7 messages in net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp[c-nsp] Ubr Docsis 2.0 Question
FromSent OnAttachments
Paul StewartMar 5, 2007 7:01 am 
Michel RenferMar 5, 2007 7:38 am 
Paul StewartMar 5, 2007 8:50 am 
Paul StewartMar 5, 2007 9:29 am 
Anton KapelaMar 5, 2007 9:39 am 
Justin ShoreMar 5, 2007 8:43 pm 
ong...@ispworkshop.comMar 6, 2007 12:51 am 
Actions with this message:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Paste this link in email or IM:
Atom feed for this thread
Paste this URL into your reader:
Subject:[c-nsp] Ubr Docsis 2.0 QuestionActions...
From:Anton Kapela (tk@5ninesdata.com)
Date:Mar 5, 2007 9:39:20 am
List:net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp

I sense a wrong conclusion here:

Thank you for the response... I didn't see this being possible but somewhere someone had told me you could run it that way.... only way I could see is 3.2Mhz width with Docsis 2.0 being backwards compatible ... thanks again for the confirmation...

Based on a small exclusion here:

No, of course not. Your DOCSIS 1.x (TDMA) modems will only support channel-widths up to 3.2 MHz. If you want use the benefits of a 6.4 MHz channel-width you need to use DOCSIS 2.0 modems (ATDMA).

It is correct that a DOCSIS 1.0 or 1.1 modem will not support US channel widths/modulations over 3.2 MHz @ qam16 (without considering vendor-proprietary hacks). However, this does *not* have to exclude DOCSIS 2.0 modems from using 6.4 MHz channels at qam32/64 and sharing the same downstream.

You can indeed run multiple upstream profiles on several different frequencies to support TDMA 1.x modems with old-school US channel widths and at the same time support the newer-school A-TDMA 2.0 channel widths.

Since Cisco doesn't support the S-CDMA mode, we'll avoid getting into coexisting with it here. It's probably better (given some of if timing related issues) that they don't support S-CDMA, imho. It also complicates matters when configuring MAP-related fetaures on the downstream, given the symbol rates and FEC codeword differences create an 'alternate reality' for S-CDMA speakers relative to TDMA speakers.

Back to the original question:

My question is in regards to Docsis1.1 modems - if we change the channel size to 6.4 is there a way to support modems that only work with 3.2 channel width (therefore Docsis 1.x)??

Yes, the two can coexist and still provide benefits to the A-TDMA modems.

The following URL's should prove instructive:

http://tinyurl.com/3x4m74

http://tinyurl.com/34zzk9

Also read about a-tdma profile configs here:

http://tinyurl.com/2vqttj

..and then specific line-card support issues for upstream profiles:

http://tinyurl.com/2sgg37

I would recommend you start with, as the documents suggest, the default profiles for mixed tdma/atdma.

To see example configs for this, see:

http://tinyurl.com/2tjvnx

I also want to point out several important caveats with Cisco's DOCSIS 2.0 support which may, or may not be important depending on the type/featureset of the linecards you have (from the following URL):

"Restrictions for DOCSIS 2.0 A-TDMA Services

-Advanced hardware-based spectrum management is not supported for DOCSIS 2.0 mixed-mode and A-TDMA upstreams. Advanced spectrum management features (such as guided frequency hopping, dynamic upstream modulation, and proactive CNR-based frequency hopping and channel width changes) can be configured only on DOCSIS and EuroDOCSIS 1.X upstreams. You cannot use these features on channels configured for mixed mode or DOCSIS 2.0 A-TDMA mode. Advanced hardware-based spectrum management for A-TDMA operations is scheduled to be supported in a future release of the Cisco IOS software.

-DOCSIS 2.0 A-TDMA cable modems will not register on a TDMA upstream if an A-TDMA or mixed upstream exists in the same MAC domain, unless the CMTS explicitly switches the cable modem to another upstream using an Upstream Channel Change (UCC) message. DOCSIS 1.0 and DOCSIS 1.1 cable modems cannot register on an A-TDMA-only upstream."

Best of luck,

-Tk