future hfc directions: of i ccap, r phy and r macphy€¦ · future hfc directions: the role of...

Future HFC Directions:The Role of I‐CCAP, R‐PHY and R‐MACPHYJohn Ulm, Engineering FellowARRIS CTO‐ Network Solutions Team ANGACOM 08 June 2016

Copyright 2015 – ARRIS Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved.

Bifurcation of the MSO CCAP WorldA More Complete Taxonomy of MSO Access Architectures

ARRIS @ ANGACOM 2016

Distributed AccessArchitectures (DAAs)

RemotexPON

Remote Pt‐to‐PtEthernet Switch

RemoteWiFi

Distributed CCAPArchitectures (DCAs)

Remote LiFi

OtherRemoteVariants

RemoteMACPHYw/o EQAMIn Node

Remote PHY

RemoteMACPHY

RemoteMACPHYw/ EQAMIn Node

OtherRemoteMACPHYVariants

RemotePHY

w/o EQAMIn CCAP Core

RemotePHY

w/ EQAMIn CCAP Core

OtherRemotePHY

Variants

MSO AccessArchitectures (MAAs)

Centralized AccessArchitectures (CAAs)

Head‐endI‐CCAP

Head‐endxPON

Head‐endEthernet

Centralized or Distributed?And Distributed Options are Still Evolving:• Remote PHY• Remote MACPHY (simple)

• Remote MACPHY with EQAM core• Remote CCAP• Remote CCAP with Centralized Controller• Remote OLT

208 June 2016


Do We Need Distributed Access (DAA)?Assessment Criteria for CAA/DAA Comparison


Impact of spectrum and/or # of amplifiers

Impact of Fiber distance to node

Impact of the number of wavelengths

Facility/Node Space & Power Requirements

Any significant cost differences?

D3.1 Performance Impacts

Space and Power Utilization Impact

Cost Assessment (OPEX and CAPEX)

1

2

4

Impact on MSO OperationsSystem and Operational Complexity Impact 3

308 June 2016


D3.1 Performance ImpactsDAA Digital Optics vs. CAA AM Optics


D3.1 Performance Impacts at ModemDAA Digital Optics vs. CAA AM Optics• DAA with Digital Optics

– Best overall performance– Same for all Distances– Performance still varies with Amp cascade

• CAA with AM Optics– Varies with Distance, wavelengths, Amp cascade

– 25km Performance almost equal to DAA Digital

– 80km Performance Relatively Poor• Drop Cable and In‐Home Impact

– Poor grade drop potentially wipes out all DAA gains

– Best results with Gateway @ point of entry• Isolate Home Network from HFC


30

35

40

45

50

CAA ‐ 80km ‐ 16λ

CAA ‐ 80km ‐ 8λ



CAA ‐ 40km ‐ 16λ




CAA ‐ 25km ‐ 16λ




CAA ‐ 15km ‐ 16λ




DAA – Remote Gadget 44λ +

0 Amp

1 Amp

2 Amps

3 Amps

4 Amps

5 Amps

6 Amps

1002 MHz Full Spectrum CNR Es mate to the RF Connector of Cable Modem at Point of Entry Through 1 Spli er

1024QAM

(10 b/s/Hz)

2048QAM

(11 b/s/H

z)4096QAM

(12 b/s/Hz)

8192QAM

(13 b/s/Hz)

16384QAM

(14 b/s/Hz)

512QAM

(9 b/s/Hz)

30.5

45

41

37

34

49

CAA to Node at 80km CAA to Node at 40km CAA to Node at 25km CAA to Node at 15km DAA at 80km+

Estimated Percentage of DAA Improvement vs. CAA

Estimated CNR

20% ‐ 30%

DAA has 0% to 9% Gain Against CAA

DAA has 9% to 18% Gain

508 June 2016


CAA v DAAHeadend Space & Power Considerations


Headend Space over the Years


2012 Headend – 306 SG in ~46 racks 2014 Headend – 144 nodes, 112 SG

in 4 racks (28 SG per rack)

708 June 2016


ARRIS CHP RX Optic SavingsD3.1 & PNM

Savings

D3.1 & PNM Savings

D3.1 & PNM Savings

PathTrak 1500

PathTrak HOU‐200PathTrak HOU‐200

PathTrak RSAM

PathTrak SWX

Sweep Return (JDSU)

Sweep Return RF Combining (ATX)

Return RF Splitter/Combining (ATX)



Legacy STB Savings

Legacy STB Savings

E6000 DCAM‐2

Broadcast Savings

Broadcast Savings

Broadcast RF Combining (ATX)

ARPD RF Combining (ATX)

Juniper 100G Switch – OOB Manage

OM2000OM2000OM2000

ARPDARPDARPDARPDARPDARPDARPDARPDARPDARPD

PathTrak HSM‐1000PathTrak HSM‐1000





E6000 IEQ Savings E6000 IEQ Savings

E6000 IEQ Savings

I‐CCAP Space Considerations – 2016‐17Upcoming Space Density Improvements

08 June 2016 ARRIS @ ANGACOM 2016 8

Power Distribution ‐ Fuses


Power Distribution ‐ Fuses Power Distribution ‐ Fuses

Optical Cable ManagementFiber Patch Panel

I‐CCAP (E6000™)



I‐CCAP (E6000™)

Aurora TX Optic Savings


HFC – RX AM Optics(ARRIS CHP)






HFC – TX AM Optics(Aurora)








HFC – RX Digital Return Optics(Harmonic)








Harmonic NSG 9000 40G






Narrowcast RF Combining (ATX) Narrowcast RF Combining (ATX)


D3.1 & PNM Savings

D3.1 & PNM Savings

D3.1 & PNM Savings

Legacy STB Savings

Legacy STB Savings

E6000 DCAM‐2

Broadcast Savings

ARRIS CHP RX Optic Savings

E6000 IEQ Savings E6000 IEQ Savings

E6000 IEQ Savings

I‐CCAP Space Considerations – ARRIS 2016‐17192 Nodes, 192 DS/192 US HSD Service Groups; 192 VOD SG


Power Distribution ‐ Fuses Power Distribution ‐ Fuses Power Distribution ‐ Fuses


I‐CCAP (E6000™)



I‐CCAP (E6000™)

96 SG per ⅔ Rack

Broadcast Savings









HFC – TX AM Optics(ARRIS Aurora)





I‐CCAP Migration Summary:Space, Capacity & Power Case Study


– ‘Chan’ equivalent = 38 Mbps

POD Migration 2014 2015 2015 2016‐17 2016‐17

Technology E6000 Gen 1,NSG UEQAM

E6000 Gen 1with IEQ

E6000 Gen 1IEQ

E6000 Gen 2 Today’s CHP

E6000 Gen 2 CHP RX/Aurora TX

Nodes per POD (4 racks) 144 144 216 216 480

AM Wavelengths 1 1 1‐2 1‐2 3‐4

SG per POD (4 racks) 112 112 168 192 480

SG per Rack 28 32 42 96 128

Subs per SG 320 320 213 187 75

Avail DS Capacity per SG 30 + 1x96 30 + 1x96 30 + 1x96 30 + 2x192 30 + 2x192

Avail Mbps per Sub 6.3 6.3 9.4 25.7 64

kW per rack 4.17 kW 3.0 kW 3.58 kW 3.08 kW 7.70 kW

W per SG 149 107 99.4 64 64

W per ‘Chan’ equiv 2.66 2.03 1.89 0.51 0.51

– While staying within existing power footprint!!!1008 June 2016


Headend Space Migration:2014 to ~2017 with I‐CCAP, R‐PHY & R‐CCAP


Existing Headend2014

I‐CCAP Headend~2017

R‐PHY~2017

Access Architecture (Central ‐ CAA or Distributed ‐ DAA)

Time Frame

Space NeededFor ~200 SG

SG per Rack SG Scale

Older CMTS + Low Density EQAM + Older AM Optics Pre‐2014 20‐50 Racks 4‐10 SG 0.2‐0.4X

CAA E6000 + High Density UEQAM + Ext B‐cast + AM Optics 2014 ~7 Racks ~28 SG 1X

CAA E6000 Gen 2 with B‐cast + AM Optics ~2016‐17 ~1½ Racks ~128 SG 4.5XR‐PHY DAA: Gen2 MAC Core + Ether Aggregation + WDM ~2016‐17 ~⅔ Rack ~288 SG 10XR‐MACPHY DAA: Router + Aggregation + WDM mux/demux ~2016‐17 ~½ Rack ~384 SG 14XEarly R‐CCAP DAA: Ethernet Aggregation + WDM mux/demux ~2016‐17 ~⅟5 Rack ~960 SG 34X

R‐CCAP~2017

R‐MACPHY~2017

1108 June 2016


Distributed Architecture Comparisons:R‐PHY, R‐MACPHY, R‐CCAP


A More Complete Taxonomy of MSO Access Architectures


Distributed AccessArchitectures (DAAs)

RemotexPON

Remote Pt‐to‐PtEthernet Switch

RemoteWiFi

Distributed CCAPArchitectures (DCAs)

Remote LiFi

OtherRemoteVariants

RemoteMACPHYw/o EQAMIn Node

Remote PHY

RemoteMACPHY

RemoteMACPHYw/ EQAMIn Node

OtherRemoteMACPHYVariants

RemotePHY

w/o EQAMIn CCAP Core

RemotePHY

w/ EQAMIn CCAP Core

OtherRemotePHY

Variants

MSO AccessArchitectures (MAAs)

Centralized AccessArchitectures (CAAs)

Head‐endI‐CCAP

Head‐endxPON

Head‐endEthernet

1308 June 2016


Distributed CCAP Options – Pick Your Favorite


RMD – Minimal Config

RMD with Embedded EQAMRemote CCAP with Centralized Controller

RPHY System Components


DAA Topology Migration Example –Multiple Options• DAA Shelf at Hub or Cabinet Location• DAA at Existing Node Location• DAA at Fiber Deep Node

– Might need 12‐24 RPD/RMD per existing Serving Area• Each might require its own Long Distance 10G Optics too

– Fiber Deep node may have ~60 HP with only~30 subs• Combine 4+ RPD into SG in MAC Core

• Hybrid DAA with AM Fiber Deep Nodes– Shared RPD/RMD resources– Lower cost, lower power Fiber Deep nodes– Scale RPD/RMD from 1x1 to 1x2, 2x2, 4x4, . . .


RPD/ RMD

RPD/ RMD


Future HFC Directions:The Role of I‐CCAP, R‐PHY and R‐MACPHY• Centralized or Distributed Architecture

– Centralized CAA Headends (I‐CCAP + Optic Shelves) have plenty of Life left in them for SG Growth• I‐CCAP + Optic Shelf improvements handle most space/power growth needs• D3.1 Performance is comparable for less than 40km• DAA makes sense for very Long Distances, e.g. 80km; and for extreme Headend Space consolidations

• Distributed Architecture Options– R‐PHY, R‐MACPHY and R‐CCAP have various Pro’s & Con’s

• R‐PHY provides minimal size/cost/power in node; critical for smaller nodes as common in Europe– Multi‐vendor interoperability

• R‐CCAP with Centralized Controller provides optimal Headend Space consolidation• R‐MACPHY pushes a middle ground between these

– DAA Topology Options• DAA Shelf in Hub or Cabinet does not disrupt existing HFC plant while providing benefits of Digital Optics• DAA in Existing Node Location is simple step; But still have Performance degradation due to cascade Length• DAA at Fiber Node Location provides optimal performance, but at a cost• Hybrid Shared DAA with traditional AM Fiber Deep nodes provides the best of both worlds


Thank you

[email protected]

future hfc directions: of i ccap, r phy and r macphy€¦ · future hfc directions: the role of...

Documents