Issue link: http://www.epageflip.net/i/1043933
18 I ICT TODAY Choosing the Optimum Design for Flexibility For ICT infrastructure cabling, there are many options and any of them could be considered as the best solution depending on customer needs. For the building management infrastructure and, especially IoT, only a design according to ANSI/BICSI 007 (compliant to ANSI/TIA-862-B and/or ISO 11801-6) will provide the necessary flexibility. Because of the efficiency of PoE linked to the length of the cables, the use of HCP (SCP) with active equipment becomes inevitable as power density increases. There is nothing wrong with the separation of networks; one for IT and the other for building management. It can sometimes be a strategic choice to separate responsibilities. In this case, a bridge between the two networks can be made in the TRs. To attain maximum flexibility, however, it seems logical to combine all infrastructures under one network. In this case, some architectures will not meet the requirements for optimum flexibility and efficiency. FIGURE 10: Combining the HCP (SCP) into the FTTZ design for optimum flexibility and IoT. Copper links for "other" equipment. Example: 6 cables to each cabinet depending on needs. Cabinet(s) for "other" equipment. Examples: Building management, lighting management, audio. Typical Floor F D B D To other 4 FDs Corridor Office area Work area Compatible with cabling for wireless access points ANSI/ BICSI 008 Yes Yes No 1 No 1 Compatible with cabling for Intelligent Building ANSI/BICSI 007 Yes Yes 2 No 1 No 1 Efficient for PoE delivery for IoT No Yes N/A N/A Traditional Star FTTZ FTTO PON 1 Must be separate cabling network 2 With additional copper links to dedicated cabinet • Traditional star, even with CP or MUTOA, generally has long horizontal cables that are too long for optimum efficiency. • FTTO, with its fiber-only infrastructure, is incompatible. In fact, it is also incompatible with cabling for WAPs, which would need to be on a separate infrastructure. • PON, for the same reasons, is also incompatible. It is also more complicated to bridge with a separate copper network, since the active equipment is completely unique. TABLE 2: Compatibility and efficency of the various designs. 4 per floor