commented that they can now offer Fttp 98 kilometers from the exchange, which I think is a very dizzying number of property and financial proposals.
Range of up to 26 kilometers at 1:64 split 1:32 Range of 35 kilometers at split 1:16 Range of 40 kilometers at split 1:8 Range of 50 kilometers at split 1:8 Range Up to 58 km range 1:4 branch
Then there is a 40 km link between the opposite OLT and the head-end OLT. Therefore, on the Openreach network, the range will be between 75 kilometers and 98 kilometers. 98 kilometers is a marginal situation.
It is hoped that the FTTC phase can create all the POPs and AGN@s required for FTTC, FTTP filling and supporting 4G-5G for rural areas. In this case, I will ask C+ optical questions.
Nothing should hinder future migration to WDM! This is the way to upgrade.
"Service creation" usually just reimposes the past constraints that hindered better design, or are we just living with the limitations of the current suite?
One advantage of being a rural village is that it can indeed get rid of the shackles of the past.
Think you value value for money. Openreach is to provide FTTP/C instead of creating new exchanges when unnecessary. They are trying to eliminate exchanges instead of building more exchanges.
Rural areas are not allowed to break the restrictions of the past. The same rules apply everywhere. Openreach will not arbitrarily invent new non-standard products because of funding gaps. This is a gift to replace the Internet.
As far as hindering WDM, there is no progress, this is not a direct upgrade path. The chassis currently can accommodate line cards with 16 GPON ports, 16 XGPON ports and 8 XGSPON ports. This is more than enough in the foreseeable situation, because the capacity of each slot of the chassis is as high as 80Gb/s, so a chassis upgrade is required to increase the backplane capacity to exceed this capacity.
Before assuming it would hinder WDM in some way, you did read the link I provided above, right?
If we try to install a toolkit that will not hinder future development, we will never install any toolkit, or we will install a toolkit, because the product now costs a lot of money or the company goes bankrupt.
I can't see any scenes that actually use 98 (even highlands and islands).
I can see that it might make long-term downsizing easier.
This may be a small number, but the long tail characteristics that copper products cannot provide because they are too far away from anything and do require some impressive fiber lengths.
This is or is trying to figure out a better/cheaper/faster way to transfer the last few percentages to FTTP.
The maintenance cost of TBH copper wire is very high, and the maintenance cost of each site is very high, so the business case for doing this may be better than at first glance.
It sounds very new to me: if it's useless, or it won't bother.
Do you know where to buy spare batteries for this newer device? It is best to be something similar to the old online unit that came with the old BBU.
Then the obvious answer is that if the device can be powered by PoE (you can use a splitter to achieve it, but it would be better if it is built-in), then you can use a switch or router with PoE and fix it to the UPS superior. Then in the event of a power outage, the entire lot remained normal.
APC Power-Saving Back-UPS 700VA, 230V, BS1363 (BE700G-UK), GBP87.00 on Amazon. It will provide you with protection for 30 to 60 minutes
The APC solution is a huge ugly brick and provides unnecessary conversion AC->DC->AC->DC, although it can power your ONT* and* routers, and may also power small servers.
Googling "DC UPS" I found this: https://www.powerinspired.com/product-range/ipower-dc-ups-system/
It looks neat-does anyone have experience in this area?
Considering the small lithium battery used, I think the running time will not be very long, maybe only a few minutes, and you need to equip each device with one.
This should solve the problem
https://cpc.farnell.com/elmdene/ups12-4400/cctv-miniature-ups-5-12v-dc/dp/SR09589
According to the BT document, the average power consumption of the ONT is 7.5W, so the running time is about 90 minutes.
As mentioned earlier, the smaller unit above is just a variant of HG8110H-20, without housing, BBU and ONT BBU sockets. It just transfers the responsibility of the BBU (vulnerable customers) to the ISP in accordance with OR/Ofcom's announcement. It also has an FVA (Tel) interface. At a certain stage, if OR can eliminate the dependence on the FVA function, then they can move to a smaller unit. But I don’t want it to run smoothly before BT Digital Voice has reached any agreement with the ISP.
As an example of a smaller unit with only one gig port, the Huawei EG8010 is only 83mm x 69mm x 28mm and consumes only 2.5w, while the Nokia 7368 ISAM ONT G-010G-Q is 89 mm x 82 mm x 27, but the statement is> 4w
Of course, BT/OR will have enough volume to pack, mark and designate their ONT to meet their requirements.
If a cable manager is included, even without a BBU, I prefer to install the enclosure for overall neatness. Especially if all the wiring goes through the back and uses a passive PoE splitter to power it from elsewhere.
I plan to switch to FTTP in early December, but I'm not sure if there is room on my wall for large units. What is the chance that the engineer will show up with the little guy?
Great article. I currently have an old ONT with a backup battery. I don't even use a landline phone, so the whole setup is a bit clunky and overkill for me. I want to replace the home hub and ONT with Mikrotik hEX S (router with SFP port) and WiFi AP. Do you know if this is possible? From the information I collected, ONT performs "authentication" based on the MAC address (I know this because when I moved into my new version, it initially didn't work because they wrote the MAC address by a letter wrong ). Hope there are any pointers/guidelines for similar settings. Because FTTP and VDSL don’t have much resources
Does anyone know if the ONT passes the 101 VLAN tag to the ISP, or if this is the router's responsibility?
They are now using a smaller ONT without a voice port! I was surprised to see this installed in the St Albans area