Are You Ready for DOCSIS 3.1? - broadbandtechreport.com · Are You Ready for DOCSIS 3.1? - broadbandtechreport.com

Ó 2016 Incognito Software Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.

Are You Ready for DOCSIS 3.1? The Future of Cable Technology and How to

Prepare Your Network

An Incognito White Paper

Ó 2016 Incognito Software Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Page 2 of 13

Are You Ready for DOCSIS 3.1? ContentsIntroduction ........................................................................................................................ 3Bandwidth Capacity: The Driver for 3.1 ....................................................................................... 3

What Does this Mean for Service Providers? ............................................................................. 4DOCSIS 3.1 Technical Advantages ............................................................................................ 4

Error Correction ................................................................................................................ 4Modulation ...................................................................................................................... 5Variable Modulation Profiles ................................................................................................. 5Multicarrier Transmission ..................................................................................................... 6Increased Spectrum Utilization .............................................................................................. 7

The Future of DOCSIS ........................................................................................................... 7Immediate Challenges ........................................................................................................ 7Improving the Standard ...................................................................................................... 8

DOCSIS 3.1 and the Race to Fiber ............................................................................................ 9Greenfield Deployments ...................................................................................................... 9Brownfield Deployments ................................................................................................... 10

Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 10Glossary of Terms .............................................................................................................. 11

Are You Ready for DOCSIS 3.1?

Ó 2016 Incognito. All rights reserved. Page 3 of 13

Introduction A decade after DOCSIS 3.0 launched, CableLabs has extended the specification with a massive capacity boost to support next-generation applications and usage needs. The Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) version 3.1 will provide more bandwidth capacity and clear technical advantages to network operators and broadband users alike; however, there will also be challenges. Making DOCSIS 3.1 part of the procurement process is essential for cable MSOs to stay ahead of the curve and remain competitive. This will become even more essential as operators shift to access technologies that provide Gbps service for their customers as the capacity demand continues to grow with the adoption of OTT services and IoT deployments within the customer's home or office.

Bandwidth Capacity: The Driver for 3.1 In the decade since the CableLabs DOCSIS 3.0 specification was released, bandwidth demand has continued to grow unabated. The rise of over-the-top (OTT) content, along with an explosion of WiFi services, cloud applications, and the burgeoning Internet of Things (IoT) has meant an even greater reliance on Internet networks than ever before. Butter’s Law states that optical transmission speeds are doubling every nine months. But how does that compare to the latest specification of DOCSIS? Is it keeping up? From 1997 to 2006, downstream capacity grew from 38Mbps of DOCSIS 1.x to up to 1Gbps of DOCSIS 3.0 with 32 bonded downstreams. With the latest DOCSIS 3.1 specification, this capacity has reached 10Gbps.

What has CableLabs provided in the latest revision of the DOCSIS specification, and are these capabilities sufficient motivators for operators to upgrade today? At the most basic level, DOCSIS 3.1 has boosted bandwidth capacities from 1Gbps downstream to 10Gbps and allows 100Mbps upstream to 1Gbps. The standard is backwards-compatible with the previous generation and even coexists with networks running DOCSIS 3.0.



Although this is a significant improvement over the previous iteration, the bandwidth growth rate is roughly half of the prediction from the aforementioned Butter’s Law. However, using a DOCSIS 3.1 modulation of 4096-QAM allows for just north of 64.32Mbps while the previous capped modulation of 256-QAM is only able to achieve a theoretical rate of 42.88Mbps. This has a theoretical advantage of 50% increase of data capacity using the same 6Mhz channel. In reality, the two numbers end up being 54Mbps and 38.81Mbps respectively due to DOCSIS overhead and spectral efficiencies (the information rate that can be transmitted over a given bandwidth). How is this all achieved? Spectral efficiencies of higher order modulations. Using 256-QAM as a benchmark — the highest modulation available in DOCSIS 3.0 — the spectral efficiencies can be compared using this formula:

bandwidth = rate* x log2(modulation) (*where 256-QAM rate as defined by the ITU-T standard J.83 (12/07) at 5.361 Msym/s.)

What Does this Mean for Service Providers? DOCSIS 3.1 has the potential to enable a 10x bandwidth capacity increase over DOCSIS 3.0. Given the insatiable appetite that subscribers are showing for bandwidth consumption, this increased capacity is essential for cable operators to continue to provide a high quality of service in the future. Clearly, enabling a 50% increase of data capacity is no minor feat for a service provider. The advantages include faster, more reliable service speed and an increased capacity to add additional users to networks. While many operators still use DOCSIS 2.0 equipment, an upgrade to DOCSIS 3.1 will extend the life of the outside plant and deliver a better quality of experience (QoE) for customers. Essentially, although there are other technical advantages to DOCSIS 3.1 (which will be explored later in this white paper), it is the increased throughput that should spur network operators into action and is the reason why DOCSIS 3.1 spectrum planning and plant upgrades should be part of the MSO roadmap.

DOCSIS 3.1 Technical Advantages DOCSIS 3.1 has the potential to enable technological advantages, such as a 10x capacity increase over DOCSIS 3.0; however, upgrading does present some challenges. It is therefore necessary to consider potential impacts while examining the technical aspects and benefits of DOCSIS 3.1.

Error Correction All previous versions of DOCSIS used forward error correction (FEC) to deal with the bit error rate (BER), the rate at which errors occur in the signal due to degradation. However, DOCSIS 3.1 increases efficiency with additional error correction methods. In DOCSIS 3.0, the FEC algorithm used was Reed Solomon (RS). This provided a decent coding gain of approximately 6dB compared to the un-encoded stream and in North America, this was coupled with Trellis Coded Modulation (TCM), for an extra 2dB gain.



During the development of the DOCSIS 3.1 standard, the CableLabs committee evaluated additional error correction methods as a means to improve the overall efficiencies. One of the additional FEC technologies explored — currently used in WiMax, WiFi (802.11n), and Digital Video Broadcasting — was Low Density Parity Check (LDPC). Although LDPC is more computationally expensive (though less intensive as Turbo Codes), modern application-specific integrated circuit and DSP/SoC are sufficiently powerful to easily add this as the FEC mechanism, providing options at both the headend and CPE. If the DSP or FPGA is sufficiently powerful, this LDPC could be enabled via a software upgrade — and several CCAP vendors have already taken advantage of this. CableLabs choice of LDPC has yielded approximately a 6dB gain over DOCSIS 3.0 Reed Solomon (RS) method, shrinking the gap to the theoretical Shannon Limit at only 1dB for the spectral efficiency vs. signal-to-noise ratio. As a result, LDPC provides near optimal FEC method with marginal increase in complexity and the efficiencies provided by LDPC saves about 2bps/Hz. Essentially, this means that a 6MHz downstream channel can effectively transmit an additional 12Mbps.

Modulation Before DOCSIS 3.1, the maximum modulation available was 64-QAM and 256-QAM for upstream and downstream respectively. With the introduction of LDPC FEC (see the above section), what used to require a 27dB signal-to-noise ratio now only requires a 22.5dB signal-to-noise ratio. With these increased efficiencies comes the availability to add some higher order modulation. An alternative way to look at the impact of the FEC is using the following example: the required signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) for 1024-QAM using LDPC is the same as 256-QAM using RS when combined with TCM. This has enabled the existing plant to support higher order modules. As such, DOCSIS 3.1 has added support for up to 4096-QAM with future optional 8192-QAM and 16384-QAM in the downstream while the standard now supports 1024-QAM and future optional 2048-QAM and 4096-QAM in the upstream. As discussed earlier in this paper when investigating spectral efficiencies, the overall bandwidth is tied to the modulation. The important factor is that with LDPC and OFDM (Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing; which will be discussed in detail in the Multicarrier Transmission section of this document) combined, the required signal budget can be lowered at higher order modulations to fit within where the cable plant commonly reaches most modems. Essentially, this makes 4096-QAM quite attainable as the SNR threshold is only 36dB, capturing the majority of devices in today’s plant.

Variable Modulation Profiles In addition to supporting higher order modulations in DOCSIS 3.1, the standard now allows for an outside plant operating with multiple modulation profiles. Previously, operators were required to choose a modulation profile that would provide service to all the cable modems in the plant, which usually meant choosing a modulation based on the cable modems who had the lowest SNR. Even if the outside plant could support a higher modulation, operators would still have been limited to 256-QAM as defined by the standard. With DOCSIS 3.1, it is possible to use multiple modulation profiles, providing lower QAM modulation for those with modems with a lower SNR and higher order modulations for modems with a higher SNR. Assuming a typical gaussian or uniform distribution with a mean of 36dB



and 2dB deviation, we would see an improvement of 35.8% network efficiency improvement when using multiple modulation profiles with DOCSIS 3.1.

Given a uniform distribution of devices in your network, the SNR through DOCSIS 3.1 is able to use higher order modulations for higher throughput. This model has been validated in a production environment with 20mm CMs, courtesy of Dave Urban of Comcast.

Multicarrier Transmission One of the most important contributions in DOCSIS 3.1 was the introduction of Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM). OFDM is based on the idea of frequency-division multiplexing, but the multiplexed streams are considered parts of a single stream. The bitstream is split into parallel data streams that are each transferred over its own sub-carrier; which are summed to form an OFDM signal. OFDM may be new to DOCSIS, however it has been used for many applications including PLC, WiFi, and cell networks. What this means for DOCSIS is that subcarrier spacing could potentially be 25kHz wide instead of 6MHz. This equates to a 960-QAM sub-carrier only requiring 24MHz of bandwidth. In DOCSIS, an adaptive equalizer with 24 taps covers 4.5 µs per 6Mhz channel. OFDM is simpler: a single guard interval is added which is generally set as the longest expected echo. Assuming as high as 2% bandwidth per guard band pair, this change will save approximately 6% per 24Mhz of OFDM space. Additionally, the OFDM subcarriers can be bonded inside a block spectrum that could be as large as 192MHz, which theoretically supports 1.99Gbps. This has the added benefit of being able to leverage up to 10% efficiencies at the band edge on digital channel. By combining OFDM and multiple modulation profiles, the channel bandwidths can be assigned to match exact real-time subscriber demand and/or channel conditions. There is more to the new standard than just the spectral efficiencies of OFDM being combined with an



LDPC FEC (also referred to as COFDM). Rather than mapping 6 or 8 bits to a symbol (as occurred with the earlier standard), DOCSIS 3.1 at 4096-QAM maps 12 bits to each data subcarrier in the OFDM symbol highlighting the increased capacity the standard affords.

Increased Spectrum Utilization In addition to higher order and variable modulation profiles, improvements in forward error correction, and spectrum efficiency, DOCSIS 3.1 also has increased the RF domain, resulting in additional capacity. The upstream frequency range is from 5MHz to 204MHz, increased from the prior limit of 42MHz. Likewise, the downstream has also increased, starting at 258MHz and spanning to 1218MHz, optionally growing to 1794MHz. This increased spectrum utilization does affect MoCA, which previously operated at frequencies higher than DOCSIS used. As a result, operators will need to ensure that filters in the range of 860MHz to 1.7GHz are properly in place at the customer premises, otherwise the MoCA signal will interfere with DOCSIS 3.1 service in the tap if the operator is using that frequency range. Some have even suggested that two F-connectors might be in the future for the gateway to enable full capacity for the respective frequency bands. One of the tenets of DOCSIS 3.1 is to provide a backwards-compatible framework. As a result, CableLabs has chosen to preserve downstream channels below 258MHz for legacy mode. This provides a mechanism for operators to deploy a hybrid SC-QAM and OFDM without having to service to an all OFDM deployment in one step.

The Future of DOCSIS What does the future hold for DOCSIS and what will the outside plant of tomorrow look like? There have been significant improvements in capacity and reliability due to technical advances enabled by each successive update to the DOCSIS standard. Over the next few years, wide-scale commercial adoption of DOCSIS 3.1 is expected. But what happens next — and how will it impact the industry?

Immediate Challenges While there are clear technical advantages to adopting DOCSIS 3.1, the specification also raises a number of challenges in the immediate future for cable MSOs. One of the challenges relates to Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM), the new multi-carrier transmission enabled by DOCSIS 3.1. This issue is that clipping may occur due to high peaks in the waveform when applied with nonlinear amplification. Digital Video Broadcasting — Terrestrial (DVB-T) employs two techniques to reduce the peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) in its application of OFDM:

1. Active Constellation Extension (ACE) in the QAM carriers and 2. Tone Reservation (TR)

TR directly cancels out peaks in the time domain using simulated impulse kernels made of the reserved sub-carriers in the OFDM signal, while ACE helps reduce the PAPR by extending outer constellation points in the frequency domain. These approaches are complementary and both applicable for DOCSIS 3.1, as TR is used in low order modulations and ACE is used in the high order modulations. In conjunction, they provide a gain of approximately 2dB. However, as



with forward error correction (FEC), there is a cost to using these techniques. In this case, there is a small average power increase and at most 1% served sub-carriers. The second major constraint of OFDM is that the channel bandwidth has to be more than the modulation rate in samples per second in order to prevent inter-symbol interference. This is the orthogonal condition, which means that spectral efficiency improvements can only be gained by using higher order modulation at the cost of lower noise and nonlinearity tolerance. This may seem like just a technical requirement; however, it may have a large impact on operators — it is directly related to noise ingress in the outside plant, as well as length of the last mile to the home. For many operators, this means evaluating aspects of the plant architecture, potentially leveraging R-PHY or upgrading areas to achieve higher modulation profiles. A third challenge relates to the use of MoCA devices with the increased spectrum utilization of DOCSIS 3.1. Operators will need to ensure that filters are in place in the range of 860MHz to 1.7GHz to avoid the MoCA signal interfering with DOCSIS 3.1 service. For operators, it is an ideal time to install a tap, to address this MoCA spectrum interference, when deploying MoCA WiFi extenders at a customer premises or upgrading a gateway to a DOCSIS 3.1 compatible one. The final constraint relates to cost. Clearly, the procurement of new equipment — such as headends and CPE gateways — will not be cheap. It stands to reason that this should be part of the regular procurement process so that costs are absorbed as part of regular equipment upgrades; however, there is no denying that there will be some costs for MSOs to bear.

Improving the Standard Spectral efficiencies could be improved using a new approach called SEFDM (spectrally efficient frequency division multiplexing), which effectively compresses the subcarrier spacing while maintaining the modulation rate and system performance. SEFDM can be viewed as an improvement over OFDM as it adopts the same subcarrier approach but intelligently packs the symbols in optimal dimensional space, interleaving the OFDM signal effectively shrinking the spacing between adjacent sub-carriers. There are several papers which have shown between 20% and 25% improvement in spectral efficiencies with negligible impact on required SNR. All this does come at a cost, with increased complexity at the receiver and transmitter; however, according to Moore’s Law, about every two years the computation power per unit price doubles. In other words, the computing power should be available to support this digital multi-carrier modulation method, and more. With that available processing power we will undoubtedly see improvements in the overall spectral efficiencies. Additional improvements in spectral efficiency can be achieved by transitioning from traditional analog optics to digital optics in the fiber segment of the HFC network. Analog optics, utilizing amplitude modulation of the optical signal, has been used in HFC networks since the first DOCSIS deployments. By moving some, or all, functionality of the DOCSIS physical layer (PHY) to the fiber node as with R-PHY or D-CCAP architectures, the optical signal can utilize digital modulation, thus eliminating:

• Impairments that plague analog optics • High operational costs associated with maintaining a well-balanced analog HFC plant • Dependence on distance • Noise and signal strength preventing higher order modulation

Digital optics have been shown to support higher order modulation levels due to the superior noise performance, allowing cable operators to make better use of DOCSIS 3.1



technologies. Looking even further into the future, certain CMTS and CCAP vendors have demonstrated that DOCSIS 3.1 technology can utilize an even greater amount of the RF spectrum available on the HFC network, well beyond what the current standards support. One approach to achieve higher throughput is to use R-PHY architecture and push the fiber node deep enough into the HFC network to eliminate all amplifiers in a N+0 configuration where the RF Coaxial segment becomes a last-mile drop to the home. Earlier this year CableLabs announced a full-duplex project which would leverage Time Division Duplexing (TDD), as used with G.Fast, and combine with the Frequency Division Duplexing (FDD) currently used with DOCSIS 3.1. This would allow the same spectrum to be used for both downstream and upstream. This has a strong technical likelihood of success with claims of full symmetric 10Gbps on 1GHz HFC plants, and it will be interesting to watch this project unfold to see its impact on the headend and the outside plant.

DOCSIS 3.1 and the Race to Fiber Increasing bandwidth demands, gigabit pressures, aging infrastructure, increasing OPEX, and decreasing average revenue per user (ARPU) are all contributing factors in the race towards fiber in the cable world. Fiber-to-the-x (FTTx) offers far more bandwidth, reliability, flexibility, security, and longer economic life than alternative technologies. It is more expensive to build but cheaper to operate and maintain than copper. Butter’s Law highlights the fact that fiber capacity is growing at a faster rate than copper, and perhaps more importantly, with this higher capacity FTTx subscribers often spend 30-40% more per month than other subscribers due to the greater number of options and premium services available. Unlike fiber connections, copper and wireless last-mile connections have inherently limited capacity which may restrict operators from fulfilling the increasing bandwidth demands of their subscribers in the long term. To cut costs of implementing new fiber lines, many service providers use fiber to get close to homes and then employ copper for the last 100 to 1,000 feet. Although DOCSIS 3.1 and G.fast are able to deliver Gbps speeds, the real advantages come when backhauling fiber, particularly FTTdp for G.fast. There are many encapsulation methods which also allow operators to keep much of the existing B/OSS stack such as cable providers using DPoX or RFoG. This allows operators to blend multiple access technologies while maintaining a consistent back-office. Clearly, there are advantages when leveraging fiber technology. The expectations and processes may differ between greenfield and brownfield deployments — but DOCSIS still has a role to play in each scenario.

Greenfield Deployments Optical fiber is the most obvious choice in greenfield deployments. There are several technologies that combine DOCSIS with fiber aimed at operators who have both pure HFC and pure fiber networks. One approach used by many operators is RF over Glass (RFoG), which allows operators to leverage existing investments in provisioning OSS systems, headend, and subscriber equipment. As such this is an extremely attractive approach while transitioning the plant to fiber. However, unless combined with DOCSIS 3.1 with higher modulation capabilities and larger spectrum utilization, or if leveraged for future optical node splits, the customer would essentially see the same bandwidth capacity. RFoG in itself does not provide any additional enhancements besides lower OPEX, reliability, QoS and potential growth capacity.



To provide additional capacity, operators also have the option of using DPoG and DPoE — DOCSIS Provisioning over GPON/EPON. Both options offer operators similar training cost savings while leveraging the existing DOCSIS provisioning OSS stack, although these options require new equipment at both headend and subscriber level. DPoG provides service at about 2.5Gbps downstream and 1.25Gbps upstream, while DPoE (using 10G-EPON) can support 10Gbps downstream and 1Gbps upstream. Similar to the DOCSIS standard, PON standards are rapidly improving, effectively doubling every nine months. Using time wavelength division multiplexing passive optical networking (TWDM PON — also referred to NG-PON2), operators can already reach 40Gbps using wavelengths that specifically avoid interference from GPON, 10G-PON, and RFoG on the same fiber line. Using a DOCSIS overlay, the ONTs appear the same as cable modems in terms of provisioning and setting up services.

Brownfield Deployments Recent advancements in fiber technology have changed the deployment and architecture focus for cable operators. Rather than requiring a completely new physical infrastructure and logical architecture, operators can leverage the benefits of fiber using their existing infrastructure. In particular, R-PHY and D-CCAP enable operators to feed a remote node with fiber to distribute the signal over existing HFC infrastructure to the home. When combined with increased spectrum utilization, spectral efficiencies, and possible high order modulation of DOCSIS 3.1, digital R-PHY provides a cost-effective means to dramatically increase network capacity while investing in a fiber backbone. PON is the endgame.

Conclusion The number of options for cable operators to achieve gigabit speeds has grown drastically in a short amount of time. Some options are more applicable for greenfield deployments while others are strategic investments for long-term capacity growth in brownfield areas. CableLabs, ITU, and SCTE continue to innovate and benefit from each other's developments. Because these innovations continue to make data communications more efficient and more reliable, the DOCSIS track has no foreseeable ending. Constantly improving the reliability and capacity at which bandwidth is sent to and from the customer premises is what continues to drive revenue for communication service providers. DOCSIS 3.1 should be part of any cable MSO procurement considerations. This latest specification will help achieve the bandwidth capacity required to keep pace with subscriber expectations and also enable numerous technical benefits for network operators. Despite its challenges, it is clear that cable operators that are willing to adapt to industry changes and those who do are poised to gain the most — an increase in customer satisfaction, subscriber retention with enhanced profit margins. Want to learn more? Contact us to learn how we can help you with DOCSIS 3.1 device provisioning and network preparation.



Glossary of Terms

Term Definition

DOCSIS 3.1 Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS) version 3.1

IoT Internet of Things

4096-QAM An order of modulation available in DOCSIS 3.1

256-QAM Capped modulation under DOCSIS 3.0

QoE Quality of experience

Forward error correction (FEC)

A technique used for controlling errors in data transmission over unreliable or noisy communication channels

Reed Solomon (RS) The FEC algorithm used in DOCSIS 3.0

Trellis Coded Modulation (TCM)

A modulation scheme that transmits information with high efficiency over band-limited channels

Low Density Parity Check (LDPC)

The FEC technology used in WiMax, WiFi, and digital video broadcasting

DSP A digital signal processor (DSP) is a specialized microprocessor (or a SIP block) that has architecture optimized for the operational needs of digital signal processing. The goal of DSPs is to measure, filter, and/or compress continuous real-world analog signals

SoC The signal on a chip is an integrated circuit (IC) that integrates all components of a computer or other electronic system into a single chip

FPGA Field-programmable gate array (FPGA)

CCAP Converged Cable Access Platform

SNR Signal-to-noise ratio

PLC network Programmable logic controller network

Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM)

A modulation format based on the idea of frequency-division multiplexing, but the multiplexed streams are considered parts of a single stream

MoCA Multimedia over Coax Alliance

Digital Video Broadcasting — Terrestrial (DVB-T)

The DVB European-based consortium standard for the broadcast transmission of digital terrestrial television

Active Constellation A technique to reduce the peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) in the



Extension (ACE) application of OFDM for Digital Video Broadcasting — Terrestrial (DVB-T). ACE reduces the PAPR by extending outer constellation points in the frequency domain.

Tone Reservation (TR) A technique to reduce the peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) in the application of OFDM for Digital Video Broadcasting — Terrestrial (DVB-T). TR cancels out peaks in the time domain using simulated impulse kernels made of the reserved sub-carriers in the OFDM signal

PAPR Peak-to-average power ratio

SEFDM (spectrally efficient frequency division multiplexing)

Multiplexing method that compresses the subcarrier spacing while maintaining the modulation rate and system performance

Moore’s Law In 1985, co-founder of Intel Gordon Moore observed that the number of components per integrated function seemed to be doubling about every 18 months. Today, the law is restated as the observation that the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years

Butter’s Law Butter’s Law of Photonics – Gerry Butter, Bell Lab’s / Lucent Optical Networking Division, postulated that the amount of data coming out of an optical fiber is doubling every nine months

Shannon Limit Theory describing the maximum possible efficiency of error-correcting methods versus levels of noise interference and data corruption

R-PHY DOCSIS Remote PHY; previously known as part of the suite of standards called modular CMTS (M-CMTS). PHY refers to the physical layer (or layer 1) in networking

D-CCAP Distributed Converged Cable Access Platform

Time Division Duplexing (TDD)

Full duplex project using G.Fast and Frequency Division Duplexing currently used with DOCSIS 3.1

G.Fast A digital subscriber line (DSL) standard for local loops shorter than 250 m, with performance targets between 150 Mbit/s and 1 Gbit/s, depending on loop length. High speeds are only achieved over very short loops

Frequency Division Duplexing (FDD)

A technique where separate frequency bands are used at the transmitter and receiver side

DPoX DOCSIS provisioning of x. May refer to DPoG (GPON: gigabit passive optical network) and DPoE (EPON: ethernet passive optical network)

Radio Frequency over Glass (RFoG)

A deep-fiber network design where the coax portion of the hybrid fiber coax (HFC) network is replaced by a single-fiber passive optical network (PON)



Time wavelength division multiplexing passive optical networking (TWDM PON)

Also referred to NG-PON2 (second stage of next-generation passive optical network)

GPON A Passive Optical Network (PON) is a fiber network that implements a point-to-multipoint architecture using only fiber and passive components like splitters and combiners rather than active components like amplifiers, repeaters, or shaping circuits. Gigabit Passive Optical Networks (GPON) can transport not only Ethernet, but also ATM and TDM (PSTN, ISDN, E1 and E3) traffic

Want to learn more? Contact us to learn how we can help you with DOCSIS 3.1 device provisioning and network preparation.

www.incognito.com Email: [email protected]

Phone: +1 604-688-4332 Toll Free (N. America): +1 800-877-1856

Documents

Are You Ready for DOCSIS 3.1? - broadbandtechreport.com · Are You Ready for DOCSIS 3.1? - broadbandtechreport.com