Motorola Docsis

Migration to Docsis 3.
Michael Gannon
Senior Technical Architect
Motorola Confidential Proprietary
MOTOROLA and the Stylized M Logo are registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office.
All other product or service names are the property of their respective owners. © Motorola, Inc. 2005
Agenda
How should I plan for future Docsis bandwidth needs?

( or, “When is supply more important than demand “ )
Docsis 3.0, M-CMTS, I-CMTS , What really is important.
Lessons learnt from existing channel bonding solutions.
Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Voice & Data Solutions
Carrier Usage Transitions
125 Carriers per FN
125
Analog
Switched
Broadcast
Digital
IPTV VOD
Digital
Broadcast
MPEG VOD
1 DOCSIS High Speed Data

Today time “Everything
On Demand”
HPCB – A bandwidth model for all services
H – Households Passed • The average bandwidth requirements to be supplied
to a Fiber Node (FN) for any service can be planned
as the product H*P*C*B of four factors:
H = Households per fiber node
750 Households per Fiber Node P = Penetration (subscribers per household)
C = Concurrency Ratio (supplied concurrently active)
P – Penetration ratio B = Bandwidth (peak bits per second)
• HPCB applies to any service:
– High Speed Data (HSD)
times 30% HSD = 225 HSD subs – Voice over IP (VOIP)
– Video On Demand (VOD) [MPEG or IPTV]
C – Concurrency ratio – Switched Broadcast (SB) [MPEG or IPTV]
• HPCB’s add per High Speed Data (HSD) service tier
• Concurrency C is the inverse of “overbooking”
times 1.0% – 1.0% C means 100-to-1 overbooking
– Worldwide HSD C range: 0.75 to 2.0%;
= 2.25 concurrent HSD streams – US Average C: 1.0% (1000 4M subs per DS QAM)
• Concurrency is a economic decision to supply.
B – Bandwidth – Wrong question: “What’s the demand for HSD?”
• It’s infinite
– Right question: “What shall I economically supply?”
times 8 Mbps HSD tier • Depends on competition: DSL and PON
= 18.0 HSD Mbps/FN
Typical 2006 HSD deployment: split one 40 Mbps DOCSIS QAM to two FNs

Typical 2004 HSD+VOIP Deployment
2004 Example HSD per FN:
H = 750 HH/FN df1
P = 0.20 D0
C = 0.01
B = 3 Mbps 2x8 U0
HPCB = 750 * 0.2 * .01 * CMTS U1 Fiber Node 1 D2.0 CM
3 Line U2
= 4.5 Mbps avg per FN U3 Fiber Node 2
Card
U4
U5 Fiber Node 3
U6
U7 Fiber Node 4
D1
Fiber Node 8
Fiber Node Average Supplied Capacity : 4.5 Mbps

Single Cable Modem Peak Throughput: 40 Mbps
38.8 Mbps / 4.5 Mpbs = maximum 8.6 FN per DS = 1:8 splitting

Typical 2006 HSD+VOIP Deployment
2006 Example HSD per FN:
H = 750 HH/FN df1
P = 0.30 D0
C = 0.01
B = 8 Mbps 2x8 U0
HPCB = 750 * 0.35 * .01 * CMTS U1 Fiber Node 1 D2.0 CM
8 Line U2
= 18.0 Mbps avg per U3 Fiber Node 2
Card
FN U4
U5 Fiber Node 3
U6
U7 Fiber Node 4
D1
Fiber Node Average Supplied Capacity : 20 Mbps

Single Cable Modem Peak Throughput: 40 Mbps
38.8 Mbps / 20 Mpbs = maximum 2 FN per DS = 1:2 splitting
PON Competition: 20 to 100 Mbps peak service.

D3.0 Downstream Channel bonding is required for 100 Mbps service.
As Bandwidth (B) increases, supplied
Concurrency (C) can decrease
C Observed concurrency data points:
Dialup (56K): 10%

ATT Frame Relay(1.544 Mbps): 2%
Cable HSD (6 Mbps): 1%
Liberty (30 Mbps): .67%
Japan PON (100 Mbps): 0.25%
B
“Endgame” Thought Experiment
HSD endgame: VOD Endgame:
100 Mbps peak to all subs “Everything On Demand” Network DVR; or
0.25% concurrency “What I Want When I Want” (WIWWIW)
H = 750 H = 750
P = 0.5 P = 0.75
C = 0.0025 C = 0.50 (?)
B = 100 Mbps B = 10 Mbps (2 SDTV+1 HDTV) (?)
HPCB = 94 Mbps/FN HPCB = 2800 Mbps/FN

or 2.5 DS QAM channels per FN VOD
or 73 (US) DS QAM channels per FN
About 5X supplied HSD in 2006 About 40X supplied VOD in 2006

Today: 100% MPEG VOD; Future: ??% IPTV
How do I economically increase
DOCSIS supplied bandwidth How do I economically transition from
by 5X or more? MPEG to IPTV VOD?
Key point: VOD bandwidth may be 30X the

bandwidth of HSD
HSD
2.5 QAMs per FN 73 QAMs per FN
EuroDOCSIS HSD endgame 94 Mbps requires 2.0 Euro channels EuroDOCSIS VOD endgame 2800 Mbps requires 57 Euro channels

CMTS DOCSIS 3.0 Feature Requirement
• MAC Layer • Network Management
– Downstream Channel Bonding – Diagnostic Log
– Upstream Channel Bonding – Extension of Internet Protocol
• Network Layer Data Records (IPDR) usage
– IPv6 support – Capacity Management
– IP Multicast (IGMPv3, SSM, QoS) – Enhanced signal quality
monitoring
• Security • Commercial Services
– Certificate Revocation Management – Layer 2 VPN’s
– Runtime SW/config validation – T1/E1 TDM Emulation
– Enhanced Traffic Encryption (AES)
– Certificate Convergence • Physical Layer
– Secure Provisioning – Switchable 5-85 MHz US Band
– S-CDMA Active Code Selection

What is, and what isn’t, important about
M-CMTS?
M-CMTS Goals
• “Independent scalability of CMTS functions from DS
PHY”
– Means: need to add DS channels without adding US
channels
• “Lower the cost to deliver video over DOCSIS service to
be competitive with today’s MPEG VOD”
– 2005 Incremental DOCSIS DS channel cost: $24K ASP for
2DS+8US CMTS blade = $12, 000 per DS channel
– 2005 Incremental MPEG VOD channel cost: $12K for 24-
channel MPEG EQAM = $500 per DS channel
• But with no rate limiting, scheduling, QOS, encryption, VOIP
compression, or RF switching

M-CMTS/ D3.0 Network Diagram
CMTS Core
DCs
Upstream
Edge
MPEG VOD NSI C

Server Regional M
Area
T 2.0 3.0
Network
S HFC CMs CMs
DEPI
CIN
GBE DTI
Switch DEPI DRFI
DEPI EQAM
M-CMTS: Modular CMTS
DTI: DOCSIS Timing Interface T-MPT
DEPI: Downstream External Phy I/F
GBE: Gigabit Ethernet
EQAM: Edge QAM MPEG EQAM STB
ERMI: Edge Resource Mgr I/F
DC: Downstream Channel ERMI
CIN: Converged Interconnect Network Edge Resource
Manager
What’s important and not for M-CMTS
• What’s important is that the two M-CMTS goals be met:
- De-coupling downstream and upstream capacity; and
- Lowering the cost of downstream capacity.
• What’s important is the adoption of the DEPI specification
by the EQAM industry.
– Enables a transition to DOCSIS IPTV with DEPI EQAMs.
• What’s NOT important is the concept of separating the
upstream PHY layer:
– Separation into an “upstream shelf” and definition of an
“Upstream Edge Physical Interface” (UEPI)
– Independent vendor implementations of “CMTS Core” and
“upstream shelf” MAC functions;

CMTS Migration
Traditional CMTS Integrated CMTS Modular CMTS

• Integrated CMTS • Modular CMTS Modules
• Integrated CMTS
Modules with Decoupled with Decoupled
Modules with Fixed Downstream and Downstream and
Downstream and Upstream channels Upstream channels
Upstream channels • Ex. xx QAM DS Module • Ex. xx QAM DS Module
• Ex. 2 DS and 8 US • Features High • Features Superior
Availability “Protected” Scalability with
Channels
bandwidth “Unprotected” bandwidth
• Features High •
• 2007 Deployment 2007 Deployment
Availability
“Protected”
Bandwidth
• Today’s CMTS

Recommendations
1. Economically introduce DOCSIS 3.0 bonding
DOCSIS SDV+VOD Carriers – Start with 3 or 4 carriers, non-adjacent if
“First Four Carriers” (EQAMs) possible.
– Split the carriers to multiple (4 or 8) fiber
Decrease splitting Increase carriers (at 1:1) nodes
– Re-use coupled I-CMTS cards for bonding
1:16 1:4 1:2 1:1 if possible
FN 1 2. Economically increase average supplied
DOCSIS capacity per FN
FN 2 • Start with decoupled “D-CMTS” if possible
• Split DOCSIS QAMs to fewer fiber nodes
FN 3 3. Integrate SDV+VOD and increase EQAM
Capacity as content (and hence
FN 4 Concurrency) increase
• Based on video features (e.g. CA)
FN 5 4. Economically transition from MPEG to IPTV
VOD
FN 6 • Use DEPI-standard EQAMs (with PSP
and DTI)
FN 7 • Support standardization of DIBA
• Transition D-CMTS to M-CMTS above 4
FN 8 to 8 DOCSIS QAMs (160->320 Mbps) per
FN
… … …
FN 16
Architecture Migration
Coupled Decoupled
DIBA
C-CMTS D-CMTS or M-CMTS
73 QAMs ?
Average supplied bandwidth per Fiber Node
2800 Mbps
8.0 QAMs
4.0 QAMs
2.0 QAMs 320 Mbps
1.0 QAMs 160 Mbps
0.5 QAMs 80 Mbps
40 Mbps
20 Mbps
2007 2008 2009 20xx ?

Channel Bonding Challenges
Real World View
What Does it Take to Deploy DS
Channel Bonding?
• Obvious
– Channel Bonding CMTSs and CMs
– Downstream Spectrum
• Less obvious
– Upstream Spectrum
– Subscribers’ Education
– Subscribers’ Equipment
• Re-configuration – at least
• Upgrade - possibility

Lessons Learned
• Performance expectations
– Raw throughput
– UDP Performance
– TCP/FTP Performance
• Supporting ‘Legacy’ CMs and ‘Channel Bonding’ CMs
– Overlay Network or Combined Network
– Balancing 100+ Mbps subscribers with “Normal”
subscribers
– New sizing concepts are needed
• Concurrency Rate
– New tools are needed
• How to handle voice
– Voice traffic goes as non-bonded
• No “sequence number”
Key Factors for FTP Performance
FTP Server
IP Network
Key Factors
1. Round Trip Time (RTT)
DOCSIS 3.0 or Pre-DOCSIS
2. TCP Window Size 3.0 Channel Bonding CMTS
3. Speed of the Slowest Link
4. Performance of the Client’s PC
HFC
FTP Client DOCSIS 3.0 or Pre-DOCSIS

3.0 Channel Bonding CM
GigaEthernet

RTT and TCP Window Size
100 Mbps
GigaEthernet
GigaEthernet
IP Network HFC
GigaEthernet
FTP Server
FTP Client
Time
Channel Bonding FTP
Max_FTP_Throughput =
(((‘TCP_window_size’ * 8) / ‘Link_Speed’) / RTT) * ‘Link_Speed’
Or just
((‘TCP_window_size’ * 8) / RTT)

Default Window Size
Standard RWIN Value (TCP

Operating System
Receive Window Size) in Bytes
Windows 95/98/98SE/NT 8K
Windows ME/2000/XP 16K
Windows XP SP2 64K
Windows Server 2003 64K
Macintosh OS X 32K
Linux Redhat 9 32K

FTP Throughput Vs.FTPRound
Throughput Trip Time (RTT)
100,000,000
90,000,000
80,000,000
< 6 msec < 22 msec

70,000,000
60,000,000
16,384
32,768
Bits/sec
50,000,000 65,536
131,072
262,144
40,000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
RTT - sec

Subscriber’s PC Configuration:
1. Increase the TCP window size ( >= 262,144)
a) Information and tools available off the WEB
i. Do a search for “TCP Tuning” on
a. Get about 1,200,000 hits
b) TCPOptimizer.exe
2. Settings -> Control Panel -> System Properties -> Advanced
a) Performance Setting
i. Visual Effects ==> “Adjust for Best Performance”
ii. Virtual memory ==> “4096 MBytes”
iii. Processor scheduling ==> “Background Services”
3. Enabling “Select ACK” can improve throughput performance with the
presence of packet lost.
4. Increase the client PC (and server if possible) performance
a) Processor speed
b) RAM size
c) Disk speed
d) BUS speed
Summary
Plan your future bandwidth requirements
Consider how to economically transition to Docsis 3.0

What can you do today at least cost
Consider what services & bandwidths you will offer

How do you educate your subscribers ?

Thank You


Motorola Docsis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Motorola Docsis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Migration to Docsis 3.

Motorola Confidential Proprietary

How should I plan for future Docsis bandwidth needs?

Docsis 3.0, M-CMTS, I-CMTS , What really is important.

Lessons learnt from existing channel bonding solutions.

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

1 DOCSIS High Speed Data

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Fiber Node Average Supplied Capacity : 4.5 Mbps

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Fiber Node Average Supplied Capacity : 20 Mbps

PON Competition: 20 to 100 Mbps peak service.

Dialup (56K): 10%

HPCB = 94 Mbps/FN HPCB = 2800 Mbps/FN

About 5X supplied HSD in 2006 About 40X supplied VOD in 2006

Key point: VOD bandwidth may be 30X the

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Motorola Confidential Proprietary

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

MPEG VOD NSI C

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Traditional CMTS Integrated CMTS Modular CMTS

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

2007 2008 2009 20xx ?

Motorola Confidential Proprietary

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

FTP Client DOCSIS 3.0 or Pre-DOCSIS

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Standard RWIN Value (TCP

Windows ME/2000/XP 16K

Windows XP SP2 64K

Windows Server 2003 64K

Linux Redhat 9 32K

< 6 msec < 22 msec

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Plan your future bandwidth requirements

Consider how to economically transition to Docsis 3.0

Consider what services & bandwidths you will offer

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

Motorola Proprietary Confidential

You might also like