By Mannix O'Connor and Vladimir Bronstein

Executive Summary

Ethernet Passive Optical Network (EPON) is a cost effective technology for achieving fiber-to-the-premises connectivity. However, deploying EPON with vendor-specific management and provisioning systems also requires significant investments to replace the corresponding DOCSIS systems that exist today. The cost of replicating DOCSIS provisioning, operations, maintenance, and data collections systems can be cost prohibitive.

A new class of EPON systems has evolved to resolve this dilemma. DOCSIS over EPON (DePON) architectures enable EPON fiber access networks to be managed by existing DOCSIS infrastructure and operations support systems. A DePON solution provides a “middleware” layer that translates DOCSIS management instructions into commands that are understood by the fiber network. This innovation preserves the cable operator’s investment in DOCSIS operations software and procedures while delivering the bandwidth required to match or exceed competitive offerings from other service providers.

While maintaining their back office systems, cable operators can take advantage of standards-based EPON systems by using DePON architecture to significantly scale up available bandwidth beyond the capabilities of current DOCSIS 3.0 implementations. DePON is a cost effective access network architecture that requires no change to back office operations.

Introduction
This paper describes the architectural challenges of integrating DOCSIS management with an EPON network. Although an overview of the system is provided, the focus of this paper is on the so called “northbound” or management interfaces. In DOCSIS, these include the OSSI and IPDR interfaces. These concepts can be extended to include similar functionality for PacketCable™ 1.5, PacketCable 2.0, PacketCable Multimedia, L2VPN, DSG, and other operations built on the DOCSIS service foundation and eSAFE architectures.

1.0 Existing Technology
New applications and services are putting bandwidth pressure on DOCSIS 1.1, 2.0, and 3.0 networks. Chart 1 shows the bandwidth demands of just one service, TV. When the requirements of other services are also included the bandwidth needs of individual subscribers becomes significant. Fiber is the ideal media to support new services that require more bandwidth and it is being used in many applications including, business services, cellular backhaul, greenfield deployments and for existing residential subscribers. Faced with similar bandwidth constraints from their copper plant, traditional voice service providers are electing to install fiber to the premises (FTTP) for both residential and commercial services. Their choice to deploy fiber is a long-term investment to replace the limited capabilities of twisted pair networks. Cable operators have the competitive advantage of coax over twisted pair, but to remain competitive with Telco fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) deployments, cable operators will increasingly look to FTTP and FTTH solutions. Approaches to FTTP deployments include Passive Optical Networks (PON), Radio Frequency over Glass (RFoG) and Active Ethernet. This paper will discuss PON; the most widely deployed FTTP architecture. From the perspective of a) cost of deployment and b) revenue generating potential, a combination of DOCSIS 3.0 network management using DePON infrastructure could best serve the needs of cable operators in both residential and business services applications today.

RFoG is functionally a node at the premises. It enables the use of fiber to the building or home but requires no change to the customer equipment (STB, CM, etc.) or at the headend. Therefore, it is viewed as an important bridging technology between HFC and PON based access networks. RFoG also enables PON pass through so that data access can be achieved at much higher rates than is available with DOCSIS while still maintaining existing equipment for RF video services and equipment. It also maintains all DOCSIS headend infrastructure, software and management procedures.

1.1 Limitations
Typically, fiber cable installation is the most expensive portion of the network and is best justified for high-bandwidth, high-revenue users. However, fiber solutions based on RFoG do not offer additional bandwidth capability per network segment beyond those available from the current implementations of DOCSIS 3.0 specifications. Therefore, operators incur the expense of fiber installation, without fully exploiting the bandwidth potential and revenue generating capabilities of the fiber media. Therefore, an approach that uses the bandwidth potential of fiber and still maintains DOCSIS management, infrastructure and procedures should be an efficient approach.

Chart 1: Bandwidth needed for TV Source FTTH Council

2.0 Network Layering as a Solution
Networking technologies are divided into discrete layers to promote interoperability. Proper layering ensures that networks can be upgraded with minimal disruption. A DOCSIS network is a multilayer architecture that includes specifications for a Media Access Control (MAC) layer and a Physical (PHY) layer. We suggest that the DOCSIS MAC and PHY layer can be replaced without changing the DOCSIS upper-layer protocols. This provides data plane transparency. As was mentioned, management interfaces are preserved. This provides

management plane transparency. This is a recent innovation that preserves cable operator’s investment in DOCSIS operations while delivering bandwidth capability at 1Gbps symmetric and a path to 10Gbps and beyond.

The DePON architecture that provides a new high-speed MAC/PHY can provide cable operators with a physical plant capable of supporting unlimited bandwidth. However, what PHY best meets cable operator requirements?

• Cable operators should look for a technology that provides enormous bandwidth potential at a low commodity cost.
• The candidate technology should be cost-effective to install, manage and upgrade.
• It should be proven, scalable technology that is mature and widely deployed.

Ethernet Passive Optical Network (EPON) is a fiber access technology defined by the IEEE 802.3ah working group that was standardized in 2004. EPON networks meet the above-mentioned criteria. They are proven, mature, and widely deployed. IEEE 802.3ah EPON will be forward compatible with the emerging IEEE 802.3av 10GigEPON standard, thus providing scalability for future growth.

Service support functions as defined by the DOCSIS standard include provisioning, management, security, data collection, and others. The systems and operating procedures in place for these functions are a valuable part of all cable operator networks. Replacing this infrastructure would be costly and disruptive.

These facts suggest that the integration of EPON and DOCSIS standard and specification would be an ideal solution for a cable operator network. For purposes of this paper, we will refer to this approach as DePON. It is intended to enable cable operators to extend their existing DOCSIS OSS over standards-based EPON networks.

3.0 DePON Architecture & Components
An EPON network has four primary components: fiber, splitters, Optical Line Terminations (OLTs) and Optical Network Units (ONUs). The OLT resides in a headend or hub and is analogous to the Cable Modem Termination System (CMTS). The ONU is analogous to a CM and is located at the customer site and communicates with the OLT over the fiber. In many respects, EPON functions like a modular CMTS. However, EPON is able to provide up to 1Gbps of bandwidth per customer. This is essentially a “1 Gbps cable modem”.

Like a CMTS, an OLT would have Ethernet interfaces towards the core network that are called a Network Side Interface (NSI). These interfaces may consist of several physical Ethernet links and may have several IP or Ethernet interfaces.

A DePON network adds another component, the DOCSIS Management Server, as shown in Diagram 1. The DOCSIS Management Server is a platform which runs the software that enables the interworking of DOCSIS network commands and the EPON. The DOCSIS Management Server provides translation of DOCSIS management commands into commands understood by the OLT/ONU. This makes the ONU appear to be a CM to other DOCSIS servers. One DOCSIS Management Server should be capable of supporting many OLTs and a very large number of ONUs.

CM functions may be combined with other functions (for example – a telephony or digital voice adapter) within one physical device. In this case, the CM becomes an eCM (embedded CM) and the telephony adapter is called eMTA (embedded Multimedia Terminal Adapter – a Digital Voice Adapter in PacketCable 1.5 specifications). An eCM may have another bridged Ethernet interface, not visible outside the device, that is connected to this eMTA. There are also other embedded devices referenced in the DOCSIS specification (i.e. eSTB (embedded Set-Top Box)), eRouters (embedded router), eDSG (embedded DOCSIS Set-top Gateway) with corresponding Ethernet interfaces. A DOCSIS 3.0 CM may also have several customer Ethernet interfaces. Similarly, all of these functions and interfaces as well as the software to support standard features should be available in a DePON ONU.

DOCSIS network management is separated into two major areas: provisioning and management. The exact management interface is defined in the DOCSIS OSSI specification. The specific elements which require network management in a DOCSIS network are CMTS and CM systems.

Provisioning is the process of configuration of devices to support specific network services. Most provisioning occurs when the network elements demand information and make requests. Usually provisioning is done by CMs during their initialization by accessing the servers and getting necessary information from them. DHCP/TFTP/TOD servers are used to obtain static “service” configuration information for CMs. ONUs would use the same servers and appear as CMs to the provisioning software. This process is shown in Diagram 1.

Some items are configured directly on the CMTS via SNMP or thru the CLI. These items pertain to configurations “shared” by large number of CMs like Named Service Classes or Filters or they may be configuration items for the CMTS itself (i.e. the Network Side Interface configuration). In a DePON system the configuration operations remain the same as in DOCSIS even though the physical elements are different. CLI scripts sent to a CMTS can instead be sent to on OLT via the DOCSIS Management Server.

The DOCSIS Management Server maps DOCSIS commands into similar functionality on the EPON network. As an example, DOCSIS PHY characteristics are mapped to similar PHY characteristics of EPON, i.e. DOCSIS RF received power can be mapped to EPON received power. Some DOCSIS PHY characteristics do not require mapping. The DOCSIS commands for channel bonding can remain undefined in an EPON network because a) there are no channels to bond and b) the EPON network exceeds the bandwidth available on an HFC network therefore, the purpose of bonding is fulfilled by the inherent bandwidth characteristics of the EPON network.

Performance management is done by reading performance data from the CM and CMTS via SNMP MIBs. Fault management has two mechanisms. First, the CM and CMTS send SNMP traps/notifications to SNMP managers and Syslog messages to Syslog servers when specific events happen. Second, there are special status values in SNMP MIBs that define alarm conditions when errors or faults occur. DOCSIS 3.0 also states that performance data may be streamed using the IPDR protocol. All of these functions should be applicable, without change, in a DePON network.

Diagram 1 DePON Architecture HCTA

3.1 Topology
DePON architecture matches the topology of the existing HFC network. It is a hierarchical tree structure. Customers reside on the leaves and multiple customers are supported on each branch. Branches are aggregated at nodes. Customers are aggregated at nodes and nodes connect to a headend or hub.

3.2 Servers
HFC networks have a significant investment in servers, software, equipment, and operating procedures to provide DOCSIS management for the entire system. DePON networks capitalize on this investment by providing “middleware” that supports OLTs and ONUs using existing DOCSIS servers and procedures, often custom developed for CMTS/CM gear. Each server described below is not necessarily a separate computer. For example, the DHCP and TFTP server may be collocated on a single machine. Servers are divided into:

a) Provisioning Elements for configuration and

b) NMS elements for fault, monitoring, and accounting.

Provisioning elements include:

1) DHCP Server – To provide initial configuration for ONUs
2) TFTP Server – To provide configuration file and upgrade software image for ONUs
3) Time Protocol Server (TOD Server) – To provide Time of Day information for ONUs
4) Certificate Revocation Server – To provide information about X.509 certificate revocations

NMS Elements include:

5) SNMP manager(s) – To poll SNMP agents in the OLT and ONU and to also collect events that were sent as SNMP notifications
6) Syslog server – To collect events sent as syslog messages
7) IPDR Collector Server – To collect statistics that are sent using IPDR protocol
8) SSH or Telnet Clients for scripted and interactive Command Line Interface (CLI) operations.

DOCSIS specifications define how these server elements communicate with CMTS/CMs in the system. Protocol translation is required to ensure the commands, requests and replies are understood and interpreted correctly by the new fiber-based high-bandwidth devices (OLTs/ONUs) that replace the CMTS/CM equipment. The DOCSIS Management Server is the device which processes these translations so that the DePON system communicates with these servers in exactly the same way that a DOCSIS system would.

3.3 SNMP Protocol and MIBs
The management protocol specified by DOCSIS 1.x, 2.0 and 3.0 specifications is SNMP. Ideally, all three versions of SNMP protocol should be supported by a DePON system. DOCSIS 1.x, 2.0 and 3.0 require that the CMTS/CM implement SNMPv1, SNMPv2c, and SNMPv3 protocols. There is a minimum set of managed objects (MIBs) that must be supported in a DOCSIS-network compliant system. The DePON system provides support for all of these using a mapping of EPON-specific parameters into DOCSIS MIB objects. DOCSIS PHY layer parameters are mapped to EPON PHY parameters. In addition, IETF MIBs can also be mapped to EPON PHY layer parameters. All IETF and DOCSIS PHY layer parameters are not necessarily mapped to EPON. However, the relevant subsets that are necessary for service creation and delivery must be translated.

3.4 NMS Elements
There are three primary NMS Elements that should be supported in a DePON system. They include: 1) the SNMP Manager, 2) the Syslog Server and 3) the IPDR Collector Server. DOCSIS management (monitoring) can be conducted with these three components. The SNMP network manager polls SNMP MIB agents in DOCSIS Management Server and may collect events that were sent as SNMP notifications or traps. Events sent from proxy servers as Syslog messages are collected by the Syslog Server. Bulk statistics on network

and element performance are sent from the DOCSIS Management Server to the IPDR Collector Server using the IPDR protocol.

4.0 DePON/DOCSIS Service Interaction
IEEE 802.ah defines the specifications for EPON. The passive elements of the EPON are located in the “outside plant”. These elements include single-mode fiber-optic cable, passive optical splitters/couplers, connectors and splices. The active elements of an EPON include OLTs and ONUs. OLTs provide interfaces between EPON systems and the cable operators core data, video and telephony networks.

The ONU resides at the customer premises and receives data in an optical format. It converts signals from the optical domain to the format required by the subscriber (i.e. Ethernet, IP, POTS, etc.) The EPON protocol assigns a unique ID to each ONU. Downstream traffic is broadcast over the physical media to all ONUs. However, only the ONU to which the packet is addressed actually reads the data. Encryption of broadcast data is not required in the standard, but nearly all EPON vendors support AES128 encryption. An ONU discards packets addressed to other ONUs. Each ONU has an assigned timeslot for upstream traffic managed by a scheduler in the OLT. As in DOCSIS, this TDMA technology prevents upstream data collisions on the shared fiber.

Traffic engineering is controlled in EPON networks through control of the scheduling in much the same way as in DOCSIS. EPON access networks implement TDMA access systems that are controlled by a scheduler for upstream transmission. Both upstream and downstream can be tightly controlled on a per-flow basis. Flows can be defined per ONU or per port per ONU or per set of generic classification parameters. Classification parameters may include all generic packet fields – Ethernet header, IP header and UDP/TCP ports. Configuration of flows can be static, dynamic, or a combination of the two. EPON vendors may implement a number of Operations, Administration, Maintenance and Provisioning (OAMP) mechanisms in their overall EPON solution. IEEE 802.3ah is the controlling standard for EPON specific OAMP mechanisms. Other standard mechanisms like 802.1ag and Y.1731 may be implemented in addition to that.

An EPON network’s physical media is different from an HFC network since the access media is replaced with fiber and the CMTS/CM is replaced with OLT/ONU equipment. For a DOCSIS OSS platform to manage a DePON, it must account for the differences in physical data transmission methods (modulation schemes, data rates, PHY) and the management communications protocols (provisioning, security, management, OAMP) between the two systems. These differences suggest that a DOCSIS OSS cannot manage an EPON network. However, DePON provides a “middleware” layer, the DOCSIS Management Server, to translate between the requirements of DOCSIS OSS and an EPON network.

Diagram 2 DePON DOCSIS Translation HCTA

Likewise, DOCSIS-defined methods for configuration, provisioning and security can be converted into commands that are understood in an EPON network, as shown in Diagram 2. Both networks have upstream and downstream data transmission and this is another aspect that makes the two systems compatible. DOCSIS testing and measurement mechanisms have their counterpart in the Ethernet OAM specifications mentioned above. The following sections examine some of the mechanisms that are used in these translations.

4.1 Configuration
The first step after bootup and initial communication channel establishment is that the DOCSIS Management Server accesses the DHCP server to obtain initial configuration information. Then the DOCSIS Management Server downloads the configuration file from the TFTP server and starts the initial configuration process.

The DOCSIS Management Server decodes information elements, “encodings” as they are called in DOCSIS, from the file and applies them in its own configuration as well as communicating these service-relevant elements to the OLT. Some additional dynamic parameters may be communicated later during operation. As part of configuration steps done in the DOCSIS Management Server, the configuration information is reflected into the read-only CM and CMTS related SNMP configuration MIBs on the DOCSIS Management Server which correspond to actual OLT and ONU configurations. This would conclude the initial ONU configuration.

4.2 Monitoring
Performance management should be done by reading OLT and ONU performance data from the DOCSIS Management Server via SNMP MIBs, which, in a pure DOCSIS case, correspond to CMTS and CM performance data. Fault management is done through two mechanisms. First, the DOCSIS Management Server may send SNMP traps/notifications to SNMP managers on behalf of CMTS and CM when events of interest happen in actual OLT or ONU devices. In addition, there are special status values in SNMP MIBs that may be interpreted as “alarms” or fault conditions. DOCSIS 3.0 specifies that performance data may be streamed using IPDR protocol to a collection server – the DOCSIS Management Server performs this function in a DePON system.

4.3 QoS
QoS management involves two major operations. The first is classifying a packet as belonging to a certain service flow. The second is applying traffic management actions to the packet according to configured service flow characteristics. DePON architecture supports the full set of QoS classification rules defined by DOCSIS and performs decoding of classifiers from a configuration file and reflects them via SNMP MIBs.

As for traffic handling and applying traffic management actions, the EPON standards have some differences from DOCSIS specifications. In the upstream direction, DOCSIS specifies several scheduling types including: Best Effort, Non-Real-Time Polling, Real-Time Polling, Unsolicited Grants with Activity Detection, or Unsolicited Grants. Due to EPON’s much higher bandwidth and lower number of subscribers, EPON continuously polls subscribers in real-time. Therefore, there are only two scheduling types possible with EPON. These are Real-Time Polling and Unsolicited Grants. All other DOCSIS scheduling types are mapped into Real-Time Polling.

Traffic description parameters (max rate, min rate, burst size, max latency, etc.) are supported for scheduling traffic in the upstream and downstream direction in the same way. DOCSIS specifies a large number of traffic flows that have to be supported by CM and therefore by the ONU. This is done by using multiple EPON (Logical Links) per ONU as an analogue of DOCSIS (service flows).

4.4 Filtering
Traffic filtering is the ability to drop traffic based on certain characteristics going from/to subscribers (CPEs) and (possibly) internal communication entities inside the CM (i.e. eSAFE, eMTA, through the DOCSIS system). Traffic filtering in the DePON system is supported in the same way as in DOCSIS 2.0 and 3.0, using CMTS filters, CM filters and upstream drop classifiers.

4.5 Security
Security authentication is managed by programming an X.509 certificate into an ONU’s memory – much the same way as CMs have X.509 certificates. The DOCSIS Management Server possesses CA certificates that are used in validation of ONU certificates. Update status of validity of certificates is provided by Certificate Revocation Server.

Traffic encryption is used on an optical media channel to ensure privacy of communication. The DOCSIS Management Server ensures that no ONU can eavesdrop on the traffic that is sent to another ONU.

Encryption uses AES128 symmetric keys (meaning the same key is used for encryption and decryption) that are frequently updated – in a similar way that DOCSIS uses traffic encryption on a DOCSIS channel. This is not a man-in-the-middle scheme and it can provide for standard or proprietary key exchanges approaches. More processing on the ONU enables more rigorous security; however, proprietary key exchange methods are available with commercial PON silicon.

4.6 Multicast
The DePON system provides proxy services and snooping of IGMP and MLD messages through the system and forwards only traffic for requested multicast groups to specific ONU ports in a similar way that DOCSIS does. All the advanced multicast features of DOCSIS 3.0 – like multicast authentication, multicast QoS, and SSM are supported as well.

4.7 Subscriber Management
Subscriber management is related to Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) IP addresses. These features relate to how the MAC and IP addresses of CPE devices connected behind an ONU are discovered and reported.

DePON architecture supports all the features required by DOCSIS. Some of these include,

1) indication of IP addresses that were assigned to CPEs,
2) limitation of the number of IP addresses,
3) limitation of the number of MAC addresses, and
4) filtering of only allowed source and destination configured IP address traffic
(anti-spoofing filter).
5) ARP proxy services
6) DHCP snooping services
7) IPv6 prefixes

5.0 Other Topics
Neither the DOCSIS standard nor the IEEE 802.3 and 802.1 specifications are frozen in time. DePON must provide a flexible platform that can adapt to these developments. There are a number of areas where these protocols are evolving. Two of these items are discussed below.

5.1 L2VPN
L2VPNs offer Ethernet Transport Services as follows:

• Transparent LAN Service (TLS) for enterprises – a set of CM/ONUs configured to can be marked with the same LAN (VLAN).
• Multiple Service Networks – all CPEs and ISP router belong to the same VLAN, other CPEs and another ISP router – to a different VLAN.
• Separate Management – management traffic can be segmented on a separate VLAN from the CPE traffic – improves security.

The DOCSIS network allows L2VPN services to be implemented using several protocols; IEEE 802.1Q VLANs, MPLS, VPLS, and L2TPv3. Actually, EPON systems were VLAN-capable from the beginning, so the concept of L2VPNs in EPON is natively supported. DePON architecture supports all of these options – starting from VLAN-based L2VPNs and expanding into VPLS and L2TPv3-based L2VPNs.

L2VPN support is being synchronized with the Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF). Since some EPON systems are already MEF compliant, DePON can offer service providers a reasonable assurance that both the DOCSIS and DePON specification and standard are on track for current and future compatibility for transport of Ethernet services.

5.1 2 IPv6
The DOCSIS 3.0 specification requires support for IPv6 alongside support for the IPv4 protocol. Support of IPv6 can be provided in two domains. These two domains are:

• IPv6 addressing of the management entities – SNMP agent entity, TFTP server, etc. This means that SNMP agent(s) on the DOCSIS Management Server (CMTS and CM agents) may be accessed using the IPv6 address (as well as the IPv4 address). This option is natively supported in DePON since the DOCSIS Management Server is an IPv6-enabled device.
• IPv6 addressing of CPE devices. From the DePON system point of view – it means supporting IPv6 in customer traffic without terminating any IPv6 flows. This includes subscriber management, filtering, QoS classifiers, etc. Since most of the EPON chipsets support IPv6 handling from start – it is not an issue for a DePON system.

6.0 Conclusion
Two factors are driving the need for fiber-to-the-premises, 1) new, high-bandwidth applications, and 2) competitive pressure from traditional telecommunications providers. The investment needed to deploy fiber-to-the-premises requires a gradual migration from HFC only when and where subscriber revenues justify the expense. EPON is a cost-effective technology for building fiber networks. However, DOCSIS network

infrastructure and operating procedures developed over many years are difficult and costly to replace along with the HFC network. DePON is an innovation on EPON that preserves the cable operator’s investment in DOCSIS equipment and procedures, but enables fiber-to-the-premises deployments. Topological similarities between EPON and HFC ensure that EPON fiber can be built as an overlay to the existing HFC network. DePON solutions provide a middleware layer capable of translating DOCSIS commands into protocols that control an all-fiber infrastructure. The ability to maintain existing DOCSIS servers, protocols and procedures reduces the expense and complexity of migrating to an all-fiber access network. DePON uses standards developed by the IEEE, MEF, CableLabs®, ITU-T and the IETF to create an efficient migration strategy for cable operators seeking to minimize costs while maximizing bandwidth to business and residential users.

Acronyms
ARP Address Resolution Protocol
CA Certificate Authority
CLI Command Line Interface
CMTS Cable Modem Termination System
CM Cable Modem
CPE Customer Premises Equipment
CWDM Coarse Wavelength Division Multiplexing
DHCP Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
DOCSIS Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification
DePON DOCSIS over Ethernet Passive Optical Networks
DSG DOCSIS Set-top Gateway
eCM Embedded Cable Modem
eDSG Embedded DOCSIS Set-top Gateway
eMTA Embedded Multimedia Terminal Adaptor
eSTB Embedded Set-Top Box
EPON Ethernet Passive Optical Networks
eSAFE Embedded Service/Application Functional Entity
FTTH Fiber-to-the-Home
FTTP Fiber-to-the-Premises
FTTx Fiber-to-the-x (anything)
HFC Hybrid Fiber Coax
IGMP Internet Group Management Protocol
IP Internet Protocol
IPDR Internet Protocol Detail Record
ISP Internet Service Provider
L2TPv3 Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol version 3
L2VPN Layer 2 Virtual Private Network
LAN Local Area Network
LLID Logical Link Identifier
MAC Media Access Control
MIB Management Information Base
MLD Multicast Listener Discovery
NSI Network Side Interface
NMS Network Management System
OAMP Operations, Administration, Maintenance and Provisioning
OLT Optical Line Termination
ONU Optical Network Unit
OSS Operations Support System
OSSI Operations Support System Interface
PHY Physical layer
PON Passive Optical Networks
POTS Plain Old Telephone Service
QoS Quality of Service
RF Radio Frequency
RFoG RF over Glass
SFID Service Flow Identifier
SNMP Simple Network Management Protocol
SOHO Small Office Home Office
SSH Secure Shell
SSM Source Specific Multicast
TCP Transmission Control Protocol
TDMA Time Division Multiple Access
TFTP Trivial File Transfer Protocol
TLS Transparent LAN Service
TOD Time of Day
UDP User Datagram Protocol
VLAN Virtual Local Area Network
VPLS Virtual Private Line Service
VPN Virtual Private Networks

“DOCSIS“ and “PacketCable“ are trademarks of Cable Television Laboratories, Inc.

Bibliography
CableLabs, Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specifications DOCSIS 3.0 Operations Support System Interface Specification, CM-SP-OSSIv3.0-107-080522

CableLabs, Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specifications DOCSIS 2.0, Operations Support System Interface Specification, CM-SP-OSSIv2.0-C01-081104

Delivering Carrier Ethernet, Extending Ethernet Beyond the LAN, McGraw-Hill Communications, Abdul Kasim, Mannix O’Connor, et. al. ISBN: 987-0-07-148747-4 2007

A Proposal for DOCSIS 4.0: The Best of DOCSIS and PON, A. Bernstein, S. Gorshe, SCTE Conference on Emerging Technologies®, 2008

C. Chang-Joon, E. Wong, and R.S. Tucher, “Optical CSMA/CS Media Access Scheme for Ethernet Over Passive Optical Network”, IEEE Photonics Technology Letters, vol 14, pp. 711-713, 2002

G. Kramer, B. Mukherjee, and G. Pesavento, “IPACT: A Dynamic Protocol for an Ethernet PON (EPON)”, IEEE Communications Magazine , vol. 40 pp. 74-80, 2002

V. Blake, “DOCSIS over PON” Optical Fiber communication/National Fiber Optic Engineers Conference,

“Business Ethernet – The Game Plan for 2007”, MEF, Vertical Systems Group, January 2007
Issue , 24-28 Feb. 2008 Page(s):1 – 3, 2008

“Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) Technical Specifications 4” Metro Ethernet Network Architecture Framework – Part 1: Generic Framework, May 2004. www.metroethernet.org
International Standards Organization – Open Systems Interconnect: Basic Reference Model, ISO/IEC7498-1, 1994

T. Takeda, I.Inoue, R. Aubin, and M. Carugi, “Layer 1 Virtual Private Networks: Service Concepts, Architecture Requirements, and Related Advances in Standardization,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol 42, no. 6, 132-138, June 2004

Lawrence K. Vanston, Ph.D., “A New Telecommunications World”, Technology Futures, Inc. 2007

Tim Hills, “The Future of Fiber Access” LightReading, November 2008

IEEE, “802.3ah”, IEEE Standard 2004

“Fiber to the Home Advantages of Optical Access 2008”, FTTH Council

Written by:

Vladimir Bronstein

 

Mannix OConnor

 

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (1)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by Sujit Das , January 27, 2010

I want to get some knowledge on DOCSIS 2.0 or any substitute method to deliver broadband internet through cable tv network.
Please be kind enough to let me know a little bit on the subject.

Regards
Sujit Das
Chairman
AMBC Pvt.Ltd.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0