This will increase the number of
fiber-fed powered terminals and the construction cost of the network. Partially offsetting
the higher costs of network construction for xDSL and HFC is the fact that CPE
costs currently are lower for these two mature technologies, when compared to EPON.
However, as discussed previously, it is expected that differences in CPE price will narrow
194 Chapter 7
quickly as EPON volumes increase. Depending on the projected service mix and other
cost-model details, side-by-side per-subscriber cost estimates for EPON vs. xDSL or
HFC typically lie in a range from near-parity to a 50 percent premium for a network
with active electronics in the outside plant.
Equally or more important than the initial construction costs just discussed, however,
are the ongoing operational costs, and in this regard EPON possesses clear advantages.
The fact that the remote electronics in xDSL and HFC networks, which are
in high-stress environments, will require regular service and replacement, and that
these ongoing operational costs are borne by xDSL and HFC networks and not by
EPON networks, is obvious. What is perhaps less obvious is the significant cost associated
with providing power to the remote active nodes, which can account for 30??“40
percent of the total lifecycle cost of the access network, depending again on the service
model, the bandwidth-per-customer requirements, and so on.
Pages:
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491