Passive Optical Networks (PON) Protocols

Optical Access - FTTx

Services Sub-Networks

CATV
Video
PSTN

Access Sub-Networks
Copper, Wireless
SDH, P2P Modem,
PON

End User Sub-Network

Voice, Data and Video
Networks
(e.g. twisted pair, Ethernet, Coax)

Video

Why not pure Ethernet?

POTS

PSTN/TDM
Intranet

ATM/FR
Intranet

FTTC,
FTTH, FTTP
Intranet
FTTB, Hybrid

IP/
Intranet
Ethernet

TDM

Ethernet

Fiber Home gateway

VoIP

PON Protocols:
APON, BPON, EPON,
GPON

Telemetry
(Special)

User Terminals (e.g. Phone,

PBX, Computer, TV, STB)

New Access Network:Why not pure Ethernet ?

New Access Network what should it be?

- Enterprise-class Ethernet
- Carrier-class Ethernet
- Carrier-class Multiservice
Carrier-class or Build at Lowest Cost (& rebuild, & rebuild):
- Performance monitoring (link monitoring)
- Fault management (preemptive alarms)
- Network Management (configuration/connection)
- Reliability
- Scalability
- Value

PON Basics
NarrowCast Programming

SFU ONT or FTTC ONU

Single Mode/Single Strand Fiber with

splitters
Video
Network
Intranet

V- OLT System

Video at 1555 nm

Splitters can be collocated or

Splitters
can be collocated or
distributed
distributed

+14 dBmV
1555 nm

ONU/ONT

1490 nm

TDM/PTN
Intranet
Network

OLT System
ATM
Network
Intranet

1310 nm

1490 nm
WF1

1:N

10/100BaseT

1:N

1310 nm
1555 nm

EMS

Passive Optical Network (PON)

Passive
Optical Network
(PON)
Optical
Distribution
Network
(ODN)
Optical Distribution Network (ODN)

1490 nm

24 POTS Lines

1310 nm

Data {DSL or 10/100BaseT}

MDU ONT or FTTC ONU

SME; LAN; B-ONU; V-ONU

Management
Intranet
Network

Service Sub-Network

Video RF+33 dBmV

ONU/ONT

IP
Network
Intranet

Access Sub-Network

End User Network

G.983.1/G.983.3 Wavelength Allocation Plan

G 9 8 3 .1 A P O N U p s tr e a m W a v e le n g th B a n d
1260

1280

1300

1320

1340

1360

W a v e le n g th ( n m )
G 9 8 3 . 1 A P O N D o w n s tr e a m B a n d
1480

1500

1520

1540

1560

1580

( a ) C u r r e n t G 9 8 3 W a v e le n g th A llo c a tio n P la n

G 9 8 3 .3 B P O N U p s tr e a m W a v e le n g th B a n d
1260

1280

1300

1320

1340

1360

W a v e le n g th ( n m )
V id e o
Band

G 9 8 3 .3 W D M B P O N
D o w n s tr e a m B a n d

1480

1500

1520

1540

1560

( b ) IT U - T G 9 8 3 . 3 W a v e le n g t h A llo c a t io n P la n

1580

PON Protocols
APON/BPON/EPON/GPON

Optical Access Protocols and Standards

Active Optical Networks:
SONET/SDH
Point-to-Point

(TDM-based/ATM VPR/Packet-based RPR)

(Fiber Modems/POS/GigE)

Passive Optical Networks:

FSAN/ITU-T
Ethernet/EFM/IEEE
Multi-Service/ITU-T

APON/BPON/BPON+
EPON
GPON

ATM Cell-based
IP Packet-based
Packet/Cell/TDM

Full Service Access Networks (FSAN) APON/BPON/GPON

ITU-T G.983.1
ITU-T G.983.2
ITU-T Q.834.3

Broadband Optical Access Systems Based on PON

ONT Management & Control (OMCI)
Management Interface Requirements (EMS)

Ethernet in the First Mile (EFM) - EPON

IEEE 802.3ah EFM Ethernet in the First Mile Study Group (VDSL - copper & optical)

PON Protocols APON & BPON

Cell-Based PON (APON): Carrier-Class Multiservice

Standards-based (ITU-T G.983.1; G.983.2; G.983.3)

155/622M/1.2G APON/BPON

AES Encryption is defined in BPON (no FEC)

True Multi-service technology (DS1/DS3 Transport; ATM/IP; Video)

Proven QoS and Network Clock Synchronization (SRTS; Adaptive)

Carrier-Class Network Management standard (ITU-T Q.834.3)

Good fit for ATM-Based Carrier Network

Strong support by carriers & vendors

Terawave is a leader in 622Mbps BPON (>5,000 nodes)

Carrier-class DBA; 50-ms protection switching; ASICs

Terawave is a leader in Network Management (FSAN standard co-editor)

PON Protocols EPON

Packet-Based PON (EPON): Ethernet-Class Commodity

Emerging 1.2G standard (IEEE 802.3ah)

Ethernet-type low-cost residential PON (Japan: $75- $100)

Potentially Multi-service technology (currently no standard)

Potentially capable of QoS and Clock Synchronization (PWE3)

Network Management standard is not defined

Does not support enhanced security; supports FEC

Good fit for Ethernet Backhaul (10/100M)

Terawave will become strong leader in EPON (multi-protocol ASIC)

PON Protocols GPON

GPON: Multiservice

FSAN 1.2/2.4G Gbps standard that breaks away from PON framing
established in previous APON standards (ITU-T G.983.1)

Multi-service technology with Cell, Packet, and TDM mapping

Gigabit Encapsulation Method framing (GEM) to support Multi-service

(not GFP)

Will maintain Network Management standard as defined by APON

Will support ATM-only, Packet-only (variable length burst), and Mixedmode framing

Early phase of new standard (not completed; no ASICs)

FEC is the main point of interest by ILECs (enhance split ratio, distance,
and compensate for optical losses due to Video Lambda overlay)

Pros and Cons of PON Protocols: APON/BPON

APON/BPON - Pro
Favorable market perception
Multiservice
(TDM/Data/Video)
Fully defined carrier-class
management
Widely deployed technology
Supported by major vendors
Carrier-Class TDM (low jitter,
low delay synchronous
transport for structured and
unstructured TDM traffic)

APON/BPON - Con

Lower upstream bandwidth

FEC is not defined

Requires SARing for IP traffic

Pros and Cons of PON Protocols: EPON & GPON

EPON - Pro
Lower cost optics
Simplicity of IP management
Potential cost benefits of
commercially available packetswitching ASICs
GPON - Pro
Low delay for TDM traffic in
mixed mode only
Mixed traffic mapping
Higher bandwidth
FEC and AES

EPON - Con

Undefined Miltiservice (CES for TDM)

Poor QoS without per-flow queuing

Lack of Carrier-Class management

Higher delays and jitter due to storeand-forward architecture

GPON - Con

Uncertain market demand

Confusing competitor to EPON/APON

Lack of commercial high-density GEM

Mappers ASICs @ OLT

Complex implementation for mixedmode traffic

Higher cost optics

Not supported by major vendors

Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation (DBA)

in
PON Networks

Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation (DBA)

DBA is a mechanism for scheduling the data traffic across PON

Non-DBA schedulers that support static data traffic across PON are not
efficient for burst data applications
DBA became an important element of network architecture:
During the recent PON evaluations by NTT the efficiency of DBA
algorithm for EPON-based OLT & ASIC vendors was a key factor
New RFI by SBS, Verizon, and Bell South requires to support
Status-Reporting DBA to improve utilization of upstream bandwidth

ITU BPON T-CONT Scheduling

ONUs
OLT
ONU 1 TCONT N

Queue N

Queue 2
Queue 3

Sch

Queue 1

PON

Queue 1
Queue 2

Queue N

ONU 2 TCONT 1
ONU 2 TCONT N

Queue N

Input Queues are scheduled into T-CONTs at ONU

ONU reports T-CONT depths in mini slot
T-CONTs are scheduled across PON at OLT
Output flows are scheduled out of the OLT

Scheduler

Queue 3

ONU 1 TCONT 1
PON Scheduler

Queue 2

Sch

Queue 1

Hakko Opto PON Scheduling

ONUs
OLT

Queue 1

Queue N

PON

Queue 1
Queue 2
Queue 3
Queue N

Input Queues are scheduled directly by OLT

ONU reports queue depths in mini slot
Queue lengths updates included in every cell
Output flows are scheduled out of the OLT

Queue 1
Queue 2

Queue N

Scheduler

Queue 3

PON Scheduler

Queue 2

Hakko Opto DBA Advantage

Strict scheduling every cell generates a request, every request

generates a grant
Strict QoS Compute intensive scheduling calculates optimal time of
grants
Dynamic Scheduling Grants recalculated every 25 uS by Hardware
Software may configure scheduling records for any ATM type of traffic.
Software may reconfigure scheduling at a rapid rate

Contact : Mark Li - General Manager

Tel.: (852) 8200 2036
Fax.: (852) 8148 4513
Email: markli@hakko-opto.com
Web: www.hakko-opto.com