Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

G.fast vs VDSL 35(b) VPLUS

15,229 views

Published on

A technical comparison between VDSL VPLUS and G.fast.

Published in: Technology

G.fast vs VDSL 35(b) VPLUS

  1. 1. Jul 16, 2015Confidential | SckipioSckipio Technology Comparison VPLUS versus G.FAST
  2. 2. Jul 16, 2015Sckipio | G.fast vs VPLUS Comparison2 VPLUS (35b) vs. G.fast Comparison Parameter G.FAST VPLUS (35b) Bandwidth 2-106MHz, 2-212MHz (future) 2-35Mhz Max Rate Up to 1Gbps with path to even faster future G.fast performance Up to 400Mbps for 0m loops, no path to higher speeds Down/Up ratio Configurable: 90:10 to 30:70 Fixed ratio Complexity 2K Carriers (more efficient) 8K Carriers (results in 4x more memory required for vectoring) Vectoring Designed to cope with the high FEXT level in the G.fast band Designed for the low 17MHz VDSL frequencies. Significant performance loss when FEXT is high. Customer Self Install Likely – the huge rates leave margin for handling tough in-home networks Unlikely – performance may drop under 17a rates Openness 7 silicon vendors participate in the G.fast interop event (Plugfest) Single vendor? No BBF certification plan * Sckipio implementation
  3. 3. Jul 16, 2015Sckipio | G.fast vs VPLUS Comparison3 G.fast vs. VPLUS 35b, downstream • Huge advantage for G.fast for short lines. Similar performance if the target rate is limited to 300Mbps. Advantage to VDSL+ if the min rate target is 200Mbps (100m). No advantage for VDSL+ if G.fast can start from 2MHz. 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Loop length [m] Bit-Rate[Mbps] Downstream Rate/Reach G.fast, 20-106 VDSL 35b VDSL 17a G.fast, 2-106 300Mbps target 200Mbps targetC A B
  4. 4. Jul 16, 2015Sckipio | G.fast vs VPLUS Comparison4 THINGS TO CONSIDER • Cost implications of multiple choices versus monopoly – VPLUS is a single vendor solution. G.fast has 6 suppliers committed to deliver chips – Users will incur all the VPLUS+ R&D costs of VPLUS since very few other telcos committed to it – VPLUS power issues may raise both OpEx and CapEx – Despite the increased bandwidth, G.fast should be lower price/port versus VPLUS • Risks of technology lock-in – Risks with committing to a single management system, single system supplier, TR-69 fees, etc. – All the problems of VDSL remain, only V+ benefit is larger bandwidth. G.fast offers many technical benefits beyond bandwidth – G.fast is an open management model – supporting SDN and open source components • Ready for the cabinet – G.fast can and will scale. Expect affordable 48-96 ports, fully vectored in future – G.fast will be able to meet the rate/reach requirements – with lower radiation & power – G.fast can be integrated into existing management systems, but offers lower cost alternatives such as Netconf/Yang and OpenFlow
  5. 5. Jul 16, 2015Sckipio | G.fast vs VPLUS Comparison5 Summary • Sckipio G.fast provides – Faster performance at virtually every distance – Flexible Down/Up asymmetry ratio – Substantially more robust with Robust Management Channel – Superior vectoring robustness, adaptation and performance – Open management framework – Scales to whatever is needed (up to 96 ports is feasible)
  6. 6. Jul 16, 2015Sckipio | G.fast vs VPLUS Comparison5 Summary • Sckipio G.fast provides – Faster performance at virtually every distance – Flexible Down/Up asymmetry ratio – Substantially more robust with Robust Management Channel – Superior vectoring robustness, adaptation and performance – Open management framework – Scales to whatever is needed (up to 96 ports is feasible)

×