Speed of the bandwidth is crucial specification of the network. Fiber is capable of carrying information on very big speed, but it is the solution architecture that define resulting available bandwidth. Many solutions are offering good bit rate optical speeds but after speeds being shared across multiple customers – the resulting speed is comparable to traditional metallic systems. After identifying solutions with best bandwidth and most flexibility we come to the assumption that Active solution is having big improvement over the Passive solution. The same improvement the Passive solution is having over DSL.

 

Next step in choosing network architecture is the cost to scale. It is a good idea to think about the bandwidth throughput at the access layer, especially assuming that most of the money spent on transport technology is spent in the access infrastructure.

 

While thinking of access layer, one should not forget that if next layer – core network – is not having big enough bandwidth, there is no much use of access layer bandwidth too. Large networks are requiring larger core network to accomplish the task of high-speed connection of the network to the rest of the world.

 

With the always increasing use of the network, it is required to have scalable bandwidth that is cost effective. It gives us one of the main requirements for the network – ability to scale beyond its initial deployment and possible to accommodate bandwidth of bigger network.

 

Active solution is having benefit of being most cost efficient and scalable. If the initial amount of subscribers is 100 and the amount is being doubled three times, we can see that scalability for the Active solution is $500-$700 cheaper per subscriber.

 

We should take into consideration, that Active solution requires only the single mode GBICs, while in GPON network it is problematic, due to the hubs that are not sized to handle four times more equipment.