Rede XGSPON GPON EPON - Minicurso com Eng Alan Araújo

Name: Rede XGSPON GPON EPON - Minicurso com Eng Alan Araújo
Uploaded: 2025-10-09T00:27:03.000Z
Duration: 3 h 56 min 41 s

Introduction to XGS-PON, G-PON, and E-PON Networks

Overview of the Mini Course

The mini course focuses on understanding the differences between XGS-PON, G-PON, and E-PON networks.

The speaker emphasizes that many users mistakenly believe they are using XGS-PON when they are actually operating with G-PON.

Objectives of the Session

Objective 1: Understand what a PON (Passive Optical Network) is to develop critical thinking about various PON types.

Objective 2: Learn about transmission channels specific to XGS-PON.

Objective 3: Differentiate key characteristics among XGS-PON, G-PON, and E-PON networks.

Objective 4: Explore practical applications for each network type and analyze bandwidth improvements with pure XGS-PON setups.

Objective 5: Discuss scenarios where pure XGS-PON is necessary versus other options available in the market.

Understanding Passive Optical Networks (PONS)

Definition and Characteristics

A PON is defined as a Passive Optical Network; "passive" indicates that it does not require power for operation at certain points in the network infrastructure.

The speaker uses a digital whiteboard to illustrate concepts related to PONS effectively during the session.

Equipment Functionality

Passive equipment does not need energy to function, which distinguishes it from active components in networking systems. This fundamental characteristic is crucial for understanding how these networks operate efficiently without constant power supply requirements.

Understanding Passive Optical Networks (PON)

Introduction to Optical Networks

The speaker introduces the concept of an optical network, emphasizing that "N" stands for "network," clarifying it is not a gerund form.

A brief review highlights that only two devices are powered in the network: the OLT (Optical Line Terminal) at the start and the customer equipment at the end.

Characteristics of Passive Optical Networks

The middle section of a PON consists entirely of passive equipment, which does not require electrical power.

Historically, creating networks required extensive infrastructure with energy points every 100 meters, making deployment complex and costly.

Evolution and Impact of PON Technology

The introduction of PON technology marked a significant evolution in networking by allowing fiber optic networks without needing power sources along their paths.

More energy-intensive technologies like radio networks or UTP required frequent power sources, leading to increased potential for errors and failures.

Advantages Over Traditional Networking

PON systems are more resilient to environmental factors such as heat and moisture compared to traditional electronic equipment that can fail under high temperatures.

The speaker emphasizes that PON is fundamentally a concept; it requires proper implementation to function effectively.

Communication Protocol in Networking

To facilitate communication between devices (like people), a protocol is necessary—akin to language rules governing human interaction.

Establishing clear communication protocols ensures effective interaction between different network components, similar to how humans need shared languages.

Practical Application of Protocol in PON

The speaker illustrates how naming conventions (e.g., remote control vs. guitar vs. bottle color) create understanding among users—analogous to establishing protocols in networking.

For successful communication within a network involving multiple ONUs (Optical Network Units), specific protocols must be established for seamless operation across all connected devices.

This structured overview captures key insights from the transcript regarding Passive Optical Networks while providing timestamps for easy reference.

Communication Protocols and Their Applications

Overview of Communication Protocols

The discussion begins with the introduction of two main international organizations that create communication protocols: IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) and ITU (International Telecommunications Union).

The IEEE is responsible for creating standards such as Ethernet, which facilitates communication between devices by establishing rules for data transmission.

Understanding Ethernet Protocol

Ethernet protocol is widely used in devices with RJ45 ports, typically involving metallic cabling like twisted pair cables.

The concept of integrating Ethernet into a Passive Optical Network (PON) leads to the creation of E-PON networks, which utilize fiber optics for data transmission.

Introduction to G-PON Networks

The ITU developed another protocol called Gigabit, which can also be implemented in PON systems, resulting in G-PON networks.

A G-PON network operates using the Gigabit protocol over passive optical infrastructure.

Key Differences Between E-PON and G-PON

The primary distinction between E-PON and G-PON lies in their communication protocols: E-PON uses Ethernet while G-PON utilizes Gigabit.

This difference can be likened to two groups speaking different languages; one group communicates in Portuguese (E-PON), while the other speaks English (G-PON).

Compatibility Issues Between Different Protocols

It is emphasized that an OLT from a G-PON cannot communicate with an ONU from an E-PON due to differing protocols—akin to conversing in different languages without mutual understanding.

This highlights the importance of compatibility within networking equipment based on their respective communication protocols.

Understanding E-PON and G-PON Technologies

Clarifying the Relationship Between E-PON and G-PON

The speaker addresses a common misconception that G-PON is an evolution of E-PON, clarifying that they are actually competitors in the market.

It is emphasized that both technologies do not communicate with each other, highlighting their distinct operational frameworks.

Key Features of E-PON

An overview of E-PON is provided, noting it operates on Ethernet protocol over PON networks and supports speeds above 1 Gbps.

The downstream port of E-PON can handle up to 1.25 Gbps while the upstream port can manage up to 1.5 Gbps, indicating its symmetrical nature for download and upload capabilities.

The technology allows for connection to up to 64 Optical Network Units (ONUs) per port, showcasing its scalability.

Technical Standards and Protocols

The IEEE standard for E-PON is identified as 802.3ah, established on September 7, 2004; this standard governs various operational aspects including speed and provisioning.

Manufacturers must adhere strictly to these standards when developing equipment for E-PON systems to ensure compatibility and performance.

Insights into Upstream Communication

A discussion about upstream communication reveals that manufacturers need to follow specific guidelines outlined in the standards documentation regarding data transmission rates.

Understanding G-PON Specifications

The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) has set forth standards such as G984.x which dictate parameters like downstream rates of 2.5 Gbps and upstream rates of 1.25 Gbps for G-PON systems.

Notably, while both technologies may connect similar numbers of ONUs (up to 128), they operate under different protocols which maintain their distinctions despite potential overlaps in capacity.

Understanding FTTH Communication

Components of FTTH Networks

The communication in a Fiber to the Home (FTTH) network involves key components: ONT (Optical Network Terminal), OLT (Optical Line Terminal), and NU/NT.

All equipment manufacturers working with G-PON must adhere to specific standards, including distance limitations for fiber optics, which can affect provisioning compliance.

Equipment Compatibility and Configuration

Many operational aspects are documented; intelligence is not solely responsible for successful implementations. Questions from participants are encouraged for clarification.

Carlos Barreto notes that LTE POM integrates automatically with E-PON equipment without manual authorization, contrasting with G-PON's manual process.

E-PON typically operates on a plug-and-play basis, while G-PON requires configuration adjustments at the OLT level for automatic recognition and release.

Protocol Differences and Network Types

G-PON is described as more robust than E-PON, leading to potential compatibility issues between different brands of G-PON equipment due to stricter protocols.

Anderson Senna inquires about attendance links; clarification is provided regarding certification issuance linked to a nominal fee.

Hybrid Equipment in Networking

Bilingual Equipment Concept

The concept of "bilingual" devices is introduced through hybrid equipment known as X-PON, which can operate on both E-PON and G-PON networks.

Defining Network Types

The type of network is determined by the OLT; if an OLT supports E-PON or X-PON, it will require corresponding ONU types.

A distinction is made that if an OLT supports only E-PON, then only compatible ONUs should be used to ensure proper functionality.

Advancements in GPON Technology

Introduction of XGS PON

The discussion shifts towards XGS PON as an evolution of GPON technology standardized by ITU under norms 987.1 to 987.3.

Technical Specifications

New wavelengths (1270 nm and 1577 nm) are introduced for downstream and upstream communications within XGS PON networks.

Provisioning Capabilities

XGS PON can provision up to 256 ONUs per port on the OLT, allowing connections for multiple clients simultaneously.

Challenges with Mixed Technologies

Compatibility Issues Highlighted

Users often purchase advanced OLT technologies like XGS PON but may connect them with older ONU types such as G-PON, resulting in slower network performance due to backward compatibility constraints.

Understanding Hybrid LTE and Compatibility Issues

Hybrid LTE Overview

The creation of a hybrid LTE was aimed at minimizing compatibility issues, allowing it to operate with both G-PON and XGS-PON technologies.

Caution is advised when dealing with vendors regarding the compatibility of equipment; it's essential to verify claims about XGS-PON functionality.

Client Equipment Considerations

If a client uses an ONU (Optical Network Unit) designed for G-PON, the entire PON port will function as G-PON, regardless of other connected devices.

Understanding that transitioning from G-PON to XGS-PON isn't automatic; awareness of operational limitations is crucial.

Communication Protocol Basics

A basic review of optical fiber networks reveals that communication protocols like E-PON and G-PON utilize specific wavelengths for downstream (1490 nm) and upstream (1310 nm).

Questions arise regarding the use of GBIC modules in different scenarios; compatibility with existing systems must be confirmed before implementation.

Real-world Applications and Limitations

In practical applications, selling high-speed plans on a network primarily using G-PON may lead to performance issues depending on infrastructure capabilities.

There are instances where XGS-PON is operational even in smaller urban areas, indicating its growing adoption across various regions.

Compatibility Challenges Between Technologies

The discussion highlights that while XGS-PON can work with certain configurations, using a non-hybrid OLT (Optical Line Terminal) may not support all functionalities required by newer technologies.

Adjusting signal levels through unconventional methods may yield temporary results but is not recommended as standard practice due to potential reliability concerns.

Future Insights into Fiber Networks

Vivo's operations illustrate the diversity within service providers' technology stacks, showcasing both G-PON and XGS-PON implementations.

When integrating different ONUs into an XGS PON network, there’s a risk that ports become limited to lower performance standards if incompatible devices are introduced.

Understanding XGS PON and Its Applications

Overview of XGS PON

The XGS PON network must be a pure network, emphasizing the need for purity in its design.

The key distinction between XG PON and XGS PON lies in the "S," which stands for symmetrical bandwidth; XGS PON offers 10 Gbps both downstream and upstream.

In contrast, the XG-PON provides 10 Gbps downstream but only 2.5 Gbps upstream, making it an asymmetrical network.

Equipment Compatibility and Cost Considerations

There are hybrid OLT (Optical Line Terminal) devices that can operate with both XG-PON and XGS-PON equipment, although projects using XGS-PON are less common due to higher costs.

The price difference between XG-PON and XGS-PON is minimal; however, ONT (Optical Network Terminal) costs significantly increase for 10 Gbps capabilities, being up to 5 to 10 times more expensive than traditional G-PON ONTs.

Performance Insights

The choice of ONT brand depends on user preference; current models often feature a 2.5 Gbps port.

Transitioning from E-PON or G-PON to XGS-PON requires careful consideration of application needs and potential performance impacts.

Bandwidth Distribution in E-PON vs. G-PON

E-PON typically supports up to 1.25 Gbps per port but may realistically deliver around 980 Mbps when tested under load conditions shared among clients.

With a maximum of 64 clients sharing this bandwidth, each client could expect about 20 Mbps if all were active simultaneously.

Comparative Analysis of Client Bandwidth

For G-PON systems providing up to 2.5 Gbps divided among potentially 128 clients, the average bandwidth per client remains approximately the same at around 20 Mbps during peak usage scenarios.

This indicates that despite different technologies (E-PON vs. G-PON), they can yield similar average bandwidth outcomes under full load conditions.

Impact of Bandwidth on Internet Speed

Understanding E-PON vs. G-PON

The impact of bandwidth is crucial; for instance, if two users test an 800 Mbps plan simultaneously, it can lead to saturation at 1.6 Gbps.

E-PON saturates at a lower threshold (1 Gbps) compared to G-PON (2 Gbps), making G-PON more efficient for speed tests.

Caution is advised when using E-PON with 128 clients, as dividing bandwidth among more users increases the risk of saturation.

Quality Over Speed

Stability and user experience are prioritized over sheer speed; many ISPs market high speeds which can mislead customers.

Customers often cannot utilize their full bandwidth due to equipment limitations, leading to dissatisfaction and increased support requests.

Real Consumption Insights

Analyzing real-time usage shows that average consumption per customer typically ranges from 2 to 3 Mbps, regardless of their subscribed plan.

This means that even with higher plans (100 Mbps or above), actual usage remains low compared to available bandwidth.

Performance Metrics

Both E-PON and G-PON can deliver sufficient average bandwidth (around 20 Mbps), significantly exceeding typical customer consumption needs.

For example, an OLT with 64 ONUs may only see a total consumption between 200 to 300 Mbps while being capable of handling up to 1000 Mbps without nearing saturation.

Challenges in High-Speed Plans

With an OLT supporting up to 2000 Mbps and multiple clients consuming around 3 Mbps each, there’s still ample capacity before reaching saturation.

Issues arise when marketing high-speed plans leads customers to expect performance beyond what their routers or devices can handle.

Equipment Limitations

Routers have processing limits; overloaded routers can freeze under heavy traffic from high-speed plans, causing customer frustration.

Customer equipment often fails to support advertised speeds, resulting in further complications for service providers who focus solely on speed marketing.

Discussion on Network Saturation and Technology Choices

Understanding Network Saturation

The speaker addresses concerns about network saturation, emphasizing that many believe the current capacity is nearing its limit, while he argues it is far from saturated.

He critiques the idea of upgrading to 10 GB services when clients are not utilizing even 1 GB, suggesting this could be a misguided strategy.

The speaker points out that using advanced technologies like XGS-PON may not provide any real differentiation for residential customers who are unaware of these technical details.

Misconceptions About Technology Differentiation

He highlights the futility in trying to impress clients with technology they do not understand, stating that such efforts only serve to showcase capabilities to competitors.

The discussion continues with a focus on the cost-effectiveness of deploying XGS-PON for low-revenue clients, questioning whether it's worth investing in expensive technology for minimal returns.

Appropriate Use Cases for XGS-PON

The speaker identifies suitable scenarios for implementing XGS-PON technology, particularly in corporate environments or high-end condominiums where demand is higher.

He describes how businesses located in dedicated office buildings can benefit from high-capacity networks due to their significant data demands.

Challenges with Existing Technologies

A critical issue raised involves limitations of G-PON and E-PON technologies when attempting to deliver dedicated links effectively.

The speaker explains that if client consumption exceeds available bandwidth, it becomes problematic; thus, understanding client needs is crucial before choosing a network solution.

Real-world Applications and Client Needs

He shares experiences from projects in business districts like São Paulo where companies genuinely require higher bandwidth plans due to their operational needs.

Emphasizing practical usage over theoretical capabilities, he notes that many businesses consume significantly more than what their plans suggest.

Audience Engagement and Insights

The speaker reflects on audience engagement during his talk and shares anecdotes about customer perceptions regarding internet speed offerings.

He concludes by addressing common issues faced by providers related to authentication processes impacting bandwidth availability.

MicroTik and Network Configuration Challenges

Issues with MicroTik Processors

The MicroTik devices, particularly the CCR series, face performance issues due to their multi-core processors concentrating processing on a single core, leading to bandwidth bottlenecks.

Users often experience these bottlenecks, prompting many to migrate to alternatives like Cisco or Huawei for higher-tier plans.

Certificate Purchase Process

A user inquires about purchasing a certificate; the presenter explains the process step-by-step.

To buy a certificate, users must visit a specific link and select payment via Pix. They need to enter their CPF number for processing.

After payment is processed, certificates are generated and sent out the following day. Accuracy in name entry is emphasized to avoid errors on the certificate.

Network Design Concepts

The discussion shifts back to network design, focusing on XGPON networks. Different configurations for client connections (1:64, 1:128, 1:256) are introduced.

A draft network design is presented for accommodating 64 clients using primary and secondary boxes (CTOs), illustrating how different configurations can optimize client distribution.

Advanced Network Topologies

Alternative designs allow for more clients by adjusting box configurations; options include varying numbers of primary boxes and CTO setups based on client density.

The presenter discusses creating a three-level network structure that enhances scalability and efficiency in client management.

Considerations for XGS PON Networks

Emphasis is placed on using pure XGS PON networks with appropriate equipment (e.g., NU of 10 GB). Misconceptions about mixing technologies are addressed.

Users are cautioned against assuming they have an XGS PON setup when utilizing lower-tier technology like NUG PON; clarity in understanding network capabilities is essential.

Equipment Specifications and Considerations

Understanding OLT Equipment

Discussion begins on the types of equipment, specifically Optical Line Terminals (OLTs), with a focus on technical specifications.

Mention of a specific model with 16 SFP ports and its classification as Class C++. A free mini-course on return signal is available on YouTube.

Clarification that while the equipment claims compatibility with both GPON and XGS-PON, it operates under different parameters, highlighting potential misrepresentation in sales.

Transmission Distances and Power Levels

The maximum transmission distance for the discussed equipment is noted to be 20 kilometers, with optical power levels ranging from 6 to 10 dBm.

Emphasis on proper fusion techniques when working with fiber optics; poor practices can lead to significant issues when operating at higher speeds like XGS-PON.

Data Sheet Analysis

Importance of consulting data sheets for accurate operational details such as maximum distances and performance metrics.

Explanation of how the device operates under GPON versus XGS-PON conditions, including data rates for download (2.5 Gbps down / 1.25 Gbps up).

Sensitivity and Performance Metrics

Discussion about sensitivity levels for reception: -29 dBm for XGS-PON and -32 dBm for GPON, stressing the need for careful installation practices.

Warning against improper handling during installations which could lead to performance degradation.

Additional Equipment Insights

Introduction of an ONU (Optical Network Unit), detailing its capabilities such as symmetrical speeds of 10 Gbps.

Highlighting differences in wavelength requirements between classic emitters and newer models designed for XGS-PON applications.

This structured summary captures key insights from the transcript regarding OLT specifications, transmission considerations, data sheet analysis, sensitivity metrics, and additional equipment features relevant to fiber optic technology discussions.

Overview of Fiberhome ONU and Optical Networks

Key Features of Fiberhome XGS-PON ONU

The discussion begins with the importance of wavelength, specifically mentioning the Fiberhome ONU model X3000, which is highlighted as a significant device in optical networking.

Key characteristics include Ethernet support, SCAPC port, and optical interface specifications. The RX wavelength is noted at 15.77 nm with a reception sensitivity of -28 dBm.

A search for additional information on E-PON and XG-PON technologies reveals that both are competitive standards in optical networking, emphasizing the need to understand their differences.

Competitive Standards in Optical Networking

Discussion shifts to the evolution of optical network standards, highlighting advancements towards 50 Gbps capabilities in E-PON technology.

The speaker emphasizes critical thinking when analyzing these technologies and mentions IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) and ITU (International Telecommunication Union) as key organizations behind these protocols.

Upcoming Courses and Educational Opportunities

Transitioning to educational announcements, the speaker shares details about upcoming courses including a free mini-course on October 21 focused on unbalanced network power calculations.

Information about an intensive hands-on fiber optics course scheduled for October 18-19 is provided, along with pricing details for both online and in-person formats.

Course Details and Registration Information

A comprehensive three-day course on designing unbalanced networks will take place from October 27 to 29. This course aims to cover project planning from scratch at an affordable price point.

The speaker encourages viewers to visit his website for registration details while addressing potential technical issues with online sign-ups.

Final Announcements

Additional courses are planned through late October into November, including a session on OTDR (Optical Time Domain Reflectometer), reinforcing ongoing learning opportunities within the field.

Stay Updated on Social Media

Importance of Following on Social Media

The speaker encourages the audience to follow their social media accounts (Instagram, TikTok, YouTube) for valuable content.

Emphasizes that all shared content is useful and credible, aiming to provide real value to followers.

Introduction to Clube de Fibra

The speaker introduces the "Clube de Fibra," a WhatsApp group with 1,018 members in the first group and ongoing growth in the second group.

Highlights that the group is closed to maintain order and only allows the speaker to post useful information such as market tips and free mini-courses.

Engagement with Audience

The speaker opens up for questions from the chat after concluding a training session, indicating willingness to extend discussions based on audience inquiries.

Acknowledges positive feedback from participants about the detailed content provided during the session.

Upcoming Courses and Certifications

Course Announcements

Mentions an upcoming project course scheduled for early December, which will be comprehensive and serve as the last course of the year.

Clarifies issues regarding certificate issuance due to high traffic; certificates can only be issued weekly.

Technical Discussions

Addresses a technical question about client capacity with G-PON technology, clarifying limitations related to XGS PON configurations.

Final Thoughts and Community Engagement

Closing Remarks

Expresses gratitude towards participants for their support throughout the session while acknowledging initial nervousness during presentation.

Community Interaction

Engages with various locations mentioned by participants in chat, showcasing a diverse audience from across Brazil.

Preparation for Mini-Course

Countdown to Mini-Course Start

Announces that a mini-course will begin shortly, emphasizing its importance for internet service providers who may not yet offer customer applications.

Cost-Effective Solutions for Internet Service Providers

Overview of Printing and Delivery Costs

The speaker highlights the annual costs incurred by internet service providers (ISPs) for printing invoices, delivery materials, and fuel expenses related to customer service.

Emphasizes the inefficiencies caused by customers accumulating in reception areas during payment delays.

Introduction to the Application

The speaker introduces a software application developed by their company, UX Software, designed specifically for ISPs.

The app's home screen displays current invoices and offers quick access features such as downloading invoices and copying PIX codes.

Customer Management Features

Discusses a feature allowing customers to unlock services temporarily if they face payment issues, enhancing customer support.

Mentions synchronization with existing management systems used by ISPs for seamless operations.

Invoice Management Capabilities

The app provides detailed views of overdue invoices, upcoming payments, and previously paid bills.

Users can generate barcodes or QR codes directly from the app for easy payment processing via boleto or PIX.

Administrative Functions

Highlights an administrative center within the app that allows ISPs to manage client information effectively.

Demonstrates how banners can be added for marketing purposes directly through the application interface.

Notification System

Introduces a notification system that allows ISPs to send reminders about payments or promotions directly through the app.

Notes that automated notifications post-due dates have reportedly reduced delinquency rates among clients significantly.

Customization Options

The application is customizable to reflect the ISP's branding, ensuring it aligns with their corporate identity.

Introduction to Internet Provider Partnerships

Overview of Partnership Benefits

The speaker mentions having around 30 to 40 internet provider partners, emphasizing that the applications provided are customized and not fake.

The application is designed to synchronize with the internet provider's system, potentially reducing workload and increasing efficiency for providers.

Upcoming Mini-Course Announcement

A mini-course is about to start, with a countdown timer displayed on screen. The speaker engages the audience by asking if they are ready.

There’s an urgent reminder regarding Anatel's deadline for internet provider regularization, which is approaching at the end of October.

Regulatory Changes and Support

Importance of Compliance

The speaker warns that after the end of October, only internet providers with proper authorization will be accepted as Anatel plans to delete its technical-administrative database.

Providers who have not yet addressed their compliance issues are encouraged to contact the office for assistance.

Expertise in Telecommunications

The speaker shares their extensive background in telecommunications engineering, highlighting nearly 15 years of experience in fiber optics projects.

They emphasize their office's reputation for seriousness and agility while noting that they have assisted over a thousand internet providers across Brazil.

Services Offered by Engineering Office

Comprehensive Support Services

Services include regulatory consulting with Anatel and other organizations like CREA and CFT.

They offer project development for fiber optics tailored to various needs including residential areas or specific industrial requirements.

Training and Development

The office also focuses on creating new internet providers from scratch, providing training and standardization for teams involved in these projects.

Over 5,000 professionals have been trained under the speaker’s guidance, showcasing their commitment to education within the industry.