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.

Network Security Through the Eyes of a 'Cable Guy'

News Flash! The world of the traditional cable service provider is changing...

Written by CCI Solutions Director, Drew Kempen

We all know about how consumers are consuming video via streaming; about the growth of DOCSIS and Internet services; about how the Internet of Things (IoT) is bringing massive amounts of new devices into the network; and about how almost everything we do as a consumer continues to migrate to the ‘cloud’. In short, everything is moving to ‘IP’. 

Unfortunately, growing the capacity and speed of the network isn’t the only area of concern that comes with this change. With IP, network security becomes a huge concern. Oftentimes, security of the headend-to-consumer pipeline has been overlooked in the traditional cable service provider environment. It is also not the sort of cost that many traditional service providers are used to stomaching. So how does someone who is not a security expert, or even an IP expert, wrap their heads around security? And how can you justify requesting funds to spend on security?

Why does my system need security?

There are a number of reasons operators need to begin to take security seriously. The most overt and publically familiar concern is being maliciously hacked. This is when hackers are accessing[G1]  your network or subscribers off your network to gather personal information, business data, insert malware, or hold you digitally hostage. We all hear the horror stories of companies being hacked, identity theft, computers being taken over, networks crashing, and so on.

CCI’s Security Solutions Director, Andy Erickson, points out “Ransomware has become the malware of choice for many hackers.” Ransomware is on its way to becoming a $1 billion market (Taylor, 2016).  This issue is not getting better, it is getting worse. Yet we still see many operators continuing to play Russian roulette by putting off investing in security solutions.

Click to Watch: Ransomware- The Anatomy of an Attack (Cisco on YouTube.com)

Second, attacks are happening all of the time. No unprotected network is safe. Every operator experiences these attacks and most don’t know they are happening at all. Imagine running a large business with hundreds of employees, products, revenue streams and costs. Now imagine the only report you get is dollars in and dollars out. Basically, you know how much money you are making. How easy would it be to hide fraud, wasted dollars, and identify critical aspects that allow you to know how each product and employee are performing? Network security today is like that. Your IP bandwidth is that business, and everything is hiding in the IP packets. It could be legitimate traffic, it could be malicious traffic, or it could be useless or DDoS generated traffic. You only see how much traffic is used. 

Examine the large DDoS attacks we have seen in the news lately about services such as Amazon, Netflix, and so on being taken down. These are not shut down by someone from Russia hacking their sites. The hackers hack entire groups of IP devices in people’s homes and program them to request access to an IP address all at one time. Take the massive outage that occurred late last year that affected the east coast of the United States. This was a DDoS attack against Dyn where the attackers used IoT devices to effect and attack (Newman, 2016). We are talking about refrigerators, watches, phones, tablets, thermostats, etc. This happens all the time and will happen with more frequency as more and more devices come online and are unprotected. 

How do I justify the cost?

Investing in security is not as unfamiliar to cable operators as many may think it is. Consider video encryption requirements and the challenges the presented for the entire industry from both a technical and financial aspect. This was to secure the content. This introduced millions of dollars of cost to operators simply to meet requirements. Today, security is different and more complex.  However, unlike the investment in encryption, these security technologies offer the opportunity for new and next-generation revenue generating services. 

For the sake of an example, let’s assume that when your traffic is at peak burst time, that 20-25% of that actually turns out to be malicious or attack oriented bursts. You provision your entire network because of peak time traffic usage. For a cable/DOCSIS operator, that is the difference between 16 and 20 DOCSIS QAM or 24 and 32 QAM. Without visibility into this traffic, huge amounts of money may be being spent to scale a network faster than it needs to be scaled. At first glance, these percentages seem high but look no further than last January’s Arbor DDoS report that clocked the largest ever DDoS attack at 500 Gbps[G2]  (Ungureanu, 2016).  Many respondents to the report saw an over 100 Gbps[G3]  attack during the year. Again, this problem isn't getting better, it is getting worse. As more and more devices come online, this percentage will inevitably rise. Now is the time to gain visibility into this and implement solutions to stop that traffic. [G4] [G5] 

Potential Monetization

There is also a value to the consumer. Next-generation firewalls provide a huge security benefit. Coming from a cable guy, using the term ‘firewall’ for this solution is very misleading. When most people think of firewall, they think of some mass marketed software that everyone has tried, yet we always seem to get viruses on our devices one way or another. Unfortunately, this has been the only layer of security most consumers have ever had. These next-gen network firewalls actually provide many of the benefits of a desktop security solution and more. Not that you would recommend not having desktop security on a computer, but Anti-Malware detection for the entire home is part of these network firewalls. It provides an additional layer of security for the entire IP stream to that home. 

Deep packet inspection is also a key feature of these network firewalls. Malicious programs and code are hidden within the IP packets. Unless you unwrap and analyze the contents of these packets, you will not be able to find the illegitimate source code. Next-generation firewalls provide this capability which helps protect your network and your subscribers. It is important to remember that as consumers information and data continue to migrate to the digital realm, it is not just data that needs to be secured, it is their life, intimate information, and identities. 

These values can translate into and additional revenue generating service to subscribers both commercial and residential. For example, let’s assume you have a 100 MB data tier. 

Option 1:

100 MBPS Class of service- Unlimited Data = $79.99/mo

Option 2:

100 MBPS Class of service- Unlimited Data= Whole home network security, firewall, malware protection, virus prevention, all-device protection = $89.99/mo

You could throw in an option 3 ‘business class’ that offers DDoS protection as well. The primary point is that you now have the capability to realize an additional revenue stream for an area of growing importance and relevance for your subscriber base. This is valuable especially considering the shrinking revenue and income generated by traditional video.

From a solution standpoint, there are many layers of security to be considered. For example, there are network-wide options that also help with the problems, such as Cisco Umbrella (OpenDNS) and Arbor DDoS detection, and mitigation solutions. 

CCI Systems CTO Matt Reath comments regarding the value of this solution; “In this case, a service provider can setup up their network and subscribers to utilize the open DNS solution so that DNS requests are scrubbed and requests protected. Arbor looks at all packets going in and out of the network and alerts and reacts to DDoS attacks. This combined with proper end-user education and in-home firewall systems creates a multi-layered approach to security.” This multi-layered approach is critical to offering a comprehensive solution for security. 

CCI’s Security Solutions Director, Andy Erickson proposes; “From a Service Provider’s perspective, security can be implemented in a phased approach:  crawl, walk, run.  Next-generation firewalls with Cisco’s Umbrella is a great starting point and can be the foundational framework for your security to build from.” In conjunction with this solution approach, CCI offers security consulting in a crawl, walk, run method. This starts with providing visibility into network attacks that are happening and security threat assessments of the current network. 

Summary

Network security should not be looked at as optional or as an ‘insurance policy’ any longer. It should be a requirement for the foundation of any long-term strategy. How many operators sink millions of dollars to make the physical layer redundant? Fiber links, line cards, switches, etc., all to increase reliability and minimize downtime. It’s time we all start understanding the preventative nature and benefits of enhanced network security solutions, as well as the asset they are to our systems and services we can offer to our subscribers.

For more information or to discuss your network’s security strategy, reach out to CCI on social media or contact us at info@ccisystems.com.

Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn

References

Taylor, H. (2016) Ransomware Spiked 6,000% in 2016 and Most Victims Paid the Hackers, IBM finds. Retrieved February 7, 2016 from www.cnbc.com
Newman, L. H. (2016) What we know about Friday’s Massive East Coast Internet Outage. Retrieved February 7, 2017 from www.wired.com.
Ungureanu, H. (2016) Worlds Largest DDoS Attacks Breaks Records, Clocks at Massive 500 gbps. Retrieved February 7, 2017 from www.techtimes.com.

Are we prepared for bandwidth growth?

Analyzing the 50% Growth Rate of Data

Author: Drew Kempen, Solution Director - Strategy & Consulting 

Since the inception of consumer data services, history has shown that a 50% data growth CAGR on a year-over-year basis is seen. At least when averaged out over that time period. That essentially breaks down to a doubling of traffic usage every 18 months and corresponds with Nielsen’s Law (Nielsen, 1998). This continual growth rate presents a significant challenge for operators who continue to need to migrate and scale their networks. One would think that a provider that provisions their network for 50% utilization of available capacity would be smooth sailing for awhile.  In relative terms, that may be correct but it still means you may be at 100% utilization in just 18 short months. The network never stops growing.

Much of this growth over the past decade has been the gradual transition of consumers to Over-the-top streaming services. Companies like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, YouTube and now SlingTV and DirectTV-Now have brought an entirely new experience to the subscriber. In addition, more and more data moves to the cloud. Information once stored on disks and hard drives such as video, pictures, data files, and backups are now becoming common cloud operations consuming larger amounts of downstream and upstream bandwidth. As people continue to migrate to this method of IP-delivered video, this growth trend of data usage will continue. 

One must ask the question however, will this ever slow down, or will it speed up? Many operators have a difficult time planning past 18 months. For those who are trying to be proactive, they are probably basing their growth on a 50% CAGR. Others, however, are being extremely proactive by rolling out 1 GB service initiatives today. Much debate has been had over the practicality of a 1 GB service. Other than marketing, what is the true need?  When will we really ‘need’ that much pipeline. 

At the doorstep is 4K and HDR technologies. The typical streams for these technologies can range from as low as 15 MBPS to over 30 MBPS and varies based on if it is true 4K, frames per second, and compression technologies. However, even at worst case and with a number of simultaneous streams, a household may only be pulling 100-200MB of traffic.  Certainly a hog on the aggregate bandwidth, but barely a dent in a 1 GB service. The evolution and adoption of these services via IP certainly seems to fit well into the 50% growth CAGR of data when looking at a 5-10 year period. 

For example: Assume that the peak utilization of data divided by the amount of subscribers is in the 2-3MB range today. This is certainly on the high side for most operators. At a 50% CAGR, this is how that average grows (shown in kbps per sub on average). 

2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024	2025
2000	3000	4500	6125	10125	15188	22781	34172	51258	76877

This growth trend and curve fits nicely with the 50% CAGR model that we have seen. As the big push to streaming services carried that curve for the last decade, it will continue to grow by adding additional subscribers as well as the resolution quality of the video advance. 

What could change the model?

There are some reasons for a concern of a disruption of this model. All of this growth has revolved around one thing that has remained somewhat unchanged. The viewpoint of all of these screens was fixed. It was a rectangle. While size does matter in the ABR world, it is still a small viewing window relegated to the size and shape of televisions and devices.  Virtual reality is changing that model. That small window into life now becomes a full 360 viewpoint. 

If you have been to CES the past few years, you have seen the rapid adoption and development of VR technology. At first, it seemed interesting but gimmicky and far from being useful. Then it looked like the next revolution for gaming. Now it looks like the next revolution for video. Today, VR is addictive and immersive. However, content is limited and video quality is far from SD, much less HD. However, the long-term end-game of VR is exactly that. A virtual replication of reality. A 360-degree view that has the same resolution as the human eye is capable. Now, we are a ways from being able to replicate that from a screen and camera standpoint; but the resolution we can achieve today is impressive. 

There is a great article to gather more information on this referenced below where the author points out that a VR stream in 4k would use approximately 300 MBPS (Begole, 2016). That is with some pretty hefty resolution. They also do the math that a 5.2GB stream would be required to come close to replicating the human eye experience. While we may be decades from a human eye experience, 4k VR is certainly realistically achievable in the next 5 years. This would be a truly disruptive service to the traditional 50% CAGR model if these capabilities mature and the demand increases. 

Before you discount the potential of this, consider this: In the 2016 Olympic games, some of the content was made available in VR. By 2020, a much larger amount of Olympic programing will be available in VR and much better quality. Now imagine being able to watch an Olympic event from a stadium seat or floor-side viewpoint in 360 HD. Then imagine watching a basketball game from the scoring table or Saturday night live as if you were sitting in the audience. Perhaps you will be able to buy a ticket to a Broadway show and never leave your living room. The applications and potential are awesome for consumers and stomach churning for network planners! 

Will VR take off? Will people want to wear a headset? Keep in mind that VR is essentially in the ‘Nintendo NES’ phase of its technology cycle. It is going to get a whole lot better and easier to use. 

All of the sudden, a 1 GB service doesn’t just seem like a marketing ploy any longer.  Thankfully, none of this is going to happen overnight and there will be visible signs of when it will happen and the adaptation will be gradual. It is worth noting however that there are signs today that need to be taken into account. We can already see the potential that this will have on the horizon. Do the network enhancements and investments you are making today leave room for migration, scaling and adaptation for this possible disruption? 

It will be interesting to see what happens with VR and if it will disrupt the growth model most network migration plans are accounting for.

CCI can help you ‘Future-proof’ the Network

Future-proofing is in many ways an inaccurate term. Future-resistant is a better term as you never know exactly what will happen in the future. However, the ability to plan for multiple scenarios exists today. This planning is not easy. There are multiple dynamics and metrics to consider that are not easy to analyze. It can take a lot of time and resources that many operators do not have, particularly the mid to smaller operators. For a traditional cable operator, it is all too easy to fall into the fix it when it breaks or shows signs of breaking mentality. 

Fortunately, CCI has the expertise, experience, and tools to help you plan across-the-network. From analyzing growth trends and service migration to architecture migrations.  From the core/route/transport aspect to DOCSIS, HFC, and FTTx technologies. 

For more information, reach out to Drew via Twitter at @drewkempen

References

Nielsen, J. 1998. Nielsen’s Law of Internet Bandwidth. Retrieved January 25^th from www.nngroup.com.

Begole, B. 2016. Why the Internet Pipes will burst when VR takes off. Retrieved January 17^th from www.forbes.com.

The Benefits of DOCSIS 3.1

Author: Drew Kempen, Consulting Systems Engineer

DOCSIS 3.1 has finally arrived! After years of talk and development, we are finally beginning to see the initial roll-outs of this next-generation technology. A few years have passed since the benefits of DOCSIS 3.1 were touted. 

Are those benefits still relevant today? It's worth revisiting.

In order to fully understand the benefits of DOCSIS 3.1, it is necessary to understand the boundaries of DOCSIS 3.0. DOCSIS 3.0 was a transformational technology in its own right and time. It provides the capacity to provide up to 1 GB of data to a service group, the ability to offer a high class of service, and provides many features and functionality that help operators with managing the customer, reporting, and reliability. 

Over time, the strengths of DOCSIS 3.0 become its weakness. The ability to achieve 1 GB downstream with up to 32 QAM becomes a limitation. Long-term bandwidth projections predict that DOCSIS 3.0 will begin to reach maximum capacities as soon as 2019 (without continuing to scale down service group sizes). In addition, competition driving 1 GB classes of service has accelerated the need for something beyond DOCSIS 3.0. The once high service group capacities of 3.0 platforms are now no longer enough. As service groups migrate to smaller and smaller groups of homes passed to manage bandwidth availability, more and more ports are required. The continual scaling of chassis, optics and other equipment to accommodate this growth becomes unsustainable. 

To put this scale into perspective, some operators have said they will need to split nodes from 4 to 10x what they are today over the next 10 years. And this is with the full capacity used on 3.0 chassis. The result would be 10x the CMTS chassis, 10x the optics, and 10x the nodes. Facilities, rack space and power requirements cannot scale with this growth. 

For a time, these inevitabilities were pushing many operators to consider a wholesale infrastructure transition to FTTH and PON technologies. The challenge with this was the complete overhaul of the entire network from video, to data provisioning, to OSP cabling and equipment to CPE. The cost, technology and knowledge change and disruption to the customers (and roadsides) made this a very unattractive option.

Enter DOCSIS 3.1. The first problem solved is the 32 channel limitation. DOCSIS 3.1 provides the ability to bond much larger groups of spectrum together to provide a true 1 GB Class of service and beyond. This also assists in the scaling problem. Whereas before, node segmentation would often be required when groups meet the 32 QAM limitation; the ability to use the full spectrum for data removes that requirement. 

DOCSIS 3.1 also allows for enhanced spectral efficiency. For math purposes, consider that a 3.0 256 QAM channel provides approximately 40 MB of throughput. DOCSIS 3.1 uses Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) technology that allows QAM modulations to reach 1, 2, 4k and beyond. A 1k QAM provides approximately 50 MB of throughput or a 25% increase in the same amount of spectrum. When you combine this capability with distributed access architectures (DAA), we see added improvement resulting in 4k QAM modulation and beyond. Therefore, DOCSIS 3.1 provides the bandwidth with more ‘bang for its buck’. 

High level-comparison features and capabilities of Next-Gen 3.1 platforms vs legacy 3.0. *Numbers may vary slightly by vendor chassis

Originally, the new DOCSIS 3.1 and DAA technologies were designed with smaller and smaller cascades in mind. However, testing has shown that improvements can be made over some of the longer cascades that exist today. For example, it is possible to achieve 1024 QAM where 256 QAM currently exists. This improved performance continues to increase as you get down to smaller and smaller cascades. 

Addressing the Upstream

As data rates increase, the upstream continues to become more and more of a choke point. Studies suggest that the upstream capacity should be 10% of the highest class of service offered. For example, for a 1 GB service to be fully functional, approximately ~100MB of upstream throughput is required. As larger and larger data pipes are brought to each service group, the upstream limits will be pushed. DOCSIS 3.0 allows for a 5-85 upstream, allowing room for growth to handle this change. DOCSIS 3.1 pushes the split to 5-200 which allows for HFC systems to theoretically achieve a GB symmetrical service. 

The Importance of DAA 

DAA architectures such as Remote Phy or Remote Mac/Phy are inseparable from DOCSIS 3.1 when discussing the benefits next-gen DOCSIS platforms. While 3.1 chassis do traditionally offer a higher amount of port density in a chassis, this still becomes a limitation of the box. The next generation of CCAP platforms have more throughput potential than the physical RF output limitations can take advantage of. DAA becomes extremely valuable in that it removes that limitation by providing a digital link to the node itself, eliminating the limitation of physical RF ports. This also provides better link performance which continues to compliment the ability to achieve higher orders of modulation (better throughput performance across the same amount of spectrum). 

Improvement in MB throughput of spectrum by leveraging higher orders of modulation made possible by DOCSIS 3.1 and DAA. 

Perhaps the greatest benefit of DOCSIS 3.1 is that it dramatically extends the life of the HFC network and physical architecture. By extending the life of the physical infrastructure, it extends the life of all the assets of the network—from the video platform, existing CMTS chassis and provisioning systems, optical infrastructure, OSP, and CPE. 

The new urgency of a long-term plan

DOCSIS 3.1 in many ways did swoop in and save the day, but it also brings to light a flaw and errors that cannot be made again. For nearly a decade, many cable operators got trapped in operational mode without a long-term strategy. Had 3.1 not come along, the push to get to FTTH would be exploding at a rate that the supply cannot provide. 3.1 has brought new life to existing infrastructure and has allowed for a more graceful migration to fiber deep, higher bandwidth capacities, system upgrades, service migration and virtualization. All of these solutions need to be executed with an eye on the longer term future, to ensure that the things we do today compliment the needs of tomorrow instead of simply extending the limits of the past.

Bringing Intelligence to the Cable Plant

Written by: Todd Gingrass, Director of Cable and Media Solutions 

As cable operators, for years we have tried to be proactive about plant maintenance to keep services working at optimal levels and our subscribers happy. However, over the years our perception of proactive plant maintenance has mutated. A decade ago, performing 100% plant sweep and leakage detection was the go-to method for preventing outages and impairments. While that thought process was not incorrect, we all know the reality of it. Not enough time, people and resources. Staying on top of the day-to-day problems had been enough to keep us reactive in our maintenance process, making a full proactive sweep a pipe dream.

We know that a marginally well maintained plant will typically only have issues in about 50% of the actual sweep coverage. What if we could get that 50% of time back?  How would that change the bottom line as an operator? 


Getting out from behind

So how do we break that cycle of always being behind? It is easy to say we are too busy to get out and be proactive, but the reality is much more difficult. 

• What if we could be proactive and not have to physically “get out there”? 
• What if we could harness available data from the plant and mix that with decades of good old cable know-how to identify portions of the plant that need the most help? 
• What if that could help me prioritize my day so when time is spent, it produces the most valuable results?

The answer, it’s all possible today!

Cable modems have been able to tell us a lot about plant performance for quite some time. As an industry, we have been slow to realize and take advantage of these technological advancements. While it is by no means “simple” to make all of this work, it is worth it on the backside.  

The new generation of modern intelligence

During the later stages of DOCSIS 3, modems on the market were able to capture the entire forward bandwidth—not just the original “sliding window” of 40 or 80 MHz, but the entire spectrum from around 50 MHz to 1 GHz. If this “capture” sounds familiar, it should. It’s basically a visualization of the frequency response of the forward bandwidth, otherwise known as… you guessed it, a basic sweep response.

 

With the new DOCSIS 3.1 standard out and vendors now going through certification, this and many other maintenance tools have been built into both CMTS and cable modems. Imagine being able to see the sweep response of your entire plant from a computer without ever leaving the office. Add on top of that, the fact that before we would typically sweep amp to amp, but now we are basically sweeping modem to modem. You can now see down to the tap where an impairment might present itself.

Actionable intelligence  

The prior example is only one of the potential tools that is or soon will be available to us as operators. Now imagine automating those steps so that information can be acted upon immediately, rather than having to spend hours analyzing and prioritize large amounts of data. We could really start to affect the days of our plant staff, allowing them to increase their productivity and get back to being preventative. This modification of how we view and handle plant maintenance will have a great impact on our real goals: 

As an operator, CCI understands how hard it is to stay ahead and offer the great services that we promise our subscribers. That’s why we have taken our 60+ years of industry experience and changed the game by building these types of tools. We use them ourselves and have seen first-hand how taking a truly proactive approach positively impacts our business.  

If you’re interested in discussing Managed Services for your network, reach out to CCI or follow us on social media.

Facebook | LinkedIn | Twitter

Market Demand Determines Network Technologies

Why the ‘Cable’ Market is Primed for Opportunity

Author: Drew Kempen, Consulting Systems Engineer

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.