<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>RE: [menog] PON</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>> <FONT face="Times New Roman">once achieved,
then the possibilities are open: IPTV in HD mode </FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman">> (of course this
what would first strike any bodys mind), and so on.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT
face="Times New Roman"></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman">BTW: IPTV is
specifically designed, even for HD, to work well with ADSL2+ and does not *not*
require FTTH. Indeed, most, if not all, US telecos deploying IPTV today do
so over copper.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Best regards,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>John</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><BR><FONT size=2></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=SMANNAI@qtel.com.qa href="mailto:SMANNAI@qtel.com.qa">Salman
Al-Mannai</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=fahad@2connectbahrain.com
href="mailto:fahad@2connectbahrain.com">Fahad AlShirawi</A> ; <A
title=menog@menog.net href="mailto:menog@menog.net">menog@menog.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, August 12, 2007 4:13
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: [menog] PON</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><!-- Converted from text/plain format --><BR><BR>
<P><FONT size=2>Hi All,<BR><BR>This is interesting Fahad, as matter of fact,
Bahrain is will suited, at least from my own personal estimate, for such
deployment (xPON in any flavor), however, to consider xPON seriously there
should be a need, just like peering; where the need is to reduce transit
traffic. saving on cost and gaining on network performance.<BR><BR>I've had a
discussion with my colleagues in Qtel, re: the technology evolvement roadmap,
now looking at what is possible (of course we are now talking 'almost' about
FTTH):<BR><BR>1. household will be able to connect (IP connection) at highier
speed than the traditional xDSL (including aDSL 2+).<BR>2. once achieved, then
the possibilities are open: IPTV in HD mode (of course this what would first
strike any bodys mind), and so on.<BR><BR>now the question is had any
operator/service provider seen a value out in
xPON?<BR><BR>Regards<BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From:
menog-bounces@menog.net on behalf of Fahad AlShirawi<BR>Sent: Thu 8/9/2007
9:15 AM<BR>To: menog@menog.net<BR>Subject: [menog] PON<BR><BR>I just thought
I'd start up another topic of interest to network operators.<BR>PONs. Network
overheads are supposed to be greatly reduced and operations<BR>more
streamlined with the technology. Also, the structure of deployment
is<BR>changed so there are lower dig costs and, as a result of reduced
capex,<BR>higher IRR rates.<BR><BR><BR><BR>We've deployed PON in Bahrain and
we love it. Still, Bahrain is small. I am<BR>interested in finding out if
anyone has deployed it on a much bigger scale<BR>and what their experience is?
What technical challenges did they
face?<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>Fahad.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>