Physical Size of Current ONT?

Hi. Can anyone tell me the size of the ONT that BT/OR are fitting currently? I've read the link on ISPREview abouut the newer smaller boxes. but I'm wondering which type is likely to be used in the near future. The newer box would fit in the window relief where my current copper termination sits but the older box with BBU would have to go somewhere else I think. Cheers - Andy

It would normally be either a Nokia or Huawei

The Nokia is 89 mm x 82 mm x 27 mm (H x W x D).

The Huawei use to be 134mm x 115mm x 25mm (H x W x D) although I believe it has got slightly smaller since the telephone port was removed.

Others will be able to confirm about the Huawei

Thanks for that. The current FTTC cabinet is Huawei so I imagine that'll be what I get.

Cheers - Andy

Edited by Rhubarb (Mon 31-Aug-20 17:33:46)

The old 1-port ONT with FVA comes in two parts:
- the ONT itself (this is small, about 115w x 135h)
- the outer housing (215w x 250h) which holds the ONT and BBU and has flip-out covers

Even though the BBU is no longer supplied, in my case the engineer still installed the outer housing. It protects the incoming fibre, giving somewhere to coil up the excess neatly. I was fine with this as I had plenty of wall space available.

However if I'd wanted just the ONT, he would have done that.

In reply to a post by Rhubarb:

Thanks for that. The current FTTC cabinet is Huawei so I imagine that'll be what I get.

Cheers - Andy

It really doesn’t follow like that.

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

In reply to a post by Rhubarb:

Thanks for that. The current FTTC cabinet is Huawei so I imagine that'll be what I get.

Cheers - Andy

It really doesn’t follow like that.

As Zarjaz says, my FTTC was a Huawei and I was installed the Nokia ONT as that is what my area has been built with.

In reply to a post by Rhubarb:

Thanks for that. The current FTTC cabinet is Huawei so I imagine that'll be what I get.

Cheers - Andy

Given that are no Nokia cabinets, that isn't an assumption you can make .

In reply to a post by Rhubarb:

Hi. Can anyone tell me the size of the ONT that BT/OR are fitting currently? I've read the link on ISPREview abouut the newer smaller boxes. but I'm wondering which type is likely to be used in the near future. The newer box would fit in the window relief where my current copper termination sits but the older box with BBU would have to go somewhere else I think. Cheers - Andy

If you go “worst case” dimensions on the ‘naked’ Huawei ONT quoted above with the voice port, you’d be ok - however remember to allow enough room for cables - both fibre and copper into the bottom of the ONT - you can of course lift off the ONT from its securing screws to disconnect cables, but you need enough room for decent cable radii into the ONT - especially for the fibre.

It depends on the manufacturer of the head end equipment.

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

It depends on the manufacturer of the head end equipment.

Speaking of which, out of perverse curiosity, do you happen to know if the “subtended head end” as per the link in the OP is purely Huawei?

The photo of the in the ISPreview link looks suspiciously like a Huawei NetEngine 08E series router...

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

In reply to a post by Zarjaz:

It depends on the manufacturer of the head end equipment.

Speaking of which, out of perverse curiosity, do you happen to know if the “subtended head end” as per the link in the OP is purely Huawei?

The photo of the in the ISPreview link looks suspiciously like a Huawei NetEngine 08E series router...

Not a scooby. Soz.

Believe the Huawei ones are MA5800-X2s.

http://huaweigpon.cz/wp-content/uploads/SmartAX-MA58...

Hi,

The new huawei ONT is 90mm x 80mm x 25mm give or take a few mm. Mine was fitted in June. You need to leave room underneath for the cables to plug in.

In reply to a post by nicknack101uk:

The new huawei ONT is 90mm x 80mm x 25mm

Thanks for supplying the latest dimensions.

In reply to a post by CarlTSpeak:

Believe the Huawei ones are MA5800-X2s.

http://huaweigpon.cz/wp-content/uploads/SmartAX-MA58...

Thank you

First Nokia sub tended head end is out there, so others will be appearing soon.

https://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/8807-okehampton-... Picture of Nokia one

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

First Nokia sub tended head end is out there, so others will be appearing soon.

https://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/8807-okehampton-... Picture of Nokia one

Thanks Mr Saffron. Apologies to the OP for taking this thread off track...

but I do wonder if this is the start of the “VDSL2 like” change to PON based FTTP as the network expands, ever higher gigabit bandwidths and the (eventual) move to symmetric XGPON services requires active/OLT equipment to be pushed from the core towards the edge.

They're already at the edge, I guess you mean closer to homes?

It does not. Those street-side OLTs are there due to cost more than future capacity.

From the pure capacity point of view it makes more sense to have all the customers going back to as few sites as possible and having enormous and relatively easy to upgrade capacity there.

However you then have to get a fibre for each 30 premises passed back to this central point while you can deliver services to hundreds of premises via a subtended OLT using fibre and duct that's already there feeding the nearby DSLAM.

The subtended OLTs also create a contention point as unless Openreach deliver 10 Gb for each 4 GPON ports lit up, which is pointless, they'll have more capacity on the PON than backhaul to headend. That can't happen with OLTs at a headend as there is no backhaul that is Openreach's problem to capacity manage.

The mini OLT does bring some major cost savings along with time to live fttp deployment. I'm wondering if ours will have that as the shaves a big chunk of fibre cabling, about a 1km. Its something sadly i will unlikely to ever know.

In the long long term it could be more expensive, as it involves maintaining a powered cabinet indefinitely.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

In the long long term it could be more expensive, as it involves maintaining a powered cabinet indefinitely.

I imagine Openreach will regret deploying them in the long run.

I suspect they will be only rarely deployed, in those cases where the optical budget (i.e. distance) doesn't allow direct PON.

Otherwise, the network will be better, more reliable and cheaper to run by taking the one-off cost of pulling cables to the aggregation node. To serve an area of ~1400 properties with PON requires only a 48-fibre cable.

The topology of FTTP doesn't always follow the topology of the copper network anyway. FTTP spans outward from the fibre aggregation node; copper spans outward from the exchange.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

I suspect they will be only rarely deployed, in those cases where the optical budget (i.e. distance) doesn't allow direct PON.

Can see the real benefits of a subtended head end when the distance limitation of fibre are reached, just hope they don't decide to use them for other deployments where pulling in some fibre would work fine.