This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been

fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019< 1

The Outlook for PON Standardization:

A Tutorial
Jun Shan Wey 魏君珊, Senior Member, IEEE

 FSAN Full service access network

Abstract— In light of the 5G deployments, edge computing, and GEM GPON encapsulation method
the future high bandwidth services, the industry is rethinking the
optical access network architecture design. Passive optical GPON Gigabit PON
network (PON) with its efficient fiber infrastructure plays an HSP Higher speed PON
essential role in the design transformation. This paper reviews the
ITU-T ITU telecommunication standardization sector
driving forces shaping the new generations of PON systems in the
coming years; and discusses the course of action in the FSAN LAG Link aggregation group
Group, ITU-T, and IEEE standards bodies to address the LA Limiting amplifier
impending requirements.
LD Laser diode
Index Terms—Passive optical networks, time-division multiple LDPC low density parity-check code
access, wavelength-division multiple access. MAC Media access control
MCRS Multi-channel reconciliation sublayer
NOMENCLATURE
MIMO Multiple input multiple output
APD Avalanche photodiode
MPMC Multi-point MAC control
ATM Asynchronous transmission mode
NG-PON2 Next generation PON 2
BER Bit error rate
NRZ Non-return-to-zero
BM Burst-mode
OAM Operation, administration, and management
BOSA Bi-directional optical sub-assembly
BPON Broadband PON ODN Optical distribution network
CDR Clock data recovery OLT Optical line terminal
CO DBA Cooperative dynamic bandwidth allocation OMA Optical modulation amplitude
CPRI Common public radio interface ONU Optical network unit
CTI Cooperative transport interface OPL Optical path loss
CU Central unit OPP Optical path penalty
DBA Dynamic bandwidth allocation OSI Open system interconnection
DML Directly modulated laser PAM4 Pulse amplitude modulation 4-Level
DS Downstream PCS Physical coding sublayer
DW Downstream wavelength PHY Physical layer
DU Distributed unit PLOAM Physical layer OAM
eCPRI evolved Common public radio interface PMA Physical media attachment
EDB Electrical duobinary PMD Physical media dependent
EML Externally modulated laser PON Passive optical network
EPON Ethernet PON QAM Quadrature amplitude modulation
EQ Envelope quantum RAN Radio access network
ER Extinction ratio RU Remote unit
FEC Forward error correction Rx Receiver

This paper was first submitted for review on 18 June 2019; revised on 27 Copyright© 2015 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted.
August 2019 and 3 October 2019; accepted on 23 October 2019. However, permission to use this material for any other purposes must be
Jun Shan Wey is with ZTE TX, Inc., Morristown, NJ 07960, USA (e-mail: obtained from the IEEE by sending a request to pubs-permissions@ieee.org.
wey.junshan@ztetx.com).

0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019< 2

SDO Standards development organization be realized by well-established industry standards. Specifically,

SERDES Serial-deserial standards are required to ensure PON systems coexist on
SOA Semiconductor optical amplifier deployed infrastructure, create volumes to drive down cost, and
enable interoperability among different vendors’ equipment.
TC Transmission convergence
TDM Time-division-multiplex
TDMA Time-division-multiple access
TDP Transmitter and dispersion penalty
TIA Trans-impedance amplifier
TOSA Transmitter optical sub-assembly
TWDM Time and wavelength division multiplex
Tx Transmitter
US Upstream
UW Upstream wavelength
WDM Wavelength division multiplex
XG(S)- 10 Gb/s (symmetric) PON
PON
XGEM XG-PON encapsulation method Fig. 1 Timeline of PON standards and the associated maximum aggregated
downstream (DS) bandwidth. Blue dots: ITU-T PON. Orange dots: IEEE
Ethernet PON. For multi-wavelength PONs, data labels also show the
maximum DS line rate per wavelength channel. Specific aggregated
bandwidth for Super-PON is not shown as it depends on the number of
I. INTRODUCTION wavelength channels supported.

P ASSIVE Optical networks (PONs) are telecommunication

technologies for point-to-multipoint broadband access over
passive optical fiber infrastructure. Since the early 1990s, they
Standardization of early generation PON systems was fairly
straightforward. Between each adjacent generation, the main
considerations were about increasing the data rate and to a
have been demonstrated and deployed worldwide to support
lesser degree increasing the transceiver power budget in order
services for residential (Fiber-to-the-Home), business (Fiber-
to deliver higher bandwidth to more subscribers. Simple! This
to-the-Office), and mobile (Fiber-to-the-Cell) customers.
trend no longer holds true. The 5G New Radio and advanced
In a PON system, an optical line terminal (OLT) located in
video services have created tremendous opportunities while
an operator’s central office transmits data to multiple optical
imposing demanding challenges for the access network [3]. Not
network units (ONUs) at customer premises over an optical
only are there more users, more devices per user, more
distribution network (ODN). There are two general types of
bandwidth per device, but also more high-data-rate applications
PON systems: time-division-multiplexed/time-division-
and higher user expectations. Many other issues such as latency,
multiple-access (TDM/TDMA) PON; and wavelength-
timing synchronization, and security also need to be addressed.
division-multiplexed (WDM) PON. In a TDM/TDMA-PON,
The industry is now rethinking the access network
the OLT broadcasts the downstream (DS) signal to each ONU
architecture and the impending requirements. The access
in different recurring timeslots on a single wavelength channel.
standards development organizations (SDOs), at the forefront
Each ONU transmits its upstream (US) signal bursts in the
of guiding the research and development strategy, are thus
assigned timeslots on another wavelength channel. For
motivated to charter new paths towards future PON standards
simplicity, we use TDM-PON throughout the rest of this paper
to ensure a healthy ecosystem for the industry supply chain.
instead of the full terminology TDM/TDMA-PON. With
WDM-PON, each ONU is assigned its own dedicated
This paper, based on the author’s tutorial at the OFC 2019
wavelength channel, forming a logical point-to-point system.
conference [4], discusses recent activities and the outlook for
Over the past 20 years, many generations of PON systems have
PON standardization in the next few years. The target
been standardized and deployed. Figure 1 illustrates the
deployments are before 2025 anticipating the market demands,
timeline of PON standards and the associated maximum
operators’ deployment timelines, and technology maturity. The
aggregated downstream bandwidth. For further reading of
discussion is structured as follows: Section II provides an
gigabit PON technologies, see [1].
overview of existing PON standards and touches on the
According to a recent market report [2], the total global PON
standards development process. Section III describes the
equipment revenue will reach $7.6 billion by 2023. The
market drivers. Section IV discusses the major optical design
projected annual sales volume is 7.2 million for OLT ports and
challenges. Section V takes up the bulk of this paper and
140 million for ONU ports. Such high volume and low price
describes emerging PON standards being developed in IEEE
expectation, especially for residential customers, must be
and ITU-T.
supported by a healthy industry supply chain, which can only

0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019<
Throughout this paper, we use the approximate values, 10
Gb/s, 25 Gb/s, and 50 Gb/s, to describe the line rates with the
understanding that the exact values depend on the data frame
structure and overhead design in different standards.
II. EXISTING PON GENERATIONS AND STANDARDS
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Three major industry organizations are leading the efforts on
PON standardization: the Full Service Access Network (FSAN)
Group [5], the ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector
(ITU-T) Question 2/Study Group 15 (Q2/15), and the IEEE
802.3 Ethernet Working Group.
Two roads diverged in PON standardization in early 2000,
with the FSAN and ITU-T Q2/15 specifying GPON and IEEE
802.3 for Ethernet PON (EPON) families of standards. Each
SDO follows its own development process, which is oftentimes
not well understood by the general public.
Standardization is a long process. After a standard is
completed; a series of lab testing and field trials must be
conducted before commercial deployment. Historically, it takes
10 years for volume deployment between two PON generations.
The next cycle of PON system upgrades is expected in 2023-
2025. To anticipate the demand, the SDOs began investigating
new generation PONs in 2015.
In this section, the decisions leading to the two
standardization paths as well as the standards development
processes in ITU-T Q2/15 and IEEE 802.3 are explained.
A. The FSAN and ITU-T Q2/15
Established in 1995, the operator-led FSAN group, in
collaboration with ITU-T Q2/15, played a key role on the B-
PON standard [6] and since then has been guiding the industry
through the completion of generations of ITU-T PON family of
standards (called Recommendations in ITU-T).
Fig. 2. FSAN Roadmap. SDN; software defined networking, NFV: network
function virtualization, IoT: internet of things
The most recent FSAN roadmap, Fig. 2, illustrates its vision
for future PON development direction, as well as ITU-T PON
systems since 2004: G-PON [7], 10 Gb/s asymmetric XG-PON
[8], NG-PON2 [9], and 10 Gb/s symmetric XGS-PON [10]. The
group is presently working towards a future PON system under
0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
3
the Higher-Speed PON (HSP) project [11]. These PON
generations and the associated maximum aggregated bandwidth
have been introduced in Fig. 1.
The ITU-T PON family of standards has originated from the
Asynchronous Transmission Mode (ATM) technology and
adopts the SONET/SDH based technologies. It relies on the
GPON Encapsulation Method (GEM) encoding, purpose-built
chipsets and burst-mode optics. The standards include a
comprehensive specification for ONU Operation,
Administration, and Management (OAM), integrated Quality of
Service, and encryption capabilities.
The ITU-T organizes the PON recommendations using the
suffix to distinguish the content in each standard. Taking the
G.989 (NG-PON2) series as an example, G.989.1 specifies
general characteristics and requirements, G.989.2 specifies the
physical media dependent layer, and G.989.3 specifies the
transmission convergence layer.
B. IEEE 802.3 Ethernet PON
In early 2000, the IEEE 802.3 began the Ethernet in the First
Mile project as many in the industry were attracted to the
potential of cost-effective Ethernet components for PON. The
EPON standards are based on Ethernet frame and datalink
protocols via peer-to-peer connection without a centralized
clock or control. A loose timing option was adopted since
Ethernet optics, although cost effective, are not suited for burst-
mode operation. Basic Ethernet OAM mechanisms are used.
Before the IEEE standardization process can be started, the
interested parties must make a project authorization request
(PAR) and establish five criteria for standards development
(CSD) – broad market potential, compatibility, distinct identity,
technical and economic feasibilities. Once the project is
approved, a Task Force is formed to develop the physical
(PHY) and data link layer specifications.
Unlike the ITU-T where each recommendation receives its
own designated number, each new Ethernet standard is added
as new clauses in Amendments of the 802.3 standard. For
example, the 802.3ca Task Force is developing the 25G/50G
EPON standards, where the final PHY layer specification will
be in Clauses 141 and 142, and the data link layer specification
in Clauses 143 and 144 of the 802.3 Ethernet Standard [12].
Despite the many similarities between the two paths of PON
standards, the major difference is that EPON uses a single Layer
2 network to carry IP traffic for data, voice, and video, while
ITU-T PON uses the (X)G-PON encapsulation method
(XGEM) to map the user data/voice/video and the PHY bit
stream. There have been ongoing efforts to converge the two
standardization paths to ensure that common optical
components are shared by the two systems. Although
agreement has not been reached on the best path to fully align
the two standards, the two SDOs nevertheless have worked to
align with each other’s specifications whenever possible and
the two families of standards bear many resemblances.
III. MARKET DRIVERS FOR NEW GENERATION PON SYSTEMS
In 2015, the ITU-R laid out its vision of the international
mobile telecommunication requirements in the IMT-2020
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019<
report [3]. The report shows the peak data rate could reach 20
Gb/s with an end-to-end latency of 1 ms by the year 2020 under
the most stringent condition.
The global wireless optical fiber-based fronthaul equipment
expenditures are expected to grow from $343Million in 2018 to
$1.5Billion in 2023, 80% of which will be from 5G networks
[2]. The amount of data traffic and the number of networked
devices are expected to grow in an astounding rate in the next
few years. By 2022, the data traffic will exceed 4
exabytes/month – 82% from IP video. The total number of
networked devices will reach 28.5 billion – 82% are mobile
devices [13]. The increases in the number of users, devices,
bandwidth, as well as higher data-rate applications and higher
user expectations, will have great impact on the access
networks as all the traffic must be carried over an access
segment at some point. PON, with its point-to-multipoint
connectivity, highly efficient fiber utilization, and massive
deployments world-wide, is well positioned to be the transport
technology for all this traffic.
IV. DESIGN CHALLENGES
Five major design challenges when planning new generation
PON systems are highlighted below.
 Coexistence with legacy PONs and migration to new
generations: this challenge depends on the operator’s
business model, market timing, deployment plan, and
technology choices. It ultimately affects the wavelength plan
decision.
 Re-use deployed ODN: deploying the fiber infrastructure is
by far the biggest investment for an operator. New PON
systems thus must be compatible with the existing ODN.
Typically, the maximum fiber reach is 20 km with a
maximum ODN loss budget of 30 dB. As in previous PON
standards, a 15 dB maximum differential optical path loss is
budgeted.
 Optical design choices: The transceivers must provide
sufficient power budget to transmit data over the deployed
ODN at the desired data rate. Specific considerations include
modulation format, dispersion tolerance, the use of forward-
error-correction (FEC), and upstream burst-mode
transmission. Another important consideration is whether to
use single wavelength or multiple wavelengths to reach a
higher system capacity. Recently, bonding of multiple
wavelength channels is also been considered.
 Low latency transmission: As the end-to-end (from user to
core network) one-way latency in 5G can be as low as 1 ms,
the latency budget allowed for the transport network, e.g.,
PON, can be as low as 100 s. Such low latency is difficult
to meet with conventional TDM-PON. Techniques to
improve dynamic bandwidth allocation (DBA) and to
eliminate delay caused by the quiet window during ONU
activation are being investigated.
 Minimizing cost: As access networks are extremely cost
conscious, methods to minimize cost must be thoroughly
investigated. Often times, technologies developed in other
domains with mass market deployment are leveraged.
0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
4
V. EMERGING PON STANDARDS
In 2015, after 10G-EPON systems had been successfully
deployed for over 6 years, the Multiple-System Operators in the
United States were motivated to plan for upgrades from 10 Gb/s
to 25 Gb/s for residential and to 40 Gb/s for business services.
In December 2015, the IEEE 802.3ca Task Force was initiated
to specify a 25G/50G/100G EPON system [14].
In January 2019, another PON project, commonly known as
the Super-PON, was started in IEEE802.3cs [15] primarily to
address greenfield deployments and central office
consolidation. This PON system aims to support 10 Gb/s in the
DS and 2.5/10 Gb/s in the US to a large subscriber base (16
wavelength channels with 64 subscribers sharing each channel)
for over 50 km reach. In July 2019, Q2/15 approved a
complementary project, G.9807.3, to standardize Super-PON
[16].
Contemplating the standardization directions in ITU-T
Q2/15, the driving question was whether to extend the multi-
wavelength NG-PON2 system or to begin a single wavelength
higher-speed PON project. The group completed the G.Sup64
Supplement (similar to a whitepaper) [17] to analyze the
technological feasibility and potential standardization paths. To
maximize current market volumes of 10 Gb/s line-rate based
XG(S)-PON and NG-PON2 systems, and to protect future
revenue potential, the group ultimately decided on the Higher-
Speed PON project (G.hsp) to specify a single-wavelength 50
Gb/s TDM-PON and Nx50Gb/s TWDM-PON systems [11].
To investigate the feasibility of supporting 5G transport in a
PON context, the Q2/15 group completed the G.Sup66
Supplement in 2018 [18]. This Supplement reviews the 5G
transport requirements and discusses potential PON use cases
to support 5G fronthaul transport.
In the following sub-sections, we will focus on three topics
of interest: A) IEEE 802.3ca 25G/50G-EPON, B) ITU-T
Higher Speed PON, and C) PON for 5G transport.
A. IEEE 802.3ca 25G/50G EPON
The 802.3ca Task Force was initially formed with an
ambitious objective to standardize a 100G-EPON by bonding
four 25 Gb/s wavelength channels together. The objective was
scaled back to a 2x25Gb/s system in November 2017 as neither
the technological maturity nor the market needs could be
anticipated before the deployment timeline. A stable draft
standard is now going through the Working Group Ballot
process [12]. In the rest of this sub-section, we will discuss the
system architecture, wavelength plan, optical design choices,
and wavelength channel bonding.
1) System Architecture
The major differentiator of the 50G-EPON from previous
generation EPONs is the bonding of two 25 Gb/s wavelength
channels to achieve 50Gb/s aggregated data rate. A 50G-EPON
system architecture is illustrated in Fig. 3. In this example, the
50G OLT consists of a 50G MAC (Media Access Control), two
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019<
sets of 25G PHY, and transceiver optics. Several flavors of
ONUs are possible, i.e., 25G/10G, 25G/25G, and 50G/50G for
DS/US line rates. The ODN supports a minimum 1:32 split and
fiber reach of 20 km.
Fig. 3. IEEE 50G-EPON system architecture
The 50G-EPON standard, following the IEEE Ethernet
layered model, specifies parameters in the PHY and Data Link
layers. Figure 4 shows the mapping of 50G-EPON structure to
the Open System Interconnection (OSI) reference model. This
figure, although labeled for the OLT, also applies to the ONU.
Fig. 4 50G-EPON layered model mapping to the OSI reference model.
Applicable to both OLT and ONU. GMII: gigabit media-independent
interface. MDI: medium dependent interface. Adapted from [12]
The PHY layer consists of three sub-layers, the physical
coding sublayer (PCS), the physical media attachment (PMA),
and the physical media dependent (PMD).
The PMD sublayer handles the line rates, wavelength plan,
transceiver optical characteristics, ODN loss budget, reach, and
coexisting systems. The PMA sublayer takes care of the
transmitter (Tx) and receiver (Rx) clock data recovery (CDR)
and alignment functions. The PCS sublayer is responsible for
data encoding/decoding, scrambling/descrambling, frame
alignment, and forward error correction (FEC).
The multi-channel reconciliation sublayer (MCRS) enables
multiple MACs to interface with multi PHYs by mapping the
MAC serial data to/from parallel PHY paths.
In the Data link layer, the Multi-point MAC control (MPMC)
sublayer defines the mechanisms and control protocols required
to reconcile the 50G-EPON into the Ethernet framework. The
MPMC functions include allocation of transmission resources,
ONU discovery and registration, and DBA.
2) Wavelength plan
The most important and difficult step in developing the PMD
Layer specifications is to decide the wavelength plan. The
0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
5
selection criteria depend on the coexisting systems, penalties
due to chromatic dispersion in optical fiber, and cost
minimization, especially for ONUs. Taking into account of all
of these, fixed wavelength channels (no tunable optics) with
sufficient wavelength tolerance (for high yield) in the O-band
(low dispersion penalty and high volume optics) were selected.
Coexistence with either 10G(E)-PON or G(E)-PON, but not
both, was agreed as three generations coexistence would be too
costly to implement.
Although the standard does not dictate the specific optical
transceiver technologies, it is nevertheless developed assuming
techno-economic feasibility and component availability at the
time of deployments. The assumptions are to use uncooled
directly modulated laser (DML) at ≤ 1310nm with 20nm
wavelength tolerance in the ONU in order to minimize the cost
and avoid dispersion compensation. In the OLT, where higher
cost optics can be tolerated, cooled externally modulated laser
(EML) at ≤ 1360 nm with 4 nm wavelength tolerance are
assumed to minimize the dispersion penalty and to avoid high
fiber loss in the E-band. The gap between downstream
wavelength (DW) and upstream wavelength (UW) was chosen
to be <45 nm to balance the filter excess loss and dispersion
penalty.
The spectrum assignment for 50G-EPON, as well as for other
PON generations, is shown in Fig. 5. Deployments of 50G-
EPON will follow a stepwise approach. The initial step, a 25G-
EPON, will be the pair of downstream wavelength 0 (DW0) and
upstream wavelength 0 (UW0) for coexistence with Gigabit
PON or the pair of DW0-UW1 for coexistence with 10 Gb/s
PON. Both 25 Gb/s and 10 Gb/s in the upstream are supported.
As the demand grows, DW1 and UW2 can be added utilizing
dynamic channel bonding to achieve 50 Gb/s data rate.
3) Optical Design Choices
The optical design choices are determined by power budget
requirements and cost minimization [19][20]. Every penny and
tenth of a dB count!
When the 802.3ca was formed in January 2016, 10 Gb/s
avalanche photodiodes (APDs) were the fastest receiver
commercially available for PON. The driving question
therefore was which advanced modulation format to use: pulse-
amplitude modulation 4-Level (PAM4) or electrical duobinary
(EDB)? When 25 Gb/s APDs became available in early 2017,
it was then an easy decision to select 25 Gb/s APD with non-
return-to-zero (NRZ) modulation. The OLT and ONU
transceiver characteristics are highlighted in Table 1 [12]. The
link loss budget required is 29 dB in both the US and DS
directions.
TABLE 1. 50G-EPON OLT AND ONU TRANSCEIVER SPECIFICATIONS
OLT ONU
Line Rate 25.78125 Gbaud 25.78125 Gbaud
Transmitter power +4.9 dBm +4.7 dBm
(OMA)
Transmitter power +4.8 dBm +4 dBm
(OMA minus TDP) (laser ER ≥ 9 dB) (laser ER ≥ 6 dB)
Receiver sensitivity −24.3 dBm −24.1 dBm
(OMA)
OMA: Optical Modulation Amplitude. TDP: Transmitter and Dispersion Penalty.
ER: Extinction Ratio
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019< 6

It should be noted that the 25G/50G EPON adopts the

Optical Modulation Amplitude (OMA) minus penalty
methodology to specify transceiver optics [21]. This
methodology enables vendors to tradeoff Tx power, extinction
ratio (ER), and signal quality. In other words, the Tx launched
power requirement can be relaxed for Tx with high ER while
maintaining the same signal quality. For example, an ONU Tx
with ER < 6dB needs 0.7dB higher OMA than an ONU Tx with
ER ≥ 6dB to maintain the same OLT Rx sensitivity.
The ONU Rx sensitivity and the OLT Tx launch power are
both very challenging to meet. The use of a semiconductor
optical amplifier (SOA) as ether a pre-amplifier or a booster-
amplifier was investigated, but the cost is still too high for the
access market. In November 2017, the group elected to use the
low density parity-check code (LDPC) FEC to satisfy the power
budget requirement [22].
The upstream burst-mode transmission is another major
challenge. As the data rate increases, the ONU burst-mode
(BM) Tx and the OLT BM Rx become drastically difficult to
implement [23].
Figure 6 shows the schematics of the OLT and ONU optical
modules. The ONU requires a burst-mode laser diode (BM-LD)
with a fast on-off switch and control loop for laser bias current.
Three critical components in the OLT process the incoming
burst-mode signals: BM-TIA (trans-impedance amplifier) for
re-amplification, BM-LA (limiting amplifier) for gain control
and decision threshold extraction for re-shaping, and BM-CDR
for retiming (data recovery and phase alignment). Overall, the
BM Rx must exhibit high sensitivity, wide dynamic range, short
burst overhead, multi-rate operation, and no external signaling
from MAC. The 50G-EPON standard specifies the maximum
values for laser on/off time at 128 ns, receiver settling time at
800 ns, and CDR time at 400 ns [12].
Fig. 6. Schematics of the OLT and ONU optical module. BOSA: bi-
directional optical sub-assembly. TOSA: transmitter optical sub-assembly.
TIA: trans-impedance amplifier. LA: limiting amplifier. CDR: clock-data
recovery circuitry. SERDES: serial-deserial.
4) Dynamic Channel Bonding
A key innovation of the 50G-EPON standards is the dynamic
wavelength channel bonding to achieve higher data rates, in
which data in one MAC instance is transmitted over multiple
envelopes on multiple MCRS channels. To understand this
concept, we will first discuss the MCRS channel transmission
and reception.
As shown in Fig. 7, in an MCRS channel, signals are
formatted as a transmission envelope consisting of multiple full
frames and fragmented frames each representing a different
data stream. Each frame is constructed with multiple envelope
quantum (EQ), which is the basic unit of transmission and 72-
bits in length. Note that frame fragmentation has always been a
basic feature in ITU-T PONs and has been adopted by the
25G/50G-EPON standard to improve transmission efficiency.
To achieve channel bonding, the EQs in one envelope are
interleaved over multiple MCRS channels so that the data can
be transmitted in a shorter time (higher speed).

0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019<
Fig. 7. MCRS Channel Structure
In summary, we reviewed the system architecture,
wavelength plan, optical design choices, and dynamic channel
bonding for 25G/50G-EPON. The standard entered the
Working Group Ballot phase in June 2019 and is on its way
towards final approval and publication.
B. ITU-T Higher Speed PON Recommendation (G.hsp)
One might wonder, why start a single-wavelength higher-
speed PON when there is already an NG-PON2 TWDM system
with a flexible and expansible architecture providing up to 80
Gb/s aggregated capacity? What better claim does a single-
wavelength, higher-speed PON have? The deliberations center
on the complexity and costs of the NG-PON2 TWDM system,
as well as the timeline of anticipated upgrade from XG(S)-PON
for some operators not occurring until 2025 when single-
wavelength 50 Gb/s technologies will have matured. More
details about the physical layer design challenges of NG-PON2
can be found in [24][25].
To address these questions, the Q2/15 group launched a study
in 2016 to investigate the feasibility of PON transmission
technologies at above 10 Gb/s per wavelength and the findings
were published in the G.Sup64 Supplement [17]. At the
conclusion of this study, the group approved beginning a new
work item for a higher speed PON (HSP) series of
recommendations (G.hsp). This project comprises a single
wavelength 50 Gb/s TDM-PON, an Nx50Gb/s TWDM-PON,
and PtP WDM overlay. The HSP TWDM-PON is included in
the project, despite of concerns of 10 Gb/s based NG-PON2, in
order to provide a migration path for NG-PON2 systems. At the
time of writing, the HSP TWDM-PON is under early stage
discussion and major decisions will likely be held off until the
single wavelength 50Gb/s TDM-PON Recommendation is
more developed.
The first in the series, the HSP requirements recommendation
(G.hsp.req, G.9804.1) [11], was consented in the July 2019
SG15 plenary meeting. A common transmission convergence
(TC) layer specification (G.hsp.comTC) will cover the protocol
specifications for all three HSP systems and future expansions.
In the rest of this sub-section, we will discuss the system
architecture, wavelength plan, optical design choices, and the
TC layer. Be reminded that as the HSP PMD layer and TC layer
specifications are still in the early development stages, the
discussion in this section related to those specifications only
reflects the current progress in Q2/15.
0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
7
1) System Architecture
The single wavelength 50 Gb/s HSP system architecture is
illustrated in Fig. 8. The OLT consists of a 50 Gb/s MAC, 50
Gb/s PHY, and transceiver optics. Three flavors of ONUs are
possible: 50G/10G, 50G/25G, and 50G/50G for DS/US data
rates.
For a higher-speed TWDM-PON, the group is considering
two wavelength channels each for DS and US in the initial draft.
The higher-speed PtP WDM overlay will support 10 Gb/s, 25
Gb/s, and 50 Gb/s symmetrical transmission.
Fig. 8 System architecture of a single-wavelength 50Gb/s PON
For all HSP systems on the legacy power splitter-based
ODN, the requirements include a maximum fiber distance of at
least 20 km for general applications and 10 km for latency
sensitive applications. For TDMA based systems, the common
TC layer will support maximum fiber distance of 60 km,
maximum differential fiber distance of up to 40 km, and a
minimum 1:256 split ratio.
The ITU-T PONs follow a layered structure illustrated in Fig.
9. The PMD layer handles the ODN architecture, wavelength
plan, transceiver characteristics, wavelength multiplexing of
DS and US signals.
The overall responsibility of the TC layer is to perform ONU
ranging, registration, and activation. The service adaptation
sublayer is responsible for the user data encapsulation,
multiplexing and delineation. The framing sublayer is
responsible for PON management functionalities, e.g., physical
layer OAM (PLOAM) and dynamic bandwidth allocation
(DBA). The PHY adaptation sublayer encompasses the
functions to improve signal detection, reception and
delineation, e.g., FEC coding/encoding, frame alignment, and
encryption.
The ONU management and control interface (OMCI)
addresses the overall ONU configuration, fault management
and performance management.
In comparison, the PMD layers in ITU-T and in 802.3ca are
largely equivalent. The TC layer corresponds to the combined
PMA, PCS, MCRS, MAC, and MPMC layers. The OMCI
contains the Ethernet OAM functions and additional details that
are not in the scope of the Ethernet standards. The EPON
standard specifies an extra MAC Control over Ethernet MAC,
i.e., the MPMC layer.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019<
Fig. 9 ITU-T PON layered structure
2) Wavelength plan
The thought process of developing the HSP PMD layer
specifications follows closely the steps in IEEE802.3ca. In
Section 5-A-2, we described the 50G-EPON specifications. In
this section, we discuss only the thought process in Q2/15 as the
work of the HSP PMD standard has just started.
As in the 802.3ca, the most important and difficult step in the
HSP PMD specification is also to determine the wavelength
plan. The process starts with determining the US wavelength
placement as the ONU is the most cost sensitive element in
access networks. Coexistence with legacy G-PON and XG(S)-
PON is preferred. A sufficiently wide spectral width is
necessary to ensure high yield optics and accommodate wide
temperature variation (wavelength drift). It is necessary to stay
close to the zero chromatic dispersion region to avoid using
dispersion compensation. Synergy with the 50G-EPON and
reuse of optics in other volume markets are desired. For the DS
wavelength, in addition to the factors described above, there
needs to be sufficient gap from the US to allow for minimal
interference.
For the single-wavelength 50G-PON wavelength plan, as
illustrated in Fig. 5, Q2/15 has decided to adopt the 25G-EPON
DW1 at 1342+/2 nm as the DS wavelength. The US wavelength
follows an either-or plan similar to the 50G-EPON standard.
For 10 Gb/s and 25 Gb/s upstream, US1 at 1300 ± 10 nm and
US2 at 1270 ± 10 nm are specified for coexistence with XG(S)-
PON and G(E)-PON, respectively. For 25 Gb/s upstream, a
narrow band option of US1 (1300 ± 2 nm) is also allowed. For
50 Gb/s upstream, the wavelength plan is still under discussion.
The narrow wavelength band is needed to support
interoperability when an SOA preamplifier-filter-PIN Rx is
used at the OLT, or when the coexistence of 50 Gb/s and 25
Gb/s upstream signals is via TDM. In addition, some operators
need triple-generation coexistence (1 Gb/s, 10 Gb/s, and 50
Gb/s), which further complicates the analysis. For HSP
TWDM-PON and PtP WDM overlay, the wavelength plan
discussion has not yet started at time of this writing.
As most of the study is still ongoing, we will concentrate the
following discussion on the single-wavelength 50G-PON.
3) Optical Design Choices
A key requirement of the optical design is to satisfy the
optical path loss (OPL) budget class of 29 dB plus the optical
path penalty (OPP) allowance of 1 dB. This determines the
0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
8
minimum 30 dB optical power budget that the transceivers must
meet while maintaining low costs.
To estimate the DS optical specifications, the known 25G-
EPON OLT Tx power (+4.8 dBm in Table 1) is used as the
baseline. According to [26], when using 50G Tx optics with
50G NRZ modulation, there is an estimated 3 dB power penalty
comparing to using 25G Tx optics with 25G NRZ modulation
due to reduced Rx SNR and dispersion penalty. When using the
same 25G Tx optics with 25G NRZ for 50G with PAM4
modulation, the estimated power penalty is 4.5 dB. The
minimum 50 Gb/s OLT Tx power is thus the baseline (+4.8
dBm) plus the penalty at the respective modulation format:
+7.8 dBm for NRZ and +9.3 dBm for PAM4. Such high power
can only be reached by using a booster amplifier due to
component availability. Feedback from component suppliers
suggest that the feasible ONU Rx sensitivity is around -22.2
dBm for NRZ and -20.7 dBm for PAM4, both measured at bit
error rate (BER) of 10-2. As previous PON generations assume
BER of 10-3 using Reed-Solomon FEC code, such Rx
sensitivities can only be met with advanced FEC.
Concerning the modulation format, although PAM4 allows
the re-use of 25 Gb/s optics and has good dispersion tolerance,
its complexity and power penalty were ultimately the deciding
factors in choosing NRZ as the preferred technology.
Several topics are still being studied. The driving questions
for the ONU are whether to use DML or EML, cooled or
uncooled transmitters, APD or semiconductor optical amplifier
(SOA)-PIN. The capability of soft- vs. hard-decision FEC is
being explored. The group is also deliberating whether to relax
the Tx specifications by adopting the OMA minus TDP
methodology [21].
4) TC Layer Specifications
Starting with the G.hsp project, Q2/15 established a common
TC Recommendation will be for future generation ITU-T
PONs. This common TC layer structure will generally follow
XG(S)-PON and NG-PON2 specifications to cover single-
wavelength TDM-PON, multi-wavelength TWDM-PON, and
PtP WDM overlay. Initial discussion on these topics has just
started.
Here we describe the general ITU-T PON TC layer structure,
shown in Fig. 10 for DS and Fig. 11 for US [10][27]. In the
Service Adaptation sublayer, for both DS and US directions,
service data units (SDUs), the user data, and high level
management frames are first formed into XGEM frames
(comparable to the Envelope in Fig. 7), and then passed down
to the Frame Structure (FS) sublayer where multiple XGEM
frames are combined into one FS frame. The XGEM frames
support SDU fragmentation to enable efficient transmission.
Note that fragmentation was not allowed in previous IEEE
EPON generations, but was adopted into the 25G/50G-EPON
standard. In the PHY Adaptation sublayer, FEC is applied to
create a scrambled PHY frame, which enables the ONU/OLT
to obtain the optical link BER using the FEC correction results.
It should be noted that ITU-T PON uses a specific timing
structure. In the DS direction, the data stream consists of a
continuous PHY frame, each at a fixed 125 s duration – see
the bottom part of Fig 10. In the US direction, each PHY frame
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019< 9

consists of multiple PHY bursts separated by guard bands – see
the bottom part of Fig.11. In the IEEE EPON systems, the DS
frame does not have a fixed length.
The G.hsp.ComTC will also support wavelength channel
bonding for TWDM-PON to reach higher speeds. Two
candidate methods for channel bonding are being considered:
The first is a flow-based or LAG (link aggregation group)-like
method that performs bonding in the service layer. Different
service data flows are bonded on different wavelength channels.
The other method is protocol-based bonding, which is similar
to the method used in 802.3ca, where each XGEM frame is
partitioned into multiple quanta and transmitted over different
wavelength channels.
In summary, we reviewed the system architecture,
wavelength plan, optical design choices, and TC layer
specifications for single-wavelength 50G-PON. The first
recommendation in the series (on requirements) was consented
in July 2019. The PMD and TC specifications are in early stage
of development.

0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019<
C. PON Standards for 5G Transport
Recognizing the rapid growth in radio access networks
(RAN), in 2016 the FSAN operators initiated a project to study
how PON as an optical access technology can play a role in the
RAN evolution [28]. As a follow-up of that project and focusing
specifically on 5G, Q2/15 completed the G.Sup66 Supplement
in November 2018 to further analyse 5G wireless fronthaul
transport in a PON context [18].
In this section, we give an overview of the G.Sup66
Supplement – starting with highlights of the 5G transport
architecture and requirements followed by a discussion on
deriving PON bandwidth, latency, and system requirements to
support 5G transport network. Ongoing work in Q2/15 and
collaboration with other SDOs are also discussed [29] [30].
1) 5G Transport Architecture and Requirements
In a 5G wireless transport network, much focus is on network
centralization to efficiently support a massive scale of
connected devices. A new network architecture design emerged
to mitigate the stringent bandwidth and latency constraints
while allowing for network centralization [31]. This new design
redistributes the radio signal processing functions into new
functional elements: centralized unit (CU), distributed unit
(DU), and radio unit (RU). The top part of Fig. 12 shows the
radio signal processing functions and eight potential functional
split options. The bottom part of Fig. 12 shows the functional
components for 4G and examples for 5G [18].
Fig. 12 Evolving from 4G to 5G (reprinted from [18]). Top: signal processing
function chain. Bottom: functional composition of network elements for 4G and
5G implementations. *CPRI (common public radio interface) is one possible
transport protocol for Option 8. NGC: next generation core, RRC: radio
resource control, PDCP: packet data convergence protocol, RLC: radio link
control, RF: radio frequency.
Many different implementations of the functional splits are
possible, each with unique merits and drawbacks. See [32] for
an in-depth review and analysis of the trade-offs among the
different split options. The choice of a specific split option
depends on an operator’s deployment decisions. Two split
points have been selected to address the diverse requirements:
a high layer split F1 interface and a low layer split Fx interface.
The F1 interface has been specified by 3GPP as the Option 2
split, while Fx is still open and could be Option 6, 7a, 7b, or 7c
(Table 2). Note that the Option 7 split point has been further
diversified to Options 7a, 7b, and 7c (not shown in Fig. 12) by
other industry groups, such as CPRI, O-RAN Alliance, and the
Small Cell Forum.
0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
10
Table 2 summarizes the transport bandwidth requirements
for the eight split options [18]. These values are calculated
assuming 100 MHz radio frequency bandwidth, 256-QAM
(quadrature amplitude modulation), 8 MIMO (multiple input
multiple output) layers, and 32 antenna ports for radio
frequency range <6 GHz. A general guidance from the FSAN
operators for the transport bandwidth at both backhaul and F1
is <10 Gb/s during 5G Phase 1 rollout (radio bandwidth up to
3.5 GHz), increasing to 25/50 Gb/s in Phase 2 (radio bandwidth >
6 GHz) [33], and up to 86 Gb/s in a later Phase.
TABLE 2
5G WIRELESS TRANSPORT BANDWIDTH AND LATENCY REQUIREMENTS [18]
Split Peak Uplink Peak Downlink One-way
Option Bandwidth Bandwidth Latency
2 (F1) 4016 Mb/s 3024 Mb/s 1-10 msec
3 Lower than Option 2 100 to
a few 100 µsec
4 4000 Mb/s 3000 Mb/s
7a 10.1-22.2 Gb/s 16.6-21.6 Gb/s
7b 37.8-86.1 Gb/s 53.8-86.1 Gb/s
7c 10.1-22.2 Gb/s 53.8-86.1 Gb/s
8 (CPRI) 157.3 Gb/s 157.3 Gb/s
For 100 MHz radio bandwidth, 256-QAM modulation, 8 MIMO layers, 32 antenna ports.
2) PON Bandwidth Requirements
The bandwidth requirement of a PON system to support 5G
transport is determined by the maximum aggregated data rates
plus additional overhead of the wireless signals, which is
referred to as the throughput at a particular functional split
interface. G.Sup66 describes in detail methods to calculate the
throughput at the F1 and Fx interfaces.
For the F1 interface, the amount of data to be transported
scales with the user traffic. Hence the transport network at this
interface can benefit from an architecture with statistical
multiplexing gain, such as TDM-PON. Here we describe one of
the methods according to [34] to estimate the throughput at F1.
A peak-capacity cell site is defined when one of its antenna
sectors (RUs) is operating at peak rate and the other two at
average rate. An average-capacity cell site is when all three
antenna sectors are running at average rate. In a typical
operating condition, the ratio of average-capacity and peak-
capacity cell sites is between 4 and 6. As an example, for a
network topology of 6 cell sites (1 at peak-capacity and 5 at
average-capacity) with 18 RUs, using 5G low frequency band
(3.5 GHz), 64 antenna ports, 8 MIMO layer, and 100 MHz radio
channel bandwidth, the estimated throughput of a CU port is
about 21 Gb/s, which can be supported by a 25 Gb/s TDM-
PON.
For the Fx interface, due to the stringent latency requirement,
it is generally agreed that PtP WDM overlay or a WDM-PON
is preferred. As for the data rate, the industry is following the
eCPRI specifications of 25 Gb/s per wavelength channel [35].
The latency requirement further limits the fiber reach. For most
operators, typical 5G fronthaul links are less than 10 km, which
is within the capabilities of PON technology. Two use cases
have emerged as preferred scenarios by operators: 1) overlaying
PtP WDM wavelength channels on legacy ODN to support
macrocells, and 2) dedicated WDM PON for both macrocells
and small cells.
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019<
3) PON Latency Requirements
As shown in Table 2, for the F1 and backhaul interfaces, one-
way transport latency is in the range of 1-10 ms. The latency
requirement is much more stringent for the Fx interface, which
could be as low as 100 s. Considering the one-way
propagation delay through optical fiber of about 5s/km, the
fiber reach for the Fx fronthaul is typically limited to 10 km to
allow for sufficient budget for processing delay.
TDM-PON is an attractive solution due to its advantage of
statistical multiplexing gain; however, the main issue for its
applicability in mobility use cases is the high latency during the
conventional ONU activation procedure. Because of the
framing structure and the need for a quiet window, a latency of
250 μs during conventional ONU discovery and 202 μs during
ranging can be experienced for 20 km differential distance [36].
As ranging is not necessarily performed immediately after the
discovery process, the maximum latency is 250 μs instead of
the sum of the two values.
Several methods have been proposed to mitigate the TDM-
PON latency issue [37]. For example, the proposals include 1)
differentiated service classes where mobile traffic has the
highest priority, 2) cooperative DBA (CO DBA) [38] to
synchronize the mobile scheduler and PON scheduler, and 3)
dedicated wavelength for ONU activation using a newly
defined wavelength, a legacy PON system on the same ODN,
or a subset of the TWDM-PON wavelength.
For the PON-wireless interface, there has been ongoing effort
to build collaboration among the O-RAN Alliance [39], FSAN,
and Q2/15 for 5G transport over low latency PON. In particular,
the O-RAN Working Group 4 has begun a Cooperative
Transport Interface (CTI) project to standardize the interface
between the 5G scheduler unit and a PON OLT port. As the CTI
project is complementary to the CO DBA specification in
Q2/15, the collaboration is expected to help speed up PON
standards to support 5G transport.
WDM-PON, a logical point-to-point system, does not require
DBA nor ONU ranging. Signals from the OLT, each
transmitted over a different wavelength channel, are combined
in a wavelength multiplexer before transmitting to the cell sites.
In the ODN, a wavelength splitter, typically an array waveguide
grating (AWG) device, routes the individual wavelengths to
different ONUs, each of which is connected to an RU
supporting one of the three sectors of an antenna. As its latency
is largely limited by the transmission distance, WDM-PON is
considered a good long-term solution for latency sensitive
fronthaul transport.
Figure 13 shows an example WDM-PON implementation for
dedicated mobility services, as envisioned by the FSAN
operators. The key requirements include 25 Gb/s per
wavelength channel, 20 wavelengths in each transmission
direction per PON, and up to 10 km reach. Tunable, colourless
ONUs in the C-band are expected. TC and management layer
specifications should provide similar operational experiences as
legacy PON systems.
0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
11
Fig. 13. WDM-PON for Fx fronthaul interface. [Reprinted from G.Sup66]
4) Overall System Requirements
System requirements for PON to support 5G fronthaul
transport must reflect the requirements set by the wireless
networks, at the wireless-PON interface (F1 and Fx), and for
PON internal only.
For requirements set by the wireless networks, in addition to
the bandwidth and latency topics discussed earlier,
synchronization is another key concern. Potential factors
affecting the synchronization timing precision include:
different fiber propagation delay for US and DS wavelengths,
equalization delay accuracy, internal timing correction, and
system hardware timing error.
At the PON-wireless interface, the CO DBA is required for
TDM-PON. For all PON systems, multiplexing schemes (the
aggregation function in Fig. 13) to interconnect OLT and
CU/DU need to be realized so that one CU/DU can flexibly
support more than one OLT wavelength channel. Liaison
communications with wireless SDOs are currently in progress
to determine the next steps.
For PON internal requirements, such as the service data
encapsulation, PON channel management and monitoring, OLT
and ONU timing relationship, message and data security, and
protection mechanisms, will follow the existing PON
specifications as much as possible.
In summary, we reviewed several key aspects of G.Sup66
and discussed how PON can support 5G transport. Progress is
being made to reduce the latency for TDM-PON. Proposals to
begin standardizing a WDM-PON for mobility-centric
applications are under discussion and a decision is expected in
the February 2020 ITU-T SG15 Plenary meeting.
.
VI. CONCLUSION
The access network is undergoing a transformation not seen
before. The industry is rethinking the network architecture in
light of the 5G deployments, edge computing, and future high-
bandwidth and low latency services. Emerging PON standards
to support this transformation are being developed.
In this paper, we discussed the driving forces for new
generation PON systems and standardization activities in the
FSAN, ITU-T Q2/15, and IEEE 802.3. The IEEE 25G/50G-
EPON uses a dynamic channel bonding technique to achieve 50
Gb/s. The ITU-T Q2/15 has chosen to standardize a higher-
speed PON series Recommendation consisting of a single-
wavelength 50 Gb/s TDM-PON, Nx50 Gb/s TWDM-PON, and
This article has been accepted for publication in a future issue of this journal, but has not been fully edited. Content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/JLT.2019.2950889, Journal of
Lightwave Technology
> JLT-24518Final-2019< 12

PtP WDM overlay. The path to a WDM-PON standard for [23] X. Z. Qiu, “Burst-mode Receiver Technology for Short Synchronization,”
Tutorial OW3G.4, Optical Fiber Communications (OFC) Conference,
mobility-centric applications is also under discussion in Q2/15.
March 2013
Recognizing the critical role that standardization plays in the [24] J. S. Wey, D. Nesset, M. Valvo, K. Grobe, H. Roberts, Y. Luo, and J.
access network transformation, the SDOs strive to ensure the Smith, "Physical Layer Aspects of NG-PON2 Standards-Part 1: Optical
next PON standards support not only the desired services, but Link Design,” J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 8 (1), 33-42, 2016
[25] Y. Luo, H. Roberts, K. Grobe, M. Valvo, D. Nesset, K. Asaka, H. Rohde,
also a volume market with a healthy industry supply chain. The
J. Smith, J. S. Wey, and F. Effenberger, "Physical Layer Aspects of NG-
industry looks forward with great anticipation to see how PON PON2 Standards-Part 2: System Design and Technology Feasibility,” J.
systems transpire in the coming years. Opt. Commun. Netw. 8 (1), 43-52, 2016
[26] V. Houtsma and D. van Veen, "Bi-directional 25G/50G TDM-PON with
Extended Power Budget using 25G APD and Coherent Detection," J. of
ACKNOWLEDGMENT Lightwave Technology, 36 (1), 122-127. Jan. 2018
The author would like to acknowledge the members of [27] D. Khotimsky, “NG-PON2 Transmission Convergence Layer: A
Tutorial,” J. Lightwave Technol. 34 (5), 1424-1432, 2016
FSAN, ITU-T Q2/15, and IEEE 802.3 groups. Their expert [28] P. Chanclou et al., “How does passive optical network tackle radio access
contributions, discussions, and debates were invaluable in the network evolution?” J. Opt. Commun. Netw, 9 (11), 1030–1040, 2017
standards development process. The editors and leadership [29] J. S. Wey and J. Zhang, “Passive Optical Networks for 5G Transport:
team provided essential guidance leading to the overall success Technology and Standards,” J. Lightwave Technol. 37 (12), 2830-2837,
June 2019
of the commercialization of PON systems. [30] J. S. Wey, Y. Luo, Th. Pfeiffer, “5G Wireless Transport in a PON Context:
It is the combined hard work from all the members that has an Overview,” submitted to IEEE ComSoc Standards Magazine. Under
made all the difference. review
[31] 3GPP TR38.801, “Radio access architecture and interfaces,” V2.0.0, R14,
Mar. 2017
REFERENCES [32] NGMN Alliance, NGMN overview on 5G RAN functional
decomposition, V1.0, Frankfurt, Germany, Feb. 2018
[1] D. Hood and E. Trojer, “Gigabit-capable passive optical networks,” 1st
[33] P. Chanclou, “Which fiber access technology for 5G?” 2020 Network
Ed., New Jersey: Wiley, 2012, ISBN: 978-0-470-93687-0.
Vision 5G and Optical Networking Panel, Optical Fiber Communications
[2] OVUM, “Wireline Broadband Access Equipment Forecast (PON, xDSL
(OFC) Conference, Mar. 2018
+ Gfast, CMTS/CCAP): 2019-24,” March 2019.
[34] NGMN Alliance, "Guidelines for LTE Backhaul Traffic Estimation”, July
[3] ITU-R M.2083-0, “IMT Vision – Framework and overall objectives of the
2011
future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond,” Sept. 2015.
[35] eCPRI “Common Public Radio Interface: eCPRI Interface Specification,”
https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/m/R-REC-M.2083-0-201509-
V1.0, August 2017.
I!!PDF-E.pdf
[36] “40-gigabit-capable passive optical network (NG PON2): Transmission
[4] J. S. Wey, “The outlook for PON standardization: 2019-2021,” paper
Convergence (TC) layer specification,” ITU-T G.989.3 Amendment 2,
Tu3B.1, Optical Fiber Communications (OFC) Conference, March 2019.
Nov. 2018
[5] The Full Service Access Networks group. http://www.fsan.org/
[37] Th. Pfeiffer, “Considerations on transport latency in passive optical
[6] “Broadband optical access systems based on Passive Optical Networks
networks,” European Conference on Optical Communication (ECOC).,
(PON),” ITU-T G.983.x Series of Recommendations
Sept. 2019
[7] “Gigabit-capable passive optical networks (GPON),”ITU-T G.984.x
[38] T. Tashiro et al. “A Novel DBA Scheme for TDM-PON based Mobile
Series of Recommendations
Fronthaul,” Tu3F.3, Optical Fiber Commun. Conf., Mar. 2014
[8] “10-gigabit-capable passive optical network (XG-PON) systems,” ITU-T
[39] The O-RAN Alliance, http://www.o-ran.org/
G.987.x Series of Recommendations.
[9] “40-gigabit-capable passive optical network (NG PON2),” ITU-T
G.989.x Series of Recommendations
[10] “10-gigabit-capable symmetric passive optical network (XGS-PON) Jun Shan Wey (M’95–SM’11) received her Ph.D. degree in
systems,” ITU-T G.9807.x Series of Recommendations. Electrical Engineering from the University of Maryland,
[11] “Higher Speed Passive Optical Networks,” ITU-T G.9804.x Series of College Park. Since then, Shan has devoted her career to optical
Recommendations. G.9804.1 consented in July 2019.
[12] “Draft Standard for Ethernet Amendment: Physical Layer Specifications
communications R&D, and in particular PON standardization.
and Management Parameters for 2 5 Gb/s and 50 Gb/s Passive Optical She is currently a Senior Director of Fixed Networks
Networks,” IEEE P802.3ca D2.1, Aug. 2019. Technology Strategy and Standards at ZTE TX, Inc. Her prior
http://www.ieee802.org/3/ca/index.shtml affiliations include the Lab for Physical Sciences, Terabeam,
[13] Cisco Visual Networking Index (VNI): Forecast and Trends, 2017-2022
White Paper. Feb 2019
Myrio, Siemens, Nokia Siemens Networks, Coriant, and
[14] IEEE P802.3ca 50Gb/s Ethernet Passive Optical Networks Task Force. Lightnote Consulting. She is active in FSAN and ITU-T Q2/15,
http://www.ieee802.org/3/ca/index.shtml and participates in the IEEE 802.3ca and 802.3cp. She serves as
[15] IEEE P802.3cs Increased-reach Ethernet Optical Subscriber Access Task an editor of G.Sup66 (PON for 5G transport), G.9806 (BiDi PtP
Force. http://www.ieee802.org/3/cs/index.html
[16] “Wavelength multiplexed point-to-multipoint 10-Gigabit-capable passive
optical access), G.hsp.comTC (common TC), and the first
optical network,” ITU-T G.9807.3 Recommendation. In progress edition of G.989.2 (NG-PON2 PMD). Shan has taken part in
[17] ITU-T G.Sup64 Supplement, “PON transmission technologies above 10 the OFC technical program committee since 2015 – as the OFC
Gbit/s per wavelength,” Feb. 2018 2018 Optical Access Networks Subcommittee Chair and the
[18] ITU-T G.Sup66 Supplement, “5G wireless fronthaul requirements in a
PON context,” Revision 1, July 2019
OFC 2020 Network-Track Program Chair.
[19] V. Houtsma, D. van Veen, and E. Harstead, "Recent Progress on
Standardization of Next-Generation 25, 50, and 100G EPON," J.
Lightwave Technol. 35, 1228-1234, 2017 s
[20] J. Johnson, “50G EPON power budget proposal,” johnson_3ca_2_0518,
IEEE 802.3ca meeting, May 2018
[21] J. Johnson, “OMA relaxation for high extinction transmitters,”
johnson_3ca_1_0718, IEEE 802.3ca meeting, July 2018
[22] M. Laubach et al., ”FEC proposal for NGEPON,“ laubach_3ca_1a_1117,
IEEE 82.3ca meeting, Nov. 2017

0733-8724 (c) 2019 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission. See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.