Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gpowell who wrote (116)	6/8/2000 12:12:00 PM
From: Curtis E. Bemis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 46821

That's cool--Now, translate that to the 1000 end-systems served by your MSO in their PONs distribution and figure out how much injected laser power is required at the head end.

To: gpowell who wrote (116)	6/8/2000 12:42:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

Thanks, gp. I'm curious to know what type of fiber they used at that time. Graded or stepped, silica vs polymer, mode and core size, outside diameter of the fiber, etc. Also, Curtis' point is well taken wrt how power gets divided amongst all users. But cluster sizes come into play and any decision to deploy optical powering would need to take into account the expense of smaller cluster sizes in order to offset the dilution. Or bringing the enabling light source closer to user clusters. But we should also keep in mind that the power channels do not need not be "in line" or one and the same as the actual fibers which are being used for communications. IOW, they could be a separate, dedicated set of strands set asside for powering, only. But whether in line or separate, field light sourcing would nonetheless present its own set of problems similar to those of electrical powering at the node and into the home. In other words, a gigalumenous light source out in the field to support this would also need to be backed up, and would require electrical power itself, from the very beginning. The only way that I can see this benefiting the provider, from a field power logistics angle, is if they could support the entire function of optical powering of the loop from the head end or CO, or upstream hub location. Or where the numbers support such, at field hubs. Perhaps another saving grace of having an optical loop powering capability which we've not discussed yet is the dielectric quality that it permits to the home, a feature which improves the odds against potential lightning damage in high risk areas. Maybe in areas of extreme risk due to lightning, optical powering might be supported even if it were not optimal per normal design and engineering metrics, due to a special set of considerations which would be afforded to the prevention against lightning strikes.