3 ms·

> GFiber will be one of the first ISPs to deploy Nokia’s 25G PON technology, Ah yes. PON. The technology designed to block out competitor access to fiber inf

> GFiber will be one of the first ISPs to deploy Nokia’s 25G PON technology, Ah yes. PON. The technology designed to block out competitor access to fiber infrastructure. The technology that has been deemed illegal to use by the incumbent in Switzerland¹ because of that. Why exactly is this using PON? [¹] https://www.swisscom.ch/en/about/news/2021/10/05-entscheid-bvg-glasfaserausbau.html https://www.swisscom.ch/en/about/news/2021/10/05-entscheid-b...

sschueller 3y ago
Only thanks to Init7 for taking them to court. That is one of many reasons I use them as my ISP. Thanks to the ruling Init7 can provide 25gbit today to existing and new p2p connections. All p2mp will be converted in the few years to p2p as well. Init7 has said they are looking into 100gbit as those BiDi modules have become available and the cost has also come down.
- jeffbee 3y ago
  A court ruling doesn't magically put glass in the ground. Isn't there truth to the Swisscom statement that forcing p2p means fewer people will have access?
  - sschueller 3y ago
    That is not true as the state wants the expansion and the state is also providing money for it. Also all the illegally installed p2mp that hasn't been activated while the case was going on will need to be converted and Swisscom isn't going to leave those connections lying around. The expensive part of running the fibers into the home is done and is the same for p2p as p2mp. It is only the fiber on the street that needs to be expanded.
- alex_suzuki 3y ago
  Just here to say that Init7 is awesome. I‘ve been on both their private and business products for years. Very competent and reponsive support by actual humans. You even get a fixed IPv6 „subnet“ for free. I have yet to find a use for it though.
  - piperswe 3y ago
    I'm so jealous of folks with Init7, I'd love having a home ISP that acknowledges that some of their customers might actually know what they're doing. Sadly I'm not in a position to be starting an ISP...
    - eppp 3y ago
      In my experience, most of the people that think they know what they are doing do not know what they are doing and have a higher support cost. Someone that actually knows what they are doing on a home connection is <1%.
eppp 3y ago
Using PON absolutely doesn't mean you are blocking out competitors. You could easily home run each customer back to the distribution building and still have multiple providers using PON to reach individual customers. PON has nothing to do with the problem they are discussing. It is about putting splitters in manholes instead of at the CO.
throw0101c 3y ago
> Ah yes. PON. The technology designed to block out competitor access to fiber infrastructure. There is nothing inherent in PON that prevents open-access network from being run: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network It's just that ILECs tend to be the ones that build out OSI Layer 1, and also tend to run the Layer 3 for customers to connect to the larger Internet. But this doesn't have to be the case: see Openreach in the UK: * https://www.openreach.com/broadband-network https://www.openreach.com/broadband-network Open-access can be done for a variety of reasons: > […] In some cases, an open access approach was adopted voluntarily (e.g., Spencer IA or Ashland OR), in others open access was mandated by state law (e.g., Grant County WA), while in many others, no open access is offered (e.g., Braintree MA). These case studies reflect a diversity of approaches that helps elucidate the relationship between open access and the technology/architecture used for the last-mile network, the business strategies employed by municipal communication service providers, and the regulatory environment in which the municipal networks operate. […] * PDF: http://people.csail.mit.edu/wlehr/Lehr-Papers_files/Lehr%20Sirbu%20Gillett%20Broadband%20Open%20Access.pdf http://people.csail.mit.edu/wlehr/Lehr-Papers_files/Lehr%20S... An outline of the five major ownership/operation models: * https://www.altmansolon.com/insights/the-case-for-open-access-providing-optionality-for-u-s-municipalities/ https://www.altmansolon.com/insights/the-case-for-open-acces...

sschueller 3y ago

Only thanks to Init7 for taking them to court. That is one of many reasons I use them as my ISP. Thanks to the ruling Init7 can provide 25gbit today to existing and new p2p connections. All p2mp will be converted in the few years to p2p as well. Init7 has said they are looking into 100gbit as those BiDi modules have become available and the cost has also come down.

jeffbee 3y ago
A court ruling doesn't magically put glass in the ground. Isn't there truth to the Swisscom statement that forcing p2p means fewer people will have access?
- sschueller 3y ago
  That is not true as the state wants the expansion and the state is also providing money for it. Also all the illegally installed p2mp that hasn't been activated while the case was going on will need to be converted and Swisscom isn't going to leave those connections lying around. The expensive part of running the fibers into the home is done and is the same for p2p as p2mp. It is only the fiber on the street that needs to be expanded.
alex_suzuki 3y ago
Just here to say that Init7 is awesome. I‘ve been on both their private and business products for years. Very competent and reponsive support by actual humans. You even get a fixed IPv6 „subnet“ for free. I have yet to find a use for it though.
- piperswe 3y ago
  I'm so jealous of folks with Init7, I'd love having a home ISP that acknowledges that some of their customers might actually know what they're doing. Sadly I'm not in a position to be starting an ISP...
  - eppp 3y ago
    In my experience, most of the people that think they know what they are doing do not know what they are doing and have a higher support cost. Someone that actually knows what they are doing on a home connection is <1%.

eppp 3y ago

Using PON absolutely doesn't mean you are blocking out competitors. You could easily home run each customer back to the distribution building and still have multiple providers using PON to reach individual customers. PON has nothing to do with the problem they are discussing. It is about putting splitters in manholes instead of at the CO.

throw0101c 3y ago

> Ah yes. PON. The technology designed to block out competitor access to fiber infrastructure. There is nothing inherent in PON that prevents open-access network from being run: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-access_network It's just that ILECs tend to be the ones that build out OSI Layer 1, and also tend to run the Layer 3 for customers to connect to the larger Internet. But this doesn't have to be the case: see Openreach in the UK: * https://www.openreach.com/broadband-network https://www.openreach.com/broadband-network Open-access can be done for a variety of reasons: > […] In some cases, an open access approach was adopted voluntarily (e.g., Spencer IA or Ashland OR), in others open access was mandated by state law (e.g., Grant County WA), while in many others, no open access is offered (e.g., Braintree MA). These case studies reflect a diversity of approaches that helps elucidate the relationship between open access and the technology/architecture used for the last-mile network, the business strategies employed by municipal communication service providers, and the regulatory environment in which the municipal networks operate. […] * PDF: http://people.csail.mit.edu/wlehr/Lehr-Papers_files/Lehr%20Sirbu%20Gillett%20Broadband%20Open%20Access.pdf http://people.csail.mit.edu/wlehr/Lehr-Papers_files/Lehr%20S... An outline of the five major ownership/operation models: * https://www.altmansolon.com/insights/the-case-for-open-access-providing-optionality-for-u-s-municipalities/ https://www.altmansolon.com/insights/the-case-for-open-acces...