Kirby Smith
join:2001-01-26
Derry, NH | reply to cjax
Re: Zyxel wireless router with FIOS 5meg/2meg
Thanks cjax. I hadn't read that A/B distinction before.
kirby |
|
cjax
join:2004-01-11
Parsippany, NJ
| reply to bbarrera
Thanks for someone speaking out with good information. The issue is not if the router or CPE equipment has different technology to support FTTP/FTTH. It's how the current technology is used in a way as to not hinder the speed capable with FTTP/FTTH. What may users of products don't realize is that just b/c you have a 10/100 port on your router, that doesn't mean the router is capable of keeping up with those speeds.
Case and point ---> »www.netgear.com/pdf_docs/2005011···trix.pdf
(look at WAN to LAN speeds)
I'm not trying to compare netgear to ZyXel to router xyz b/c they are all different products. What I am trying to say is that many times the WAN to LAN speed has many factors such as processor speed, firewall packet processing, etc. So although company X may have a very good all around product, it may not be able to keep up with the speeds for FTTP/FTTH. This was very evident when Verizon chose to use Dlink VDI-604 and VDI-624 router for their deployment for their FiOS service. The VDI-604 and VDI-624 are just Verizon versions of the standard D-Link DI-604 and DI-624. It has been confirmed that the standard out of the box D-link router could not achieve the 15/2 speeds but the VDI series D-Links routers could. No change in technology but, a change in firmware and maybe a different processor. 5/2 speeds should be fine with almost any home router.
Also to clear up some info - APON is based on the ITU G.938 International Standard, which supports 64:1 passive optical splitters (Non-North American Standard). BPON on the other hand supports up to 32:1 passive optical splitters. Each customer channel is end to end encrypted, not sure if this is the case with APON. BPON is basically the specification that Verizon, BellSouth, and SBC came up with for FTTP/FTTH. Having a spec common to all, provided overall lower cost of common equipment and components.
All of these technologies use ATM for traffic management. |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
 ·SureWest Internet
| reply to Shootist
I haven't researched the various FTTH schemes. It seems to me that all you need is an Ethernet router capable of routing at advertised speed, which in my case is up to 20M each direction. The earlier discussion was confusing because it discussed wireless datarates and QoS, when my real question was about routing/firewall performance. |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA
| reply to Kirby Smith
said by Kirby Smith  :said by DavidJWood :Whilst I won't word it in the same way as others, I do wish to join in on the questioning as to why FTTH needs any kind of special support. Verizon's FiOS, probably the most common FTTH system at the moment, is an EPON system - Ethernet over PON. There's no ATM involved in these systems, which is one reason why they're relatively cheap to implement. What's so special on the CPE side of a FTTH install that needs special support in a router, especially in an FTTH system that is based around Ethernet? David Some here may wish to spend some time at the Verizon FiOS forum. There they will read that Verizon BPON (broadband PON) is APON (ATM PON) plus TV and voice spectrum additions. Agreed that to first order, the ATM aspect is irrelevant because the ONT converts the connection to standard Ethernet. Negotiation for up time slots and other ATM arcana is hidden from the user. kirby With all that said about EPON/APON/BPON and apologies where needed I have one basic question.
The port that is installed in the (Inside the) home or business for internet access is what? Ethernet? If Ethernet what is so different from this Ethernet port then ANY other type/style Ethernet connection. And why would one brand/make/model router be any better then any other brand/make/model giving that all can handle the high connection speeds.
This is where the whole discussion started. Why is one better then the other for a FTTH connection?
--
Shooter Ready--Stand By BEEP ******** |
|
Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS
| reply to DavidJWood
just maybe be in England its EPON and in America its APON.
and in Japan its Ippon (which is the same as two Wazaris) and I bet you thought I was going to say Nippon!  |
|
DavidJWood
Premium
join:2001-10-12
UK | reply to Kirby Smith
In that case, I apologise; references I had read indicated that FiOS was EPON, but I was clearly mistaken.
David |
|
Kirby Smith
join:2001-01-26
Derry, NH
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to DavidJWood
said by DavidJWood :Whilst I won't word it in the same way as others, I do wish to join in on the questioning as to why FTTH needs any kind of special support. Verizon's FiOS, probably the most common FTTH system at the moment, is an EPON system - Ethernet over PON. There's no ATM involved in these systems, which is one reason why they're relatively cheap to implement. What's so special on the CPE side of a FTTH install that needs special support in a router, especially in an FTTH system that is based around Ethernet? David Some here may wish to spend some time at the Verizon FiOS forum. There they will read that Verizon BPON (broadband PON) is APON (ATM PON) plus TV and voice spectrum additions. Agreed that to first order, the ATM aspect is irrelevant because the ONT converts the connection to standard Ethernet. Negotiation for up time slots and other ATM arcana is hidden from the user.
kirby |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA
| reply to maxusa
maybe we got off on a tangent...
SMBs generally don't need managed switches for the same reason they don't need Gb to the WAN, or really anywhere in the LAN. no bang for the buck.
SMBs seem to be more inclined to move towards putting their DMZ services off-site for availability reasons. what's left is an office lan with some VPN requirements to the off-site location. we might be talking about different flavors of SMBs, but i've experienced a pretty wide cross section and none needed (or wanted to pay for) Gb anywhere. running backups over the network would be faster (not a routing or firewall issue), but day 2 day operations didn't come close to needing it. and running firewall-dmz-firewall-lan doesn't sound like a simple SMB setup to me.
load balancing isn't needed, generally, for SMBs that aren't trying to run a web biz on-site (see above). failover, yes, load balancing no. and i don't know of many SMBs that want 100Mb or more for their WAN connection. most make due with a t1. again, maybe we have different ideas of what an SMB is. |
|
Mem
join:2002-01-03
USA
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to maxusa
I have to agree with maxusa from what I see within businesses in this area (NY). Residential has also been stepped up recently for cable customers-at home we get 15mbps/2mbps for $45 and can go to 30mbps/2mbps for an additional $10. It's been announced that next summer a new tier of 50mbps will be offered (and business use of this tier will be symmetrical)
The faster speeds are here and the mass market lead time will probably be very short. Those having products available to handle these speeds will grab the lions share of these end users and it could be difficult to make headway against the manufacturers perceived as premium, innovative hardware providers. |
|
Shootist
Premium
join:2003-02-10
Decatur, GA | reply to maxusa
Bump to see next page. |
|
maxusa
Premium
join:2004-05-05
USA
| reply to jig
Regarding SMB needs:
•SMBs are still price-sensitive and complexity-averse. They rarely buy into L2 switches, let alone L3. We rarely see managed switches used, only in heavy IT shops, or multi-department midmarket customers (closets). But this can be our biased experience and perception. Anyone seen different?•In perimeter network topologies, we need at least 2 firewalls: one facing WAN, and one facing LAN. The DMZ with public servers is in between. This is still preferred in some cases to the ZyWALL approach. Gigabit speeds can be used here.•In load balancing situations, dual 50+ Mbps WANs aggregate to 100+ Mbps on LAN. Gigabit territory again. I'd like to see Gigabit speeds (100+ Mbps) in ZyWALLs, we can use 'em today. |
|
maxusa
Premium
join:2004-05-05
USA
| reply to jig
Regarding the extra switch:
•Most residential have 1 to 3 network devices at home. (Not in each room, toilet, and kitchen!)•One or more of those 3 is using wireless. Wired homes are rarity and waste of money. Wireless is cheap. So not all switch ports are occupied.•One or 2 printers. To the most part are dirt-cheap ink jets, so USB plugs to a host computer. If the router is equipped with a USB print-server, fine, maybe. Very few buy a print server.•NAS is super rare, backups are done on CD-Rs if ever.•Gaming consoles are stand-alone, newer ones with NICs are just coming out.•Media extenders are very rare to none. So this is the typical residential setup eyewitnessed first hand by yours truly in various U.S. cities, big and small. Rarely have I seen the need for another switch... unless kids are learning computers or SOHO. |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA
| reply to maxusa
sorry, when i asked "finally, how many consumers are going to be able to buy into fios speeds?" i wasn't talking about ability to pay for it, but availability. i know i don't have fiber available to me, or to any of my various friends and clients, yet (not counting you guys).
as far as providing the bandwidth for the video offerings, it is my belief that the video will be offered on a separate segment, one that physically splits off at the box they bolt onto the side of your house. my guess is that all the equipment required for that will be rented out (like cable boxes or sat STBs) and i'll be very surprised if they expect the house owner to have an installed, routed network that would work with their hardware. imagine the support costs of trying to work with every tom dick and eve who couldn't get their specific firewall to pass the right ports, let alone the bandwidth. if you are sure that everything (both video and data) is supposed to travel through a user supplied firewall to the home, then i'll need a link.
anyway, how useless would it be if all the traffic was on the same segment? since i can't really control my download speed, i'd hose my video every time i updated, right? and p2p would be impossible.
i agree that we bleeding edgers need the throughput, but i'm not so sure about the majority of people who just want something better than dialup. they seem to be a much larger group, in my experience.
as far as the extra switch... well, i have to disagree. anyone who has a wired system typically has more than 4 port needs (one for each room, one for each current pc, one for each printer). and everyone else usually tries to get by with wireless, and that's not yet over 100Mb, especially between computers on the lan.
and as far as using department tiered topology... i thought that was all done with managed switches and such so that only the specialized routing and routing to the wan went through the actual "routers"/firewalls. also, having some experience with setting up internet 2 connections (not hands on, just getting all the ducks in a row), there are lots of points all along the line where 10 and 100Mb bottlenecks have to be bypassed... and those bottlenecks serve the majority of a campus of more than 60,000 (staff, undergrad, grad, wireless, wired). now i'm sure that the campus backplane is huge and solid fiber (at least it has been for a couple years now) but, i mean, come on. how is that similar to the needs of an smb or home? |
|
maxusa
Premium
join:2004-05-05
USA
4 edits | reply to janderso1
Jim, ZyXEL procrastination baffles me. It does not appear like they try to protect the Z5/35/70 line, as this line is positioned for security, granularity of features, and reliability. Consumer routers are fighting on price, all-in-one (wireless), ease of use, and tech support. ZyXEL does not and shall not sell ZyWALLs to consumers (retail), as it won't sell Prestiges to SOHO/SMB (except, maybe, for VPN telecommuters). Suppose there is a Prestige that does 50+ Mbps, MIMO, etc., for $50. This won't outweigh the appeal of slower ZyWALLs for SMB.
Regarding the Gigabit interfaces. Your situation with an extra switch is not common in the segment. Power users needing lotsa ports account for much smaller group. If built-in switches were useless, most consumer routers would have had a single LAN port. They all have switches.
Also, Gigabit is more relevant when talking about ZyWALLs. Factors like internal deployment (departmental), tiered topology, fiber speeds suggest going Gigabit. It won't cost them a fortune to make the move, however, ZyWALL real problem appears to be the fabric throughput. Remember, anything above 100Mbps is the Gigabit territory. |
|
maxusa
Premium
join:2004-05-05
USA
| reply to jig
The residential broadband ramp-up is/will be fueled by entertainment. All telcos and cable operators have this in their sights. Each HDTV-quality stream will take 6~10Mbps. If they promise PIP and/or several viewers in the house--you get the idea. FTTH, FTTN, or cable must provide minimum 15 Mbps to be suitable for the content delivery. More like 20+ Mbps.
The broadband as we know today (for Internet access) is transforming into a utility-type service. Internet and computer usage will be secondary in bandwidth utilization. However, the need for security only becomes more pertinent. So this is the context for the discussion.
Pure broadband prices ($20, $40, $60) will soon become irrelevant--will drown in the provider's bill for added services. Those who argue that the market share for residential routers capable of 20+ Mbps firewall throughput is/will be insignificant, most likely do not realize the direction. This kind of throughput is needed today, let alone tomorrow. I believe this case is very strong. |
|
janderso1
Jim
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-15
Saint Petersburg, FL
| reply to jig
jig
The Verizon 15Mbps/2Mbps FIOS offering is $50 per month which is $20 per month more than I am currently paying for 1.5Mbps/384Kbps Verizon DSL (my phone line doesn’t qualify for the 3Mbps DSL tier which is the same price).
»www22.verizon.com/FiOSforhome/ch···age.aspx
As far as I know, none of the Zyxel consumer grade support 15Mbps with the firewall on (so far no one has measured the 550). All Zyxel needs to do to support these speeds is to use a faster processor (and possibly faster memory) in the consumer grade products. However, it appears to me that they are using slow processors to protect the sales of the Zywall 5/35/70. I am currently using a Zywall 5 for reasons other than speed.
I use a eight port Netgear gigabit switch (less than $90) so gigabit LAN interface isn’t very important unless it comes at a very low cost.
--
Jim Anderson |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs: | reply to jig
Around here 10M/10M is $49.95/month without a contract, and $89.95/month for 20M/20M without a contract. Street prices are better. I'd expect same pricing for FTTH in other areas as it must compete against DSL and Cable. |
|
jig
join:2001-01-05
Hacienda Heights, CA
| reply to bbarrera
wow, that router really takes a hit on udp performance.. 2 orders of magnitude off of other protocol performance?
Gb lan interfaces would be nice... but even very expensive industrial strength firewalls use 100Mb. i won't fault them for that choice.
it's true that zyxel has some holes in their residential lineup, performance and features wise. does the 550 have throughput as high as the Linksys wrt54gx? if so, are they similar in price?
finally, how many consumers are going to be able to buy into fios speeds? i'm not sure zyxel thinks they will make enough money off that group to support a new line. however, cable speeds seem to be also ramping up... though are they ramping up enough to outstrip the current products? |
|
bbarrera
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-23
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·SureWest Internet
| reply to Anav
TomsNeworking review of Linksys wrt54gx on this page »www.tomsnetworking.com/Reviews-1···GX-5.php also lists other high throughput routers (not listed is a Netgear routers in the 40M+ club). |
|
Anav
Sarcastic Llama? Naw, Just Acerbic
Premium
join:2001-07-16
Dartmouth, NS | reply to bassetts
Not sure but ASUS may have some high throughput units? |
|
