Talk:10G-EPON

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Early comment[edit]

It would be interestin to know which one is better, CWDM or GePON system. Advantages and disadvantages... [unsigned] User talk:85.206.21.24 April 1, 2011

Perhaps, but that would be in marketing literature. Wikipedia should only discuss things from a neutral point of view. We should be able to, for example, quote estimated market shares if from an independent source. W Nowicki (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand the need for Ethernet on a Point-to-Point link!? Its just un-necessary overhead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.82.93.58 (talk) 12:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a point-to-point link; it's a point-to-multipoint link. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10G-EPON#Efficiency . However, Ethernet is used even on point-to-point links -- most Ethernet links today are point-to-point links, but the Ethernet header is retained. Ethernet hardware costs are low due to scale, and the software is already written, so no need to re-invent the wheel even though a whole wheel is no longer needed. Also, note that the point-to-point link might connect to an Ethernet bridge, where the MAC header is crucial. Learjeff (talk) 23:11, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]