EuroDocsis Introduction

PPT: C00-introduction.pptGen. week: 207Author: A.Velders

Printed: 09-10-01 Sheet: 1Version:

EuroDocsisIntroduction

A short course about theintroduction of EuroDocsis 1.1



Why this course?

• EuroDocsis 1.1 is new

• A lot of previous systems exist in Casemae.g. Demos, DVB, COM21

• A lot of related subjects such asTPA, SI, SP, different OSIHN, EMC, LVDAAA, QoSbut what does it mean?(even if you know them all, this presentation may be interesting for you)



Agenda for today

• EuroDocsis introductionEuroDocsis introduction– planning, – some features, – COM21, DVB, Docsis, EuroDocsis comparison

• System IssuesSystem Issues– NGP, implementation of other market areas, – system calculations (capacity, line price), – linking to the PC

• Implementation issuesImplementation issues– Suppliers comparison, – Self installation and provisioning



Our goals

• Roll out without major surprises.• Broad knowledge about EuroDocsis 1.1

(not only technical possibilities and blockings, also the market related ones must be known)

• Low line price (what the hell is line price!)(everybody knows its importance, nobody uses it,somebody calculated it, anybody does it his way)

• Get a modem system that is cheaper and more flexible than COM21's system today



1-10-100 rule

RFQ phaseRFQ phaseTrial and Trial and test phasetest phase

Business Business phasephasegood questions

understanding - the subject- the supplierright choicechange cost some days

what must be testwhat are the criteriaunderstanding - the need for the test- the test results- the consequencesright choicechange cost a few man-weeks

reliability, availability serviceabilityupgradeabilityinstallabilityunderstandingchanging cost a lot more



Issues that are (partly) not covered

• Regulatory issuesIf it is mandatory, only the board can and must decide since the president (and his MT) is mostly personally responsible.

Examples:– LT Legal Tapping, government must be able to tap– EMC Radiation & interfering other systems like air traffic– LDV Low-Voltage Directive, Safety due to mains voltage – IHN Configurations and responsibility (only TPA

aspects)basis for seminar is: Cable operator is not responsible for IHN

AOP + NTU + modem together, no usage of existing IHN for interactive traffic, Ethernet from modem to the PC

SI = Self installation



Development of Euro-DOCSIS in Time

Cursus voor niet-technici

3 mei 2002



CableLabs

• In 1988, CableLabs was founded in the USA• CableLabs serves the cable television industry by:

• researching and identifying new broadband technologies; • authoring specifications, certifying products and spreading

information.

• CableLabs benefits the cable television industry and consumers by: • enabling interoperability among different cable systems; • facilitating retail availability of cable modems and advanced

services; and helping cable operators deploy innovative broadband technologies



DOCSIS summary

Website:

www.cablelabs.com



DOCSIS summaryVersion Spec PICS/ATP 1st Certif. CMs CMTSs Market

1.0 '97 '98 '99 203 26 Roll out

1.1 '99 00Q3 01Q3 22 6 Roll out

CCCM '00 01Q2 02Q3 0 0 Waiting

2.0 01Q4 t.b.d. t.b.d. 0 0 Waiting

1997 1999 2001 2003

1.1

1998 2000 2002

CCCM

1.0

2.0

CCCM = CPE controlled CM, t.b.d.= to be defined



History of Euro-DOCSIS

• In October 1999, TOCOF was founded and selected Ghent University to establish and conduct Euro-DOCSIS interoperability and certification program

• In February 2000, Euro-DOCSIS annex N is approved• In May 2000, tComLabs at Ghent and Euro-DOCSIS

Certification Board (ECB) were founded• In June 2000, first certification wave for Euro-DOCSIS 1.0

products by tComLabs



EuroDOCSIS summary

Website:

www.tcomlabs.com



EuroDOCSIS summaryVersion Spec PICS/ATP 1st Certif. CMs CMTSsMarket

1.0 00Q1 00Q2 00Q3 28 16 Roll out

1.1 01Q3 01Q3 01Q4 0 0 Delayed

2.0 ??? ??? ??? 0 0 Waiting

2000 2001 2002 2003

ED1.0ED1.1

RFQ NGPSelection

ED1.0 ED1.1 roll out

TPA



Euro-Docsis

Technische inleiding



DOCSIS

• Data

• Over

• Cable

• Services

• Interface

• Specifications



DOCSIS

• Amerikaanse standaard

• Gestandaardiseerde apparatuur

• CM ( kabelmodem) en CMTS (netwerkapparatuur) mogen van een verschillende fabrikant zijn



EuroDOCSIS

• Europese versie van DOCSIS

• Aanpassingen aan Europese kabelnetten– Kanaalbandbreedte– Upstream frequency range– Downstream frequency range



Reference Model Compleet

Cable modem Termination system

NetworkTermination

Mod

Dem

TX

RX

O/ENode

Cable modem

CPE

O/ENode

O/ENode

Operations Support System

BackboneTransportAdapter

Cable Modem RF Interface

Cable Modem CPE Interface

CMTS RF interface

CMTS-NSINSI = Network-Side interface

SNMPV3



Operations Support System

• DHCP(Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) server

• Time of Day Server

• TFTP(Trivial File Transfer Protocol) server



DHCP

• De DHCP server zorgt voor:– Het IP adres van het Modem– Het IP adres van de Time of day server– Het IP adres van de TFTP server– Naam van de Config file – DCHP lease: tijd dat IP adres aan het modem

is toegekend



Time of day Server

• Zorgt voor:– de tijdsindicatie– samen met offset wordt dat de juiste lokale tijd



TFTP

• De TFTP server zorgt voor:– Config file

• Netwerk toegang configuratie setting• Class of Service configuratie setting• Quality of Service configuratie setting• Baseline Privacy configuratie setting



TPA

• Toegang via derde partijen– Modem maakt verbinding met Casema– CPE (PC) maakt verbinding met ISP

• Twee afzonderlijke procedures– CPE(PC) heeft IP adres– Modem heeft IP adres



Baseline Privacy

• Bied een zeker niveau van versleuteling

• Authenticiteit van CM en CTMS– Docsis 1.0 BPI Niet voor CM– Docsis 1.1 BPI Voor CM via digitale

handtekening

• Zorgt dat CM alleen toegang heeft tot diensten waarvoor het is geautoriseerd– Docsis 1.0 via MAC adres



Baseline Privacy

• Zorgt dat CM alleen toegang heeft tot diensten waarvoor het is geautoriseerd– Docsis 1.0 via MAC adres– Docsis 1.1 via MAC adres en Digitale

handtekening.



Downstream

CMTS

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CMCMTS-Cable

ModemTermination

SystemCM-Cable Modem



Downstream

• Frequency gebied:108-862 MHz

• Bandbreedte: 8MHz/ eff 7,96 MHz

• QAM 64 (QAM 256)

• MPEG-2 datastream

• Bruto Bitsnelheid: 42 Mbit/s tot 56 Mbit/s



Upstream

CMTS

CM

CM

CM

CM

CM

CMCMTS-Cable

ModemTermination

System

Instraling

CPEIHN



Upstream

• Freqency range: 5 MHz-65 MHz

• Bandbreedte : 0.2 ;0.4 ;0.8 ;1.6 of 3.2 Mhz

• QPSK of 16 QAM

• Bitsnelheid: 0,128 …10,24 Mb/s



Wat is maximaal mogelijk ?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

10 20

9Bit/Hz

256QAM

128QAMShannon limit

Maximale Signaal/ruis

CATVnetwerk

64QAM

32 dB

CNR [dB]



CNR zichtbaar gemaakt

Grote CNR Kleine CNR



(Euro)Docsisto DVB/COM21

issuesA short course about the differences between DVB

COM21 and (Euro-)DOCSIS



DVB, COM21, (Euro)Docsis

DVBDVBFrom 1995From 1995A/V + IP (+ tel.)A/V + IP (+ tel.)Origin: Europe EBUOrigin: Europe EBUMultimedia standardMultimedia standardIP development failedIP development faileddue to weak CNP supportdue to weak CNP support

COM21COM21From 1996From 1996IP only (+ tel.)IP only (+ tel.)Origin: USA COM21Origin: USA COM21IP oriented proprietaryIP oriented proprietaryOne vendor onlyOne vendor onlydue to that, too expensivedue to that, too expensive

EuroDocsisEuroDocsisFrom 2000From 2000IP + tel. onlyIP + tel. onlyOrigin: Europe tComLabsOrigin: Europe tComLabsIP oriented standardIP oriented standardVideo streaming developmentVideo streaming developmentdue to lack of CNP pushingdue to lack of CNP pushing

DocsisDocsisFrom 1997From 1997IP + tel. onlyIP + tel. onlyOrigin: USA CableLabsOrigin: USA CableLabsIP oriented standardIP oriented standardVideo streaming developmentVideo streaming developmentdue to lack of broadcast visiondue to lack of broadcast vision

EBUEBU



DVB versus DocsisDVBDVB++ CM easily to link with STB

++ Real multimedia vision, DVB for all

++ IPCableCom, later adopted for time- critical services.

++ Developed for world market from European vision. Can be used in either 8 (PAL,SECAM) or 6 MHz (NTSC) systems.

-- 8 US channels per DS

++ OOB and IB possible

++ QoS from the beginning.Important in Europe

DOCSISDOCSIS-- STB link originally not foreseen.

-- No multimedia vision, DVB + ED mix

++ IPCableCom, later adopted for time- critical services.

-- Developed in USA, for USA. DOCSIS is not suitable for other regions, it declares the EuroDOCSIS version.

++ 4 to 8 channels per DS (vendor dep.)

-- Only IB possible.

-- QoS was not in DOCSIS1.0 CoS only. In USA less interest.

OOB = Out of Band, separate control downstream based on QPSK 2 Mb/sIB = In Band, control signals in main downstream bandmultimedia = satellite, cable, terrestrial

The many pro's for DVB shows the technical superiority for the European market but the market decided differently. DVB and EuroDocsis will be used simultanuously



COM21 versus Euro(Docsis)

COM21COM21-- Proprietary, monopoly position

++ Mature proven technology

-- Downstream 6 MHz, NTSC oriented, 27 Mb/s in 8 MHz

-- Upstream 1,7 MHz QPSK only

-- Bridged CMTS based VLAN tagging

-- Tel: very expensive propriatary

++ Internet: QoS and billing,

-- PPPoE like virtual IP encapsulation (proprietary)

-- Too transparent for ISP (CNP problem)

-- iTV: no iTV but video streaming

Europe (EuroDOCSIS)Europe (EuroDOCSIS)++ Interoperable between many vendors

-- Step into the dark but it will work finally

++ Downstream 8 MHz, PAL oriented, 38 Mb/s in 8 MHz

-- Upstream 1,7 MHz QPSK only

++ Routed CMTS (can be used as bridged)

++ Tel: ETSI-POTS, ISDN, VoIP

++ Internet: QoS and billing (if ED1.1_

++ MPLS, VPNbut Cisco dominated up to now

-- Better TPA, standard

++ iTV: over Ethernet/ EuroDOCSIS

There are good reasons to step from COM21 to EuroDocsis 1.1



USA DOCSIS USA DOCSIS (ETSI ES 201 488)(ETSI ES 201 488)

-- ITU region 2 oriented ("New World plan")US 5...42 MHzDS 54...750 MHz, NTSC oriented grid

-- FCC commitment for EMC, safety

-- USA LV safety based on 110 V

-- Commitment to US local standardse.g. low reflection requirements

-- Under US supervision for e.g. interoperability via CableLabs. Cannot be influenced by Eur. CNP's.

-- US Cablecom solutions for telephony

-- Network: tree & branch, aboveground

EuroDOCSIS EuroDOCSIS (ES 201 488 Anx.N)(ES 201 488 Anx.N)

++ ITU region 1 oriented ("Old World plan")US 5...65 MHzDS 87,5...862 MHz, PAL oriented grid

++ European Directive for EMC (EMCD)

++ European Directive for safety (LVD)

++ Commitment to Cenelec EN 500 83with higher reflection requirements

++ Under European supervision for e.g. interoperability via tComLabs. Influenced by Eur. CNP's (e.g. ISDN)

++ Eur. Cablecom solutions for telephony

++ Networks: (mini-) star based, buried

EuroDocsis versus Docsis part 1

Docsis shows a year in advance what we can expect from EuroDocsis



EuroDocsis versus Docsis part 2

USA DOCSISUSA DOCSIS++ Node size now 300...200

later 100...200 due to interactivity

-- Drop lines to IHN

++ Home-RF is defacto standard, very USB oriented

-- DS 6 MHz NTSC based, gives 25% lower efficiency in 8 MHz (27 Mb/s)

++ Network is renovated for 256QAM?

-- US 3,5 MHz with 16QAM is used with fall-back mode 2,56…10 Mb/s

-- Tel: US-POTS, VoIP

-- Internet: plain internet for the time being, no iTV but video streaming

EuroDOCSISEuroDOCSIS-- Node size now 800...2100

later 250 by interactivity

++ AOP-NTU connection to IHN

-- No common IHN solution, Ethernet recommended, is the only cheap solution

++ DS is 8 MHz PAL based. Full 38 Mb/s. European DVB fits in EuroDOCSIS.

-- Network not good enough for 256QAM

-- US 1,7 MHz only possible with QPSK, 2,56 may be 5,12 Mb/s in 3,5 MHz

++ Tel: ETSI-POTS, ISDN, VoIP

++ Internet: QoS and billing, MPLS, VPN, iTV over Ethernet/ EuroDOCSIS

Environmental market conditions are completely different



EuroDocsis 1.0; 1.1; 2.0EuroDOCSIS 1.0EuroDOCSIS 1.0-- Telephony is not possible-- CoS only-- TPA cannot be implemented

EuroDOCSIS 1.1EuroDOCSIS 1.1++ Telephony VoIP under development++ Service enhancement QoS, payload header suppression

++ IP multicast enhancement and encryption (cond. access)

Better operations, SNMP v3, Account mgnt. Fault mgnt.

++ TPA is possible under certain conditions

EuroDOCSIS 2.0EuroDOCSIS 2.0-- Advanced PHY: S-CDMA (ECI like) and Advanced TDMA

new hype of US vendors or is the market waiting for it?-- Starting development, not be certified before 2004?



Euro-DOCSIS and Telephony


3 Mei 2002



VoIP / IP Telephony / Internet Telephony

• Gedachten van VoIP varieren van persoon tot persoon• 3 verschillende voorbeelden VoIP / IP Telephony:

- Voice-over-Internet meestal ‘PC-to-PC’ of ‘PC-to-Phone’ - Corporate VoIP

bedrijfstelefonie, o.a. PBX- Carrier-grade VoIP gebruikelijke analoge telefoon

De verschillen worden bepaald door type IP netwerk, toegepaste protocollen, apparatuur, e.d.



Architectuur

PacketCable / IPCablecom Platform

PHY, Broadband Modem Physical layer (modulation) MAC, Media Access Control (addressing)

EuroDOCSIS 1.1 Platform

Internet Protocol

PacketCable / IPCablecom Protocols

IP-based

data services Voice/Video

ConferencingiTV

services

VoIP is gebaseerd op een open architectuur



Geschiedenis van Carrier-GradeVoIP over Cable

• In 1998 begon CableLabs met PacketCable (Pkt)

• Begin 2001 begon ECCA met IPCablecom project

• In maart 2001 begonnen ETSI en ITU-T met technische specificaties voor IPCableCom

• Omvattende aanpassingen in ETSI IPCablecom standaarden zorgen voor vertragingen in het proces

• GEVOLG: Onzekerheid over certificatie en onduidelijkheid over definitieve eisen



New Generation Platform (NGP)

• Casema project NGP doelstelling is selectie van: ‘Euro-DOCSIS 1.1 + IPCableCom’ apparatuur

• Fasering van NGP– Fase 1: Internet services (vervanging Com21)– Fase 2: Third-Party access voor andere ISPs– Fase 3: Self Provisioning & Self Installation– Fase 4: Telefonie



Voice-over-NGP I

• 2 architecturen gedefinieerd in IPCableCom:

– Fully VoIP (softswitch-gebaseerd)

– Switched VoIP (gebruikmakend van PSTN switch)

Casema heeft voor de ‘switched VoIP’ architectuur gekozen!



Voice-over-NGP II Switched VoIP architectuur

Customer premisesThird party

HFC

Network

AOP+

NTUVGW

Casemaswitch

EuroDOCSIS

Telephony signals

Legend

EuroDOCSIS 1.1

SS7 V5.2

HFC NetworkCore network

IPCablecom (switched VoIP)

POTS(ISDNoptional)

MT

A

CM

MT

A*

* The MTA can be external orembedded in the CM

CMTS

Router

Transmission

& Routers

TSP

TSP

TSP

3rdparty

switch

3rdparty

switch

TDM-traffic



Voice-over-NGP III

Fully VoIP architectuur

IPCablecom

Euro-DOCSIS 1.1

Customer premisesCasema and/or Third party

HFC

network

AOP+

NTUCMTS

KPN

EuroDOCSIS

Telephony media flowLegend

ANS

ANC

ANP

TSP

TSP

SS7

PCM+MF sign.

HFC NetworkCore network

CMS

MGC

Casemaswitch

MGW

SGW

SIP

CMS

NCS

a1

a2

MT

A

CM

MT

A* POTS

(ISDNoptional)

Router

Telephony signalling

Het iTV platform in NGP

3 mei 2002



Behandeld zal worden

1. Mogelijkheden van het gebruik van het iTV platform in relatie tot NGP

2. Aandachtspunten c.q. mogelijk te verwachten problemen



Algemeen

Twee scenario's voor transport interactieve data:• Via telefoonlijn dmv POTS modem in de STB:

– Via KPN– Via MTA in het kabelmodem

• Via kabel, down- and upstream via het HFC netwerk.

Twee verschillende stromen:• A/V broadcast = het oversturen van het digitale video, audio en

extra programma informatie, uitgezonden in een DVB-downstream kanaal.

• Interactieve data = persoonlijke en signaleringsdata, verzonden in EuroDOCSIS 1.1 downstream en upstream kanalen of via de telefoonlijn.



Huidige situatie: telefoon retour via KPN

Applicatieserver

Applicatieserver

KPNswitchKPN

switchModem

poolModem

pool

Conventionele A/V broadcast via DVB

KPN Telefoon lijn

SDHnetwerk

TV RHFCnetwerk

Interactieve data



Gewenste oplossing met EuroDocsis kabel

modem

Applicatieserver

Applicatieserver

IN DATA

R/TV R TV

ED-CMED-CM

Ethernet kaart

Ethernet kaart

SDH netwerk

HFCnetwerk

CMTSCMTS


Interactieve data via ED 1.1

Meterkast



Tweede optie: telefoon retour via MTA

Applicatieserver

Applicatieserver

IN DATA

R/TV R TV

ED-CMED-CM

Tel.modem

Tel.modem

MTAMTAModempool

Modempool

Casemaswitch/GWCasema

switch/GW

SDH netwerk

HFCnetwerkCMTSCMTS


Interactieve data

Meterkast

Huidigetelefoon modem



Gelijktijdig gebruik van het kabelmodem

Persoonlijkedata

DVB

ED-CMED-CM

Ethernet kaart

Ethernet kaart

ApplicatieServiceProvider

InternetServiceProvider

Casema netwerk

IN DATA

R/TV R TV

Downstream

A/V broadcast + interactiviteit

Upstream

ED 1.1



Tijdskritische diensten in iTV

On-line betalingen:

ED-CMED-CM

Ethernet kaart

Ethernet kaart

ApplicatieServiceProvider

Casema netwerk

IN DATA

R/TV R TV

Shopping mall via DVB broadcast Ik ga watbestellen


te laat=

geen afrekening



Tijdskritische diensten in iTV _2

T-commerce:

WWW

Additionalinfo

ED-CMED-CMEthernet

cardEthernet

card

Casema network

IN DATA

R/TV R TV

Applicationserver

Applicationserver

reclame via DVB broadcast Die beer wil ik wel




Samengevat• iTV mogelijk in het ED NGP

– via het Internetplatform– via het Telefonie platform

• Een aantal zaken zullen goed uitgezocht moeten worden– gelijktijdig gebruik PC en STB met de data communicatie tussen

verschillende SP’s– het correct laten verlopen van tijdskritische diensten

Verschillen DVB en ED in relatie tot iTV

Mei, 2002



Algemeen

• De DVB standaard is ontwikkeld voor digitale audio en video broadcast waaraan later een module is toegevoegd waarin interactiviteit geregeld wordt. Deze standaard is hierdoor uitermate bruikbaar voor de STB.

• DOCSIS is ontwikkeld voor de internet omgeving maar wordt inmiddels ook gebruikt in de STB.



Verschillen in de downstream

EuroDocsis:• Modulatietechniek identiek aan DVB• MPEG transport alleen mogelijk via IP over ED. Aangezien dit zorgt voor

timingproblemen is dit voor MPEG transport geen optie.

DVB:• Twee methoden in de downstream: Out-Of-Band (OOB) and In-band (IB):

– OOB: QPSK modulatie met een bandbreedte van 2 MHz met 3 Mb/s, is robuust en kan overal in de frequentieband worden geplaatst.

– IB: 64 QAM modulatie met 8MHz bandbreedte op 38 Mb/s. Deze bandbreedte kan MPEG, IP, MP3, etc informatie bevatten. M.b.v MPEG part 6, kan IP ingekapseld in MPEG verzonden worden.



Verschillen in de upstream

EuroDocsis:• De US modulatie kan QPSK zijn en 16 QAM. De

standaard laat data snelheden toe* van 128 kb/s tot 10 Mb/s in zeven stappen.

DVB:• US modulatie is QPSK. Mogelijke data snelheden

zijn 256 kb/s tot 6 Mb/s in stappen van vier.

Voor beide standaarden geldt dat de toegang naar de gedeelde US bandbreedte wordt geregeld via de MAC protocollen. De controllers in het HE regelen de toewijzing van de US bandbreedte, de manier waarop dit gebeurd is verschillend.

* “De standaard laat toe” betekend niet dat dit ook mogelijk is in het kabelnetwerk. Op dit moment, de maximum bitrate per kanaal in ons kabelnetwerk is 3 Mb/s.



Belangrijkste punten

• DVB: – Multimedia oplossing, bruikbaar in kabel, satelliet en terrestrial netwerken

en voor audio/ video, internet en telefonie diensten. – Voor broadcast van audio en video in de downstream is DVB via Europese

regelgeving verplicht gesteld.

• EuroDocsis: – Alleen te gebruiken in kabelnetwerk en voor de internet en telefonie

diensten. iTV kan meeliften op deze diensten alleen op basis van TCP/IP– Voor iTV zijn er altijd twee modems nodig: een DVB en ED modem.

Hierdoor is EuroDocsis vanuit technisch oogpunt duurder dan DVB

Conclusie: Beoogde ED voordeel vanwege meer beschikbare bandbreedte (vergeleken met DVB-OOB (38Mb/s tov 3 Mb/s)). Valt weg met de DVB-IB oplossing die dezelfde bandbreedte en snelheid beschikbaar stelt en tevens de mogelijkheid voor het gebruik van een multiple carrier zorgt zelfs voor duidelijke voordelen.



EuroDocsisSystem calculations

Short calculations you must know for EuroDocsis 1.1:

speed, capacity, CMs/CMTS, line price



Speed general

• Speed can be split up in downstream speed (DS) andupstream speed (US)

• In US as well as in DS each one channel at a time(if capacity is too low, 2nd channel cannot be added)

• If n is number of allowed US channels per DS channel then the asymmetry is given by DS : (n x US)

e.g.: DS = 38 Mb/s, US = 2,5 Mb/s n = 4the asymmetry is 38 : (4 x 2,5) = 3,8 (or 3,8 : 1)

CMTSTX + RX

CMRX+TX

CMTSTX + RX

CMRX+TX

CMRX+TX

CMRX+TX

OR

ANDTX

RX1

TX = Transmitter, RX = Receiver



Speed - bandwidth

Choice of speed/bandwidth ratios:• DS:DS: 64QAM, (128QAM) and 256QAM

PAL oriented network accepts 64QAM only- network CNR is too low for 256QAM- CNR increase is very expensive

• US:US: QPSK and 16QAM16QAM in speed, two times as efficient as QPSK but:- network less reliable for 16QAM- number of CM's/CMTS reduced by 50%

CMTSTX + RX

CMRX+TX

128QAM is a little less efficient technique that is not supported by most of the CM and CMTS suppliers

64Q

AM

128

QA

M

256

QA

M

33%

QP

SK

16Q

AM

100%but..

+12% +33%



Speed downstream

• 64QAM gives 6 b/s/Hz (ref. 64 = 26)so in theory: 8 MHz channel gives 8 x 6 = 48 Mb/s48 Mb/s

• Due to filtering, FEC etc. result: 38 Mb/s38 Mb/s effective bitrate lower (between 20..25%), before IP handling service independent

• UDP/IP consumes approx. 1%(streaming, telephony) result: 37 Mb/s37 Mb/s

• TCP/IP consumes another 10% (webserving, E-mail) result: 34 Mb/s34 Mb/s

CMTSTX

CMRX

FEC = Forward Error Correction

34

Mb/

s4

37

Mb/

s1

10

10

TCP UDP



Speed upstream

• QPSK gives 2 b/s/Hz (ref. 4 = 22)so in theory: 1,7 MHz channel gives 1,7x2 = 3,4 Mb/s3,4 Mb/s

• Due to filtering, FEC etc. result: 2,56 Mb/s2,56 Mb/seffective bitrate is lower (approx. 35%), before IP handling service independent

• UDP/IP consumes approx. 5% (due to asymmetry)

(streaming, telephony) result: 2,5 Mb/s2,5 Mb/s• TCP/IP consumes another 40% (due to asymmetry)

(web serving, E-mail) result: 1,5 Mb/s1,5 Mb/s

CMTSRX

CMTX

1,5

Mb

/s1

,06

Mb

/s

2,5

Mb

/s0,

06

0,8

4

0,8

4

TCP UDP



modems per CMTSon service level

• Let say QoS = DS 256kb/s /US 64kb/s TCPDS: 1 TX = 34 Mb/s 34 : 0,256 = 136 users US: 4 RX = 4x1,5 Mb/s 6 : 0,064 = 100 usersFor Web surfing for a concurrency of 1%,

10 000 users10 000 users could be connected to one CMTS 1 TX - RX combination

• For video conferencing DS = US = 64 kb/s UDPDS: 1 TX = 37 Mb/s 37 : 0,064 = 600 users US: 4 RX = 4x2,5 Mb/s 10 : 0,064 = 160 usersFor video conferencing for a concurrency of 10%*,

only 1600 users1600 users could be connected to one CMTS 1 TX - RX combination

* video conferencing is peer-to-peer, can use upstream and downstream as well once started, video conferencing is occupying the channel continuously



modems per CMTSon network level

In US a modem produces a signal + spurious (Spurious is unwanted disturbing signal residue)

1 Supplier guarantees for a CM a minimum signal-spurious ratio (SSR) (in the standard: -72 dBc per modem)

2 QPSK needs at least 22 dB SSR to operate reliantly

3 Network path loss asymmetry reduces with 15 dB*4 Maximum modems/CMTS receiver is:

72 - 22 - 15 = 35 dB is approximately 200 CMs/RX (see curve) Asymmetry reduction helps: 72 - 22 - 9 = 41 dB is approx. 500 CMs/RX

5 Each doubling of modems reduces SSR with 4,5 dB So, for e.g. 256 modems (is 28) reduction is 8 x 4,5 = 36 dB

* 15 dB is a typical Casema network value. With new (switchable) multi-taps it could be less

512400316256200160128100

30 32 34 36 38 40[dB]

modem quant.



Summary

CMTS

RX4RX4

RX3RX3

RX2RX2

RX1

TX

HFC networkCMnCMn

CM1CM1

CMnCMn

CM1CM1

RX1RX1PHY: 200 maxPHY: 200 maxADDR: e.g. 800ADDR: e.g. 800Serv: betweenServ: between1600 and 10 000 1600 and 10 000

Conclusion (this example):PHY is the restricting factor for the time being

max. 4 x 200 = 800 modemsMany parameters can be changed but themaximum of 200/RX card is difficult to exceed

RX3RX3PHY: 200 maxPHY: 200 maxADDR: e.g. 800ADDR: e.g. 800Serv: betweenServ: between1600 and 10 000 1600 and 10 000



Line price EuroDOCSIS only

(example, simplified)costs TX-cards CM's price

/entity /CMTS /TX-card /CM

Network management 40000 9 800 5,6L2/3 sw+edge router 25% 82000 9 800 11,4CMTS+SW+install.+maint. 350000 9 800 48,6Line card (1DS+4US) 25000 - 800 31,3Cable Modem 72 - - 72,0Provisioning costs 16000 9 800 2,2Total/subscriber [EUR] 171,0

only the costs of new ED equipment is incorporatedonly the costs of new ED equipment is incorporated

Calculation (example) as used for the comparison between ED-vendorsModems are needed for each subscriberLine cards (in the CMTS) can be divided by 800 (4 US/card x 200 CMs/US)Central costs for all connections can be divided by 9

(9 line cards can be inserted in one CMTS)



(blue is added for network upgrade) costs line cards CM's price/entity /CMTS /TX-card /CM

Network management 40000 9 800 5,6L2/3 sw+edge router 25% 82000 9 800 11,4CMTS+SW+install.+maint. 350000 9 800 48,6Line card (1DS+4US) 25000 - 800 31,3CMTS-DC-SC (DWDM) 800000 9 800 111,1Coax net upgrade (SNP) 80000 - 800 100,0AOP + NTU 55 - - 55,0Cable Modem 72 - - 72,0Installation costs 50 - - 50,0Provisioning costs 16000 9 800 2,2Total/subscriber [EUR] 487,1

only the costs of new equipment and modifications are incorporatedonly the costs of new equipment and modifications are incorporated

Case for e.g. Utrecht. For The Hague some investments are carried out already.

Line price for business plan (example, simplified)



Conclusions

• Line-price increase not for internet only.If telephony and interactive TV can use the same platform, the line-price increase of EUR 487 is an investment for all these services.

• Why so much?– CATV was designed for connecting one R/TV only– Network quality increase was always used for

capacity increase– Lot of investments were postponed until now (SNP)

• But there is a moment that limits are reached



EuroDocsis and TPA Third Party Access

The consequences and some special issues (SI and SP)



Is TPA for internet only?

• On the IP platform, TPA is a hot issue at the moment but:

• It was already an issue years a go for telephony as well (2nd operators)

• It was already an issue years ago on pay-TV (Channel+). This will become more important with introduction of interactive TV

• Today we study TPA for the IP platform since the government presses us to open our network for other SP's (third parties).

CM

CM

STB

STBTel

Tel

All over one modem, or modem/ SPWho delivers the modem?

Who owns the modem?Who cares…?

SP is generic name for Service ProviderISP is specific Provider for Internet-Services



Casema only?

• Casema is studying TPA for internal knowledge improvement

• Casema is working together with Essent and UPC to get common sense and to get one standpoint in the direction of the government.

• Projectname: ShAP (Shared Access Project)splitted in WG technology and WG business.Casema will commit to the result of ShAP study.

• TPA for EuroDocsis only because of step-to-ED policy and uniform SLA for all ISP's

Internal TPA group: Fred v. Let, Maria KlessensShAP: Fred van Let, Hans Velders, ...



TPA dualism

• Cable Network Provider (CNP) is leading, tries to set the Standard for the SLA once and for all.

• Internet Service Provider (ISP) must feel happy with such SLA

• Government (OPTA) must accept construction

Technical group sets conditions• Physical parameters (NTU)• IP platform parameters (MPLS)• NMS, AAA, SI, SP• Eliminate all impossible models

NMS = Network Management System SP = Self ProvisioningAAA = Authentication, Authorization, Accounting SI = Self Installation

Business group sets conditions• Sets up Business plans• Select business model that can

work with Techn. group conditions• Makes SLA between CNP and ISP



Begin (subscr. initiative)

ISP diagnosesproblem

Subscriber with problem calls ISP

ISP opens ISPtrouble ticket

Is subscribersatisfied

?

NO

ISP closes both ISPand CNP tickets

End

ISP calls subscriberto verify resolutionISP corrects

the problem

is it CNP's fault?

YES

isticket open forthis problem

?

YES

NO

ISP attempts to verify correct operation

ISP opensticket with CNP

Problem found?

YES

CNP corrects problem & marks ticket resolved

ISP calls subscriberto verify resolution

NO

YESISP's activity

CNP's activity

Users' activity

NO

Trouble ticketing(example: ISP responsible)

is itsubscriber's

fault?

NO

ISP helps to solve problemYES

Goals:• less red• more green

Subscriber solves problem

Begin (ISP initiative)

ISP finds problem



End

Self provisioning (example)

Begin Subscriber buysCNP certified CM

Is subscribersatisfied

?

NO

ISP closes initiation ticket

ISP sends RFSC+ INITICK to CNP

ISP stores allsubscr.information

ISP opens subscr. account

CNP stores allsubscr.information

ISP opens initiation ticket

YESISP's activity

CNP's activity

Users' activity

Others

Does everything

work?

NO

YES

Goals:• less red• more green• more blue

Subscriber sends RFSC to ISP

Subscr. gets ISP connectivity set

Subscr. conductsCM's self installation

RFSC = Request for Subscription and Class of ServiceUCAP = Username, CoS Acknowledge and Password

CNP opens subscr. account

CNP send Ackback to ISP

ISP sends UCAP to subscriber

ISP handles trouble ticket

Subscriber solvesproblem via retail

CNP sets up interconn. & CoS

Iseverything

OK?NO

YES

CNP handles trouble ticket

is predefinedprocedure



Self InstallationEffects from splitter, cable and amplifier on TV input level

0,00

0,02

0,04

0,06

0,08

0,10

0,12

0,14

45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 TV input [dBuV]

existing 1TV

10m to TV

ampl. to TV

splitter 10m

Err

Effects from splitter, passive and active NTU on modem input

0,00

0,02

0,04

0,06

0,08

0,10

0,12

0,14

45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 Modem input [dBuV]

existing 1TV

splitter 10m

passive NTU

pasNTU 20m

active NTU

actNTU 20m

Err

OKtoo low too hAmplifiers, splitters and long cablenot possible.

Passive NTU seldom possibleActive NTU withadjustment goodin all cases.



Existing market developments(becoming more important with TPA introduction)

• PC with Windows: increasing number of versionsincreasing number of versionsW95, W98, ME, SE, 2000, XP… (mainly NL also UK versions)

• Desktop with PCI slots but also laptops with PCMCIAPCMCIA(UPC was pressed to deliver PCMCIA Ethernet cards on request recently)

• Increasing number of Linux serversLinux servers/firewalls at home(in particular in the heavy user area.)

• Linux, AppleLinux, Apple are still interesting market areas• Modem trends to location near the CATV systemtrends to location near the CATV system

outlet due to need to connect TV, radio, PC and telephones in all rooms of the house.



Summary

• Third Party Access asks for a very good co-operation between CNP and ISP.

• Self provisioning is seldom a problem but a good scenario must be chosen.

• Self installation is a Capex problem. Is it possible to ask the retailer with (its connections to installers) to control correct installation and to keep the installation costs separated from our line price.



Comparison of Euro-DOCSIS Vendors


3 Mei 2002



Short List RFQ NGP

• In December 2001:Casema selected 3 vendors of NGP equipment(Euro-DOCSIS and IPCablecom devices)

• Euro-DOCSIS testing (Okt/Nov 2001):Two vendors have been tested earlier in Casema’s labThird vendor has been tested earlier in FTC’s lab

• IPCablecom equipment (Feb 2002):All 3 vendors have been tested by Casema at vendors’ premises



Vendor ComparisonPrice

Vendor equipment had been compared on investments for a specific Casema case study (Den Haag, V’burg + Z’meer)

•Vendor1:– Network price per subscriber for “Internet only”: 1 unit

•Vendor2:– Network price per subscriber for “Internet only”: 1,3 units

•Vendor3:– Network price per subscriber for “Internet only”: 1 unit



CMTS Comparison Physical 7ft / 19“ rack mounted

• CMTS1:– 12 slots for RF line cards and network side interfaces– 1x4 RF line card with 1 downstream and 4 upstream– Total port capacity per rack: 36 DS & 144 US*– Roadmap: 2x8 and 3x12 RF line cards

• CMTS2:– 4 slots for RF line cards and 2 slots for network side interfaces– 1x6 RF line card with 1 downstream and 6 upstream– Total port capacity per rack: 16 DS & 96 US*– Roadmap: 2x8 RF line cards (5x20 for bigger

chassis)

• CMTS3:– 14 slots for RF line cards and network side interfaces– 1x4 RF line card with 1 downstream and 4 upstream– Total port capacity per rack: 42 DS & 168 US*– Roadmap: 2x8 and 4x32 RF line cards

* For comparison Com21: 3 DS & 21 US



CMTS ComparisonData throughput

• CMTS1:– Downstream, 8 MHz, 64QAM: max. 38 Mbps (measured)– Upstream, 1,6 MHz, QPSK: max. 1,3 Mbps (measured)– Forwarding capacity: 30 Mpps (theoretical)

• CMTS2:– Downstream, 8 MHz, 64QAM: max. 38 Mbps (measured)– Upstream, 1,6 MHz, QPSK: max. 1,7 Mbps (measured)– Forwarding capacity: 2,4 Mpps (theoretical)

• CMTS3:– Downstream, 8 MHz, 64QAM: (measured at FTC’s lab)– Upstream, 1,6 MHz, QPSK: (measured at FTC’s lab)– Forwarding capacity: 42 Mpps (theoretical)

Mbps = Mega bits per secondMpps = Mega packets per second



CMTS Comparison:Network Side Interfaces

• CMTS1:– Octal 10/100BaseT, GbEth, POS STM-1/4

• CMTS2:– Single 10/100BaseT, GbEth, POS STM-1/4, ATM OC-3

• CMTS3:– Octal 10/100BaseT, GbEth, POS STM-1/4

ATM advantages - Low implementation costs- In-band transport of NM information

disadvantage - Data capacity limited for future- Alternative cheaper Interfaces

NM = Network Management POS = Packet over Sonet (SDH)



CMTS Comparison:Third Party Access

Third Party Acess has lots of flavours

For dynamic service and ISP selection per CPE:•CMTS1:

– For now TPA only possible using a service selection gateway– Later MPLS VPN interface card enables more TPA features

•CMTS2:– TPA possible by using MPLS VPN technology and advanced OSS.

•CMTS3:– For now TPA only possible using a service selection gateway– Later MPLS VPN interface card enables more TPA features



CMTS Comparison Legal Interception

• CMTS1:– Legal Interception only possible using a Protocol Analyser card

(with certain limitations: monitoring of only ONE RF line card per Protocol Analyser card!)

• CMTS2:– Legal Interception possible by setting a tap within CMTS2

• CMTS3:– Legal Interception possible by setting a tap within CMTS3



Conclusion

• Many factors (financial, service, technical, time-to-market) have an impact on the equipment selection

• Comparison of equipment is not always straightforward because of many hidden pitfalls

• Every vendor has strong and weak pointsdepending on service (Internet, Telephony, …. )

Documents

EuroDocsis Introduction