|
John,
Tom,
Thanks for the comments. I'll find a way to weave them into the document.
Thanks!
Jorge
Sorry – I wasn’t specific enough – I meant in the broad market potential response.
From: John D'Ambrosia [mailto:jdambrosia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 11:13 AM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] [AMP-MSO] 3 topics: 5-Criteria, Monday meeting and headend tour
All,
As I read through the responses, one thing sticks out to me – no mention of 802.3 or Ethernet (yes it is implied in EPON, but the word Ethernet is never used
in the response).
As this document ultimately needs to get approved by the IEEE 802.3 Ethernet Working Group, please accept my friendly suggestion that it would seem a good idea
to work in either of these terms into the broad market potential responses.
Some relevant examples include:
http://www.ieee802.org/3/efm/public/jul01/presentations/par_1_0701.pdf
http://www.ieee802.org/3/bk/ExEPON_5Criteria_approved.pdf
Regards,
John
From: Tom Staniec [mailto:staniecjt@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 11:00 AM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] [AMP-MSO] 3 topics: 5-Criteria, Monday meeting and headend tour
Matt
I agree with Marek, it “looks better.”
Jorge et.al.
First my apologies to the group because I must have missed this when it was originally discussed.
The original and the reworked statement do lead me to a couple of observations tied to CAPEX and OPEX. What strikes me is “how” their inclusion in the statement
addresses both of these areas in a positive way.
By example, if the MSOs’ are not going to wholesale change the networks to EPoC, but rather evolve, then the implementation going forward would continue to
require DOCSIS buys and now EPoC buys. So how does that contain CAPEX? Rationally it looks like it is going to increase for the long term until the point where one of the service/application delivery platforms goes away.
That feeds directly into OPEX which then poses a question in my mind of whether a regular “service tech” can provide service on an EPoC service. Or does he
now have to have training and a signal level meter that doesn’t exist today which then has to be purchased to be able to service the EPoC customer? Those are only 2 examples that are going to drive OPEX. There are a lot more. So wouldn’t we now have OPEX needs
for two services/applications and two platforms beyond what we have for DOCSIS alone?
In some sense, having been a VP of Network Engineering and Operations who engineered, built and operated HFC and data networks for over 35 years, this sure
looks to me like I’m increasing CAPEX and OPEX. So how do CAPEX and OPEX actually fit in the statement?
If they don’t fit or can’t be justified shouldn’t they be removed as they do not actually project the reality of what is going to happen in the USA? If EPoC
is solely to be used in a green field, then maybe there is an advantage for CAPEX and OPEX but a green field may represent less than 1% of all deployed plant in the US.
Again, my apologies to the group for surfacing these thoughts now as we are trying to finish the slide deck. I think all of the other points in the statement
are accurate and on target which paints very good reasoning for EPoC.
Regards,
Tom
Matt,
Looks better – good work
Marek
Following up on the last call, I made the comment that I felt the wording for Broad Market Potential, Broad Sets of Applicability, bullet #1 read somewhat awkwardly,
and offered to try and come up with an alternative (it was too complicated of a sentence to easily wordsmith live).
Here's what is in the most recent version of the deck:
–
Given the success of DOCSIS-based services, service providers are looking for cost-effective, high performance means to provide higher data capacity,
addressing their growing CapEx and OpEx,market competition and future-proofing their existing coaxial plant, while expanding service portfolios for business and residential customers.
Here's an alternative I would propose that I think reads more clearly, but accomplishes the same ends:
–
Given the success of DOCSIS-based services, service providers are looking for cost effective, high performance means to do the following: provide
higher data capacity; address growing CapEx and OpEx; stay ahead of market competition; future proof their existing coaxial plant; and expand service portfolios for business and residential customers.
Essentially I just restructured part of the sentence to make it a more defined and consistent list, but tried to leave most of the points essentially intact (so
as to preserve as much of the existing wording as possible).
Please find attached an updated copy of the 5-Criteria slides. In this copy I incorporated feedback from David Law regarding the formatting for the Compatibility
Criteria. Given David's feedback I moved the contents of the top part of slide 4 into slide 5, and removed slide 4. The old slide #4 is still in the deck with crossed-out letters and the new text in slide #5 is shown in red letters. If no one objects, I will
remove the old slide #4 and change the color on the additions to slide #5 to black letters. I have also updated the motion slides to reflect the new slide numbers, the new file name (which I will use in the final version) and the correct date for the meeting
in Minneapolis. Please let me know of any issues with the changes, or any other comments or suggestions.
As a reminder, we will have an additional meeting on Monday, April 30, from 2 PM ET to 4 PM ET. Kevin Noll will lead the discussion, which will focus on the Objectives.
Finally,
please see the IMPORTANT notes below regarding the headend tour in Minneapolis.The tour will take place on Monday, from 4 PM CT to 6 PM CT.
Thanks for attending the meeting today.
Please find attached the latest version of the 5-Criteria as we ended up the meeting today. Still pending are formatting changes suggested by David Law. I will
work on those and send an updated version. In the meantime, please let me know of any comments or suggestions.
Our next meeting will be on Monday, April 30 from 2 PM ET to 4 PM ET. You should have an calendar Invitation for this meeting, but let me know if you don't.
Finally, with respect to the headend tour, 21 people responded, with almost everyone able to attend late on Monday and only a few people unable to do but but
able to attend early on Thursday. To simplify things for the headend personnel, I will propose that we plan to conduct the tour late on Monday, between 4 and 6 PM CT. Hopefully everyone is able to go then. A couple of IMPORTANT NOTES:
-
To participate of the tour you MUST BE REGISTERED. To register you just need to fill-out the Doodle
form. Here is the link once again: http://www.doodle.com/v75wyuhxakwvqmh7.
DON'T FORGET to enter your name and SAVE.
-
To enter the headend you will have to SIGN AN NDA. I will send the NDA ahead of time. You can fill it out ahead of time or do so there.
-
Understanding that this is a live headend, serving signals to live customers in real time,
we will have to follow the rules outlined below in the headend, which I hope you will understand
and respect:
-
no cell phones
-
absolutely NO PHOTOGRAPHY
-
no food or drink
-
no chewing gum
-
hands in pockets at all times
-
No leaning on racks or equipment
-
We will try to commute using our own cars. I will have a car and can take 4 people with me. Matt Schmidt and Ed Boyd will have cars as well. Please let us know if you can provide a car to take
others. Seems that 2 more cars, for a total of 5 cars, should be enough.
Thanks, and have a great weekend!
<="" p="">
<="" p="">
|