In reply to a post by Taras:

OR ont is a optical to Ethernet solution. And as others have said gpon ont use encrypted streams and also part of the reason you need or equipment.

Theres is no current reason to have something different. As others have said think of it being a optical master socket ..

Agreed, plus I have had my ONT (orig 4 port version) for over a year now and mine is fine and has had no issues, unlike the Smart Hub which in my mind is a pile of rubbish.
Don't get me wrong, its a lot better than all the HH4's that I have had.

Paul

Er, yes there is reasons to want something different. Firstly perhaps I don't want two boxes. There is nothing so certain as a single box solution being neater and consuming less resources. Secondly an SFP GPON ONT stuck in something like an EdgeRouter-4 will be lower latency than a separate ONT that converts it to 1000BaseT, before it goes back to the router to be converted back out of 1000BaseT. Maybe I am some latency obsessed gamer.

The Openreach solution is just bog standard G.984 /G.988 with authentication to the OLT being based on the serial number of the ONT. As I have show elsewhere in this thread you can buy a ZISA G.984 /G.988 compliant SFP based ONT in which you can change the serial number it reports to the OLT to anything you want; including that of the Openreach provided ONT.

As such the cat is out the bag for anyone wanting a single solution. For my mind an Ubiquiti Edgerouter-4 with an SFP based ONT power some UniFi access points via PoE is a very neat solution, and blows anything provided by an ISP out the water. Though admittedly it does cost a lot more.

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

Secondly an SFP GPON ONT stuck in something like an EdgeRouter-4 will be lower latency than a separate ONT that converts it to 1000BaseT, before it goes back to the router to be converted back out of 1000BaseT. Maybe I am some latency obsessed gamer.

We're talking microseconds here. There will be far bigger external factors affecting your latency to the gaming servers.

In reply to a post by AndyHCZ:

We're talking microseconds here. There will be far bigger external factors affecting your latency to the gaming servers.

I did say latency obsessed for a reason

In reply to a post by jabuzzard:

Er, yes there is reasons to want something different. Firstly perhaps I don't want two boxes. There is nothing so certain as a single box solution being neater and consuming less resources. Secondly an SFP GPON ONT stuck in something like an EdgeRouter-4 will be lower latency than a separate ONT that converts it to 1000BaseT, before it goes back to the router to be converted back out of 1000BaseT. Maybe I am some latency obsessed gamer.

The Openreach solution is just bog standard G.984 /G.988 with authentication to the OLT being based on the serial number of the ONT. As I have show elsewhere in this thread you can buy a ZISA G.984 /G.988 compliant SFP based ONT in which you can change the serial number it reports to the OLT to anything you want; including that of the Openreach provided ONT.

As such the cat is out the bag for anyone wanting a single solution. For my mind an Ubiquiti Edgerouter-4 with an SFP based ONT power some UniFi access points via PoE is a very neat solution, and blows anything provided by an ISP out the water. Though admittedly it does cost a lot more.

Are you sure Openreach are just using the serial number not serial number + password?

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

Are you sure Openreach are just using the serial number not serial number + password?

Following on from this even if they are just using the SN when the ONT registers it'll have a MIB data sync mismatch. The OLT will require a full MIB sync. This will rather give away that it's not an Openreach ONT on the other end of the connection.

The MIB sync allows the OLT to discover hardware configuration and software capabilities of the ONT.

Openreach use this to determine when to push firmware updates to their ONTs.

Best hope Openreach neither use SN + password or are paying any attention to the MIBs being returned from ONTs.

Also remember the FVA piece, another thing which makes using something other than the openreach ONT tricky (even if you don't plan to use FVA, it'll be something that the head end is likely expecting to be able to see etc..).

In reply to a post by robsdesk:

Also remember the FVA piece, another thing which makes using something other than the openreach ONT tricky (even if you don't plan to use FVA, it'll be something that the head end is likely expecting to be able to see etc..).

Yup, just a part of the hardware and software capability MIBs. Replacing the ONT is very much hoping Openreach have fingers in ears singing 'La la la!'.

In reply to a post by Ignitionnet:

In reply to a post by robsdesk:

Also remember the FVA piece, another thing which makes using something other than the openreach ONT tricky (even if you don't plan to use FVA, it'll be something that the head end is likely expecting to be able to see etc..).

Yup, just a part of the hardware and software capability MIBs. Replacing the ONT is very much hoping Openreach have fingers in ears singing 'La la la!'.

Yep, falls firmly into the solution looking for a problem category (imo).

In reply to a post by robsdesk:

Yep, falls firmly into the solution looking for a problem category (imo).

Indeed. Though it isn't actually a viable solution to the problem either.