[c-nsp] ME2600X FTTH design, shaping, road map questions

[Waris Sagheer (waris)]

I am copying Durga (ME2600X product manager) to comment on the following questions.

Best Regards,

[http://www.cisco.com/web/europe/images/email/signature/horizontal06.jpg]

Waris Sagheer
Technical Marketing Manager
Service Provider Access Group (SPAG)
waris at cisco.com<mailto:waris at cisco.com>
Phone: +1 408 853 6682
Mobile: +1 408 835 1389

CCIE - 19901


<http://www.cisco.com/>



This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message.

For corporate legal information go to:http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html



From: "mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>" <mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>>
Organization: SEACOM
Reply-To: "mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>" <mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>>
Date: Friday, November 28, 2014 at 2:20 AM
To: "cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>>, Christian Kratzer <ck at cksoft.de<mailto:ck at cksoft.de>>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME2600X FTTH design, shaping, road map questions

On Friday, November 28, 2014 11:05:39 AM Christian Kratzer
wrote:

I would be happy to hear from others using or evaluatiing
the ME2600X for their experiences.

When this platform first launched last year, I was very keen
on deploying it for FTTH scenarios; basically because it has
good port density, can be priced well for large scale
deployments, and I'm a believer in Active-E and less on
GPON.

We had a call with the BU on this platform to clarify all
the questions you've asked, and more, and as of February
this year, the platform is still wanting.

There are various limitations that may never be fixed
(particularly for QoS) since the silicon in this box is not
Cisco-internal, but off-the-shelf (Broadcom). This will
hurt, but that said, it is good that you can pull off a
reasonable amount of QoS on the box itself, meaning that it
is now possible to enforce contract right at the customer
port on the AN in a profiled manner, as opposed to having to
do this on the BRAS upstream.

My requirements for the deployment have been delayed a bit,
so I haven't caught up on the queries we had. But the best
advice I can give is for you to work with the BU on what you
need.

Mark.