Developing an FTTx Ecosystem

Developing an FTTx
Ecosystem
(Introduction to IEEE P1904.1 SIEPON)

Glen Kramer, P1904.1 WG Chair
Glen.kramer@ieee.org

20 April 2012 SIEPON Seminar, Prague, Czech Republic 1

FTTx Ecosystem
What does it take to develop an ecosystem?
1. Common rules and principles
– A flexible reference architecture and unified design principles for
addressing technical needs in a consistent way
– Coordination and alignment among the relevant SDOs
– One ecosystem, not many

2. Multiple cooperating classes of actors
– Specification(s) promoting independent business models for optics
vendors, ASIC vendors, systems vendors, and test labs.
– All classes of actors together provide a complete lifecycle of product
development and verification

3. Multiple competing actors within each class
– Many optics vendors, ASIC vendors, test labs, system vendors, and
operators.
– Competition within each class promotes innovation, flexibility, and cost
efficiency.


EPON is a Universal Access Architecture

 All user types
– Residential
– Business
– Cellular backhaul
 All configurations
– SFU
– MDU/MTU
– FTTH
– FTTC/FTTN

 All Data Rates
– 1 Gb/s (.3ah-2004)
– 10/1 Gb/s (.3av-2009)
– 10/10 Gb/s (.3av-2009)

 One architecture simultaneously supports all user types,
all deployment configurations, and all equipment
generations on the same network!

What is SIEPON?
 EPON’s popularity grew very quickly. Recently, many EPON-
related projects have started in various SDOs or by operators
without much coordination.
– ITU-T SG15 is discussing relevant specifications (OMCI for EPON)
– BBF has completed TR-200: Using EPON in context of TR-101
– CableLabs has DOCSIS Provisioning of EPON project (DPoETM)
– Various operators or national bodies developed their own specifications

 In December 2009 IEEE SA and ComSoc started the IEEE
P1904.1 Service Interoperability in Ethernet Passive
Optical Networks project

 SIEPON is an “umbrella” standard that defines a common
reference architecture to ensure that EPON preserves a single
ecosystem, as opposed to multiple, nationally-controlled, and
fragmented ecosystems.


1: Common Rules and Principles
 SIEPON does not need to invent new technology or resolve
technical challenges

 Various architectural features
are already debugged, refined,

O
pe
deployed, and field-proven

ra
to
C

r
B ru e
B
fo S L
F sin nvi
S g m s
vi O ts

Ope
SI in e ab

R g ro
nm in

D
t
en EP en

eq E n
en
 The goal of

C s ir L

ro N
Operator

O u u le

ui PO me
D for Req ab

re N n

rator
D
m
C
A
IEEE p1904.1

en i n
ts
SIEPON project:

t
Address in a consistent
and uniform way

the diverse requirements
associated with
– Multiple service models

r
G ato
O
pe E

r
– Different provisioning and

pe
ra

O
to

management concepts
r

– Various deployment scenarios


Coordination with Other Groups
IEEE P1904.1 has established close and productive
relationships with

 CableLabs 802.3ah

– DPoE provides requirements IEEE 802.3av
OAM
for EPON in MSO environments 802.3 CableLabs
 Broadband Forum FAN
Ethernet
– TR-200 provides EPON Data DPoE 1.0
Path (EDP) requirements DPoE 2.0
– Coordinating activities of IEEE
WT-287 (optical monitoring) and P1904.1
WT-288 (deployment requirements) SIEPON
 ITU-T SG15 G.epon
– Coordinating activities on G.epon OMCI

 IEEE 802.3 ITU-T BBF
– Successfully cooperated to SG15/Q2 FAN
allow an increased OAM frame rate TR‐200
WT‐287
– Recently - added support for WT‐288
multicast LLID

2: Multiple Cooperating Classes of Actors

 IEEE 802.3 EPON and IEEE P1904.1 SIEPON specifications ensure
clean separation of functionality and precise definition of interfaces.

 This promotes business models
favoring competition within

Re
each class of actors and

qu
ire
cooperation across classes Operators Optics

m
en
Vendors

t s
 EPON ecosystem includes
multiple classes of actors Verified
Product
– Test Labs ASIC
– Operators Vendors
– System Vendors Test Labs

– ASIC Vendors
ts
– Optics vendors en
System
p on
Pro Vendors
 Each class requires and benefits du C om
ct
from the continued good health
of the other classes

3: Multiple Competing Actors in Each Class
Operators Test Labs Systems
 Brighthouse  CableLabs  Alcatel- Shanghai Bell
Networks  Iometrix  ARRIS
 China Telecom  UNH – IOL  Aurora Networks
 China Unicom  RITT  CommScope
 KDDI  Ericsson
 KT Optics  FiberHome
 NTT Corporation  Delta  Fujitsu
 Coretek  Hitachi
ASIC  Ligent  Huawei
 Broadcom Corp.
 Lightron  Mitsubishi Electric
 Cortina Systems
 LIG Neoptec  NEC
 Marvell
 Neophotonics  Oki Electric Industry
 Oliver Solutions
 OE Solutions  Sumitomo Electric
 PMC-Sierra
 Photop  ZTE Corporation
 Qualcomm
 Source Photonics

 Underlined are members of IEEE P1904.1 SIEPON Working Group

IEEE P1904.1 SIEPON
Project Information


Working Group Structure
TF1: Service Configuration and Provisioning
The P1904.1 WG currently Chair Glen Kramer Broadcom Corp.
works on four documents Vice Chair Ken-Ichi Suzuki NTT Corp.
Exec. Secretary Zhou Zhen Fiberhome
Chief Editor Marek Hajduczenia ZTE Corp.
 Main Specification
TF1: Service Configuration and Provisioning
– P1904.1/D2.3 Chair Lior Khermosh PMC-Sierra, Inc.
 Conformance Tests Editor Alan M. Brown Aurora Networks
– P1904.1/Conformance01 TF2: Performance Requirements and Service Quality
– P1904.1/Conformance02 Chair Curtis Knittle CableLabs
Editor Jeff Stribling Hitachi
– P1904.1/Conformance03
TF3: Service Survivability
Chair Seiji Kozaki Mitsubishi Electric
 The work is divided Editor Hesham ElBakoury Huawei
among 5 Task Forces  TF4: System/Device Management
Chair James Chen Hitachi
Editor Fumio Daido Sumitomo Electric
TF5: Conformance Test Procedures
Chair Toshihiko Kusano Oliver Solutions
Editor Motoyuki Takizawa Fujitsu
20 April 2012 Editor Liu Qian RITT

Project Timeline

Draft PAR to
Draft
P1904.1

NesCom
(before 19 Oct. 2009) standard to
D1.0
D3.0 RevCom
Baseline D2.0
PAR proposals Sponsor
WG Ballot
approved selected Ballot Std!

J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
u u e c o e a e a p a u u u e c o e a e a p a u u u e c o e a e a p a u u u e c o e a e a p a u u u e c o e
l g p t v c n b r r y n l g p t v c n b r r y n l g p t v c n b r r y n l g p t v c n b r r y n l g p t v c
Conformance

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Draft PAR to D1.0 D2.0 Std!
NesCom Baseline WG
P1904.1/

Draft
(before 29 July 2011) proposals Ballot standard to
selected
D3.0 RevCom
PAR
approved Sponsor
Ballot

- SIPON Working Group Meeting
- IEEE-SA Standards Board Meeting

Approved by the P1904.1 WG
on 9 February 2012.


How to Participate
Date Location Host
 SIEPON WG holds 6 Feb Piscataway, NJ IEEE-SA
meetings per year Apr Shanghai, China ZTE
 Any company is welcome Jun Busan, S. Korea Korea Telecom

2010
to join and participate Aug Beijing, China Fiberhome

Past Meetings
Oct Tokyo, Japan NTT
• Entity-based project
Dec Santa Monica, CA Broadcom + RITT
(One company = one vote)
Feb Vancouver, Canada PMC Sierra
• Companies must be IEEE Apr Louisville, CO CableLabs
Corporate members Jun Shenzhen, China Huawei

2011
 More information at Aug Kobe, Japan Sumitomo
Oct Kamakura, Japan Mitsubishi
• http://www.ieee1904.org/1/ Dec Shanghai, China China Telecom
Feb Palo Alto, CA Hitachi
Apr Prague, Czech Rep IEEE-SA & ICAP
Jun Louisville, CO CableLabs
Future Meetings Aug Sapporo, Japan (*) Fujitsu (*)
2012

(*) tentative Oct Beijing, China RITT & Fiberhome
Dec Shanghai, China (*) Qualcomm

Thank You


Developing an FTTx Ecosystem

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Developing an FTTx Ecosystem

More from IEEE Standards Association (IEEE SA)

Recently uploaded

Developing an FTTx Ecosystem