Re: [802.3_EPOC] Study Group Questions
Hesham,
No 802.3 project (to the best of my knowledge) ever took upon itself
guaranteeing interoperability with standards 802.3 does not control in any
way ... I think it would be dangerous, if possible at all to take such
objectives upon ourselves. I am also sure we will have our hands full first
nailing down what we intend to do in this new project and then dealing with
this work in the Task Force and need not look for extra work ...
Marek
-----Original Message-----
From: Hesham ElBakoury [mailto:Hesham.ElBakoury@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 14 December 2011 07:37
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Study Group Questions
Hi Kevin,
I am asking if interoperability with these standards should be in the scope
of the work of EPoC group. Your answer which is definitely valuable is NO.
Thanks
Hesham
-----Original Message-----
From: Noll, Kevin [mailto:kevin.noll@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 7:47 PM
To: Hesham ElBakoury; STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Study Group Questions
Ugh!
Hesham, I don't like where you are headed with that last comment about
HomePlug, CM, etc.
I assume for now that your comment was rhetorical. I don't think I could
support development inside this group of a system that would be able to
interoperate with all those other standards.
--kan--
--
Kevin A. Noll, CCIE
Principal Engineer
Time Warner Cable
13820 Sunrise Valley Drive
Herndon, VA 20171
o: +1-703-345-3666
m: +1-717-579-4738
AIM: knollpoi
From: Hesham ElBakoury
<Hesham.ElBakoury@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Hesham.ElBakoury@xxxxxxxxxx>>
Reply-To: Hesham ElBakoury
<Hesham.ElBakoury@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Hesham.ElBakoury@xxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:03:19 -0500
To:
"STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"
<STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Study Group Questions
Mark,
Comments below.
Hesham
From: Mark Laubach [mailto:laubach@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 10:59 AM
To:
STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Study Group Questions
Hi John,
And for others that have joined the EPoC Study Group email discussion list.
Welcome!
There are a number of things that are in the Call for Interest (CFI)
presentation as guidance items. The CFI is available at:
http://www.ieee802.org/3/epoc/public/nov11/index.html
My initial answers. Note: The SG contribution and consensus process will
have more on these as its official answers:
1) Open for SG discussion, flexible with cable operator initial deployment
and changes. As an SG effort, we'll probably need to evaluate from 5MHz to
2.8GHz (there are taps in the market that run up 2.8GHz....)
2) and 3) strong preference for "as is" but cable operator requirements
followed by SG work to see how it plays out
4) open for discussion, but there is the strong notion of being able to work
"around" existing services without disruption
5) EPoC is a new service that should be compatible with existing services
and "on the wire" signaling. While specific signaling mathematics will be a
topic for the Task Force, the SG will likely have some guidance/objectives
at conclusion going into the TF.
HEB> If EPoC is a service then it is more than just a PHY and therefore,
HEB> as Matt mentioned we need to study the interactions between the
HEB> PHY and different components of EPoC system to achieve the intended
HEB> service
and performance.
HEB> I am assuming that by "signaling on the wire" you mean the
HEB> modulation used by the PHY (e.g. OFDM, wavelet OFDM, QAM, ....
HEB> Etc). In this respect, by compatibility with existing services do
HEB> you mean that EPoC
as a service needs to support new PHY and existing PHYs ? i.e. Does CMC need
to find out if at the other end of the wire it is connected to CNU, CM, or
say HomePlugAV CPE and then uses the appropriate PHY modulation and
appropriate MAC ?
Mark
From: John Santhoff [mailto:jsanthoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 9:05 PM
To:
STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] Study Group Questions
I'm new to this group so please forgive me if these questions have already
been answered. If so where can I find the document?
1) What are the frequencies to be used for Downstream and Upstream?
2) Is the goal to use the existing infrastructure "As-Is" or do we have the
option to upgrade equipment?
3) Is the goal to maintain existing amplifier spacing?
4) Is the plan to maintain the 6/8 MHz channel spacing?
5) What about legacy signaling? Is that being maintained?
-John
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 9:31 PM, Hesham ElBakoury
<Hesham.ElBakoury@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Hesham.ElBakoury@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hi Howard,
I have few questions regarding the Operator requirements (pertaining to
physical layer):
Service coexistence issues and criteria
Services to be provided over EPoC
HEB> Do you mean residential and business services or video, IPTV, VoIP,
data services ?
and how they will evolve over time
Business vs residential services
(will they exist on the same network?)
Asymmetry vs. symmetry
Existing cable plant characteristics
Architectures
(Node+0 "passive", Node+N [N=1-?], Complete HFC, MxU)
Amplifier characteristics and considerations that will effect the PHY
Cable & passives characteristics
Typical size of cable plant
HEB> I am not sure how you measure the size ? (number of home passed, size
of coverage area, number of nodes, ... etc).
Subscribers passed
Number and size of taps
Changes to cable plant characteristics over time
(e.g. passive and active element changes, any use of bypasses?)
Spectral allocation
and how it changes over time
Which frequencies are amplified and which are passive
` What spectrum will be allocated for EPoC initially,
and how will that change over time
Regional differences for changes?
Functional Assumptions and Impairments
DOCSIS 3.0 has already characterized in CM-SP-PHYv3.0-I05-070803,
Chapter 5,
and in CM-SP-DRFI-I12-111117, Chapter 5, for "in
amplified" regions of
cable. For both "in amplified" and "passive" EPoC
considerations, are
there any additonal functional assumptions and impairments
that need to
be considered for up to 1Gbps and higher operation?
How will these change over time?
Are there regional differences; e.g. China, Europe?
Number of subscribers per network, take rate
Minimum required channel data rate
Maximum desired channel data rate
Thanks
Hesham
-----Original Message-----
From: Howard Frazier
[mailto:hfrazier@xxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:hfrazier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 7:00 PM
To:
STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [802.3_EPOC] Study Group Questions
The first meeting of the IEEE 802.3 EPON Protocol over Coax (EPoC) PHY Study
Group will be held January 24th and 25th in Newport Beach, CA, hosted by the
Ethernet Alliance. Please see my previous message for links to meeting
logistical details.
In preparation for the meeting, Mark Laubach and I put together a list of
topics that can help us prepare for a successful study group meeting, and
these are listed in the attached file.
The first set of topics deals with the IEEE 802 standards development
process. I have all of the material I need for this section, and I am sure
that I will be able to enlist the help of some of our experienced hands to
deliver it.
The second set of topics deals with operator requirements, and this is where
I would like to make an appeal for contributions. We may not get
contributions that address all of the topics listed, and there may not even
be universal agreement that the topics are relevant, but I think that these
are areas that must be explored in the study group if we are to do a proper
job of defining the scope of a new project, and judging it against the "5
Criteria".
People wishing to make a contribution to the study group should review the
"Procedure for Presenters" information that can be found here:
http://www.ieee802.org/3/epoc/public/presentproc.html
Since this is a new email reflector, I would also like to make people aware
of the IEEE 802.3 Working Group email reflector policy that can be found
here:
http://www.ieee802.org/3/reflector_policy.html
I will welcome your comments and questions.
Howard Frazier
Broadcom Corporation
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1
________________________________
________________________________
________________________________
<="" p="">
________________________________
________________________________
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to
copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for
the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not
the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the
contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the
sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this
E-mail and any printout.
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1
________________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-3-EPOC list, click the following link:
https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-3-EPOC&A=1