Re: [802.3_EPOC] another argument for MCS
For George…
From: "George Hart @ Rogers" <George.Hart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:George.Hart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: Thursday, October 11, 2012 11:29 AM
To: Marek Hajduczenia <marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx<mailto:marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx>>, "STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" <STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Cc: Matthew Schmitt <m.schmitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:m.schmitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: RE: [802.3_EPOC] another argument for MCS
Marek,
There is at least 100dB difference in received signal levels at the CNU drop connection between a mobile phone or femtocell in the home and a satellite in space.
Thanks,
George
From: Marek Hajduczenia [mailto:marek.hajduczenia@xxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 1:16 PM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] another argument for MCS
I was going to ask whether the next step would be also protecting against GPS signaling as well as satellite radio and such … it seems to me that it is the problem which has been solved in the past, as Rich points out.
Marek
From: Rich Prodan [mailto:rprodan@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 13:12
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] another argument for MCS
On the other hand, it is easier to avoid LTE interference by carrier nulling the small amount of spectrum impacted. This is also why premium services today are not placed in the 88 to 108 MHz FM band on many systems.
From: Tom Williams [mailto:T.Williams@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]<mailto:[mailto:T.Williams@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:58 AM
To: STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:STDS-802-3-EPOC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [802.3_EPOC] another argument for MCS
All-
Here is a another good reason to use different MCS’es: some homes will have LTE interference and will need a more powerful (and less efficient) FEC to overcome the ingressing interference.
Again, it makes little sense to force everybody to the lowest common denominator when the lowest comment denominator is low and the spread is high.
I personally think a big value of multiple MCS’es may be 1-1.8GHz downstream band. At these frequencies, the attenuation differences will be huge due to different cable lengths between the subscriber right off the node and subscriber at the end of the line. Once attenuation gets too high, S/N falls.
Tom Williams
Cablelabs
________________________________________________________________________
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