Showing posts with label CMTS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CMTS. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Putting the "WHY" in Remote PHY

Author: Todd Gingrass, Solution Director – CCI Systems, Inc.

Todd Gingrass

As operators continue to look at facing the ever-increasing onslaught of data demand from subscribers, we must ask ourselves, “Is there a better way to do things?” We all have heard the unofficial definition of “insanity” as “doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result,” we can’t just keep going forward blindly doing things like node splits forever as it is not a sustainable practice doing it the way it has been done for the last 5-10 years .

Invoking a New Thought Process


Step back and look at the problems we are facing and what we can actually change. So often, the industry gets so caught up in the low level “geek factor” of all the great products and technologies developed, that we forget to ask ourselves, “What problem am I actually solving?  Am I deploying this because it is new and cool or does it make sense to solve an actual problem now or one we know is coming in the near-term future?”

One of those technologies with lots of buzz right now is Remote PHY (RPHY). It is one of a few competing technologies that live in the arena of Distributed Access Architectures (DAA). At its most basic, root definition, RPHY takes the QAM modulation/demodulation portion of the CMTS and separates it to a location outside of the CMTS. This function will now typically be handled directly in an HFC node in the field or a “shelf” type unit located in a hub or cabinet. The connection between the CMTS and the Remote PHY Device (RPD) is traditional Ethernet.  But we are not here to talk about the broad technology that makes up RPHY. More importantly, we need to talk about what the benefits are and what problems it can solve. 

It is important to first start by identifying some of the more pervasive problems that an HFC operator is currently facing. The number one question is “How will I deal with the ongoing, massive expansion of data bandwidth?” There is not a single operator in the US that is immune to dealing with this, but how the problem manifests for each operator can be very different.

Let Us Explain


Take the case of a rural operator that has multiple serving territories covered by multiple Headends/hub sites. Typically, each of these sites would end up with its own CMTS due to distance limitations of RF Optics performance and the DOCSIS protocol. Many times, in the past, we might have been able to get away with smaller CMTS at these locations due to a lower bandwidth demand. If we want to start slowing down node splits by employing forward-looking technology that is more efficient with RF spectrum like DOCSIS 3.1, this may require deploying a brand new, potentially larger CMTS that is capable of the protocol. This could become quite expensive. What if instead, we could centralize the functions of the CMTS and use nearly any type of IP network to interconnect to the sites in order produce the DOCSIS carriers via a RPHY shelf? If we can connect the sites to an existing network, leased wavelength or even a data circuit, we can run Remote PHY. From this example alone, we can see benefits of hardware reduction, power savings, support cost reduction and operational ease of only having a single CMTS. Not to mention achieving the goal of deploying the more forward-looking technologies that you set out to do which may have otherwise been too costly.

On top of this example, here are a few more benefits that we can see from Remote PHY:
  • By taking the RF QAM generation out of the CMTS, it turns the platform into an IP in and IP out piece of equipment. This typically allows the CMTS platform the ability to handle more bandwidth through it if it has the proper backplane and processing capability. This, in turn, allows an operator not to have to deploy as many individual CMTS units as in the past, thus saving valuable rack space, power, cooling and common control hardware along with management time and support and maintenance contracts.
  • By moving the PHY layer of the CMTS potentially out to the node, you can have a compounding effect on how much more efficient DOCSIS 3.1 is. DOCSIS 3.1 will run at higher modulation orders when SNR gets higher. When you take out any or all the typical RF Optical link and turn it into a digital IP link, you end up removing a sizable component of the SNR that can, in turn, lead to the higher modulations. Thus, having the capability of being able to push more data through the same amount of RF spectrum as before.
  • When looking at making an outside plant architecture change of cascade reduction of anything smaller than what the operator has today all the way down to Node + 0, the potential number of transmitters and receivers needed could potentially become overwhelming from a space and powering standpoint. In contrast, Remote PHY uses high-density Ethernet switching in place of an RF combining network and the Ethernet links in place of the RF optical links. This offers the potential to greatly reduce the space considerations needed.
  • There are another two benefits of using Ethernet as the transport for Remote PHY. The first is the ability to now potentially mesh the RPHY transport into an already existing long haul and/or metro IP network. This allows for a great efficiency of getting two benefits out of the same IP transport network. The second benefit of using Ethernet is the ability to gain the potential for true redundancy further out into the network due to the resiliency of many IP protocols.

Many of these benefits were realized recently by a customer of CCI Systems that deployed a fully converged CMTS and video deployment (CCAP) over Remote PHY into a serving territory that needed to now have 1 Gbps/s services utilizing DOCSIS 3.1. This operator needed to provide all their services for voice, video, and data over a single leased circuit. This proved to be a perfect application for Remote PHY as it allowed the operator to garner much greater efficiency in density of their CMTS, minimized the footprint of gear needed to be deployed in the serving territory and increase the modulation profile of the DOCSIS 3.1 carriers that were implemented, thus giving the operator more data throughput in the same amount of RF spectrum. 

CCI Systems worked with the operator from beginning to end on the project, starting with listening to the needs to understand the problem to solve. It was quickly determined that Remote PHY would provide the operator the best technical and financial solution for not only this opportunity but also for the future for growth. CCI Systems then completely designed and procured the entire end to end solution including the CMTS, IP switching architecture, video ingestion and delivery, Outside Plant nodes and passives (N=) in this case, but N+X works also), and any OSP facilities needed like cabinets and powering. Moving to the delivery phase, CCI deployed the entire solution while working very closely with the customer staff so they would be able to quickly take over the solution for day to day operations.

From a solution perspective, CCI and the operator relied on multiple platforms from Cisco. The Cisco cBR-8 was used as the CMTS platform along with the GS7000 node to provide the Remote PHY delivery in the plant. Cisco switching was utilized for aggregation of the Ethernet network.  CCI also integrated multiple other 3rd party items to complete the entire solution from Headend to outside plant.

To learn more about the "WHY" behind Remote PHY, reach out to CCI Systems at info@ccisystems.com or connect with the author Todd Gingrass.

Wednesday, October 7, 2015

Market Demand Determines Network Technologies



Why the ‘Cable’ Market is Primed for Opportunity

Author: Drew Kempen, Consulting Systems Engineer



CCI Systems CSE
Drew Kempen, CSE
Seemingly overnight, there is a major buzz around the cable market.  What is causing this buzz in a technology area that was apparently in serious peril not too long ago?  To understand this, one must understand cable history, the overall market and technology. 


Cable had seen arguably its largest growth period in the late 90’s to mid-2000s. The introduction of two-way internet capable systems in 1996, along with the demand and transition to HD content in the 2000s sparked this growth.  A massive undertaking of pushing fiber deep, building next gen architectures (anything less than N+6), and expanding bandwidth drove the network adaptation.  


Subscribers, all of the sudden, were being thrust into the digital age.  Analog began its slow death—but still played a part as a service.  HD content slowly became the primary customer choice and major differentiator.  Cable could offer much better speeds than the previous dial-up and DSL models.  The future looked bright.  


To account for growth in HSD/Data demand, cable introduced DOCSIS 3.0. This allowed for more than one channel per service group to be bonded together— offering a larger pipe and keeping service group sizes larger.  Most cable operators then sat back, made the necessary changes, went into operational mode, and watched customers roll in.  


But as with any technology industry, ‘promising futures’ arrive and are surpassed very quickly…

Fast forward to 2007 and the financial crisis.  The market crash hit technology and cable operators particularly hard.  Virtually everything regarding investment into the system was put on hold.  The ‘necessity’ to grow HD content from 200 channels to 300 channels began to seem…ridiculous.  The seemingly infinite amount of new channels popping up daily during the HD era disappeared overnight.  Cable went into a defensive mode.  Maintain and recoup.  Innovation stopped, plant investment halted, and growth became stagnant. 


This in turn affected the equipment and partner side.  Vendors scaled back on the big bet investments and R&D.  Contractors slowly disappeared.  As in any economic downturn, only the strong survived.  This trend also applied to cable operators as consolidations of many of the mid to smaller tier companies occurred.  


Then in 2008, everything changed once again, and would never be the same.  Netflix began streaming in November of 2008.  While there were sceptics because of the limited content at the time, Netflix became an instant success.  Particularly for people on a budget.  By this time, internet connectivity had finally overtaken video as the most important communication service required in the home.  Many people in the down economy had to pay for internet, but didn’t want to fork over the extra $50-100 per month for video.  Netflix provided a revolutionary and cost saving idea, and gave subscribers an experience better than anything they ever had in the past.  


It is very important to understand that up to this time, from the introduction of cable internet, one DOCSIS QAM channel per service group had sufficiently accounted for data traffic. Within 2-3 years, Netflix alone accounted for 50% or more of all internet traffic.  The revolution had begun.  Steadily, we began to see the demand for DOCSIS QAM per service group rise from 1-2 by 2010, 2-4 by 2013, 4-8 by 2015, etc.  Now the industry is looking at 32 channels and beyond over the next few years alone, and with smaller and smaller service group sizes.


 
Chart: DOCSIS QAM Growth Trends & Projections for constant service group size.


In addition to Netflix and streaming services, FTTx began to heavily roll out in the 2010s.  The ‘speed war’ had begun.  30 MB, 50 MB, 100 MB, 300 MB, 1 GB tiers!  Not only was keeping up with real customer demands a concern, but now a marketing war based on subscriber perception had begun.  


The problem many cable operators faced, was that cable technology at the time, would not be able to keep up with those speed requirements.  It was also apparent as they viewed the demand/impact hockey stick of QAM channel requirements, they were going to have significant issues keeping up with consumer demand—unless they continued to split nodes; over and over and over again.  This would cause rapid expansion in CMTS chassis requirements, optics, fiber, nodes, etc.  Not a viable option for any long term strategy or business model.


Major MSOs began to question whether they should abandon growing HFC at all and move directly to a FTTH architecture.  There seemed to be no good answer.  Moving to a FTTH architecture was a massive cost, change in technology, new HE’s, changing set-tops, re-educating maintenance crews, changing operating procedures, …new vendors, partners, contractors, etc.  In addition, the transitional process would be a nightmare.  On the flip side, investing in HFC to keep up with demand and competition appeared okay for a while; but seemed a lost cause in the long run. 

Fortunately, the few remaining thought leaders in the industry came together.  The result of this is DOCSIS 3.1, higher density chassis, remote Phy, 1.2 GHz gear, larger US splits, etc.  The foundations of this all arising in the 2012-2014 time frames.  The possibilities that these technologies would provide, modeled cable systems well beyond a 10-year time frame at a fraction of the cost of a full FTTx overbuild.  Adopting a hybrid New Next Gen HFC architecture with targeted PON not only extends that even further, but helps the longer term migration to fiber deeper becomes manageable and cost effective. 


These technologies help solve the bandwidth issue, speed requirements, scaling issue at the HE, and provide spectrum for next gen services such as managed IP, Cloud VOD, Cloud DVR, etc.   At this point, it was all a matter of the vendors and partners executing on that solution, equipment and software.  


Opportunities in Cable are back, and in a big way.  Major players in cable such as Comcast and Time Warner continuing to investment in HFC technologies.  These changes include Node splits, upgrades, CMTS replacement and scaling, D3.1, Remote Phy, IP video, Targeted PON growth, new build PON integration, etc.  


Over the next 10 years, the majority of cable operators will have:
  • Upgraded most if not all of their node and active components
  • Enhanced tap and passive networks
  • Migrated to node only
  • Growing CMTS capacity multiple times over
  • Introduced DOCSIS 3.1 and Remote Phy
  • Migrated services away from broadcast and traditional QAM to IP delivered services
  • Migrated portions of their network to true virtualization
  • Began process of migrating to full FTTX/PON

Vendors will be releasing new platforms and technologies at a rapid pace over the next few years.  The scale of changes in the network will rival, if not exceed the changes that took place in the late 90s to mid-2000s.  To achieve success during this transition, operators, vendors and partners need to work together—leveraging the strengths of each entity.  


CCI has the ‘across the network’ experience and expertise to help cable operators build a strategic migration solution for both the physical network and service strategy.  From strategy to design, installation, implementation, and Managed NOC & Call Center services, CCI is the ideal partner to help cable operators with transitioning their traditional video and HFC systems to the IP capable network of the future.

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

DOCSIS 3.1: Coming to a City Near You!


Concerns from across the country; DOCSIS 3.1 Basics and Beyond

Todd Gingrass, Cable and Media Solutions


Todd Gingrass



Recently over the last couple of months I’ve been on the road presenting the topic of DOCSIS 3.1 to different SCTE chapters throughout the country.  All were well attended, with many having multiple presentation sessions. Attendees ranged from large Tier 1 cable operators to small regional systems with various business challenges. Many questions and concerns were discussed, but a few common themes appeared at each event. 

  1. How the changes of adding a new encoding method, OFDM, to the past methods of TDMA/ATDMA/SCDMA would change their day to day activities and what they would need to learn. 
  2. The new ability for the system to increase and decrease the modulation level automatically based on the signal quality on the RF plant
We discussed these hot points in detail and provided the audience with a better understanding of the advantages of moving forward using these new methods. Some other concerns we were able to address were:
  • RF Plant return path bandwidth changes to 85 MHz and above and the associated migration scenarios
  • Potential for new meters and troubleshooting tools
  • Addition of powerful new RF plant performance statistics built into upcoming DOCSIS 3.1 certified modems and CMTS'

OFDM detailed view
Overall, the audiences were able to see that while new techniques and methods for monitoring and maintaining the systems would need to be adopted, the gains from the changes would be great and allow them do their daily job better and faster along with helping to improve subscriber experiences and satisfaction.

 Watch for Todd at your next SCTE chapter training or email him directly to learn more about DOCSIS 3.1