Related subject matter is disclosed in the following patent applications, which are commonly owned and co-pending with the present application, and the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference: U.S. application Ser. No. 13/458,368 filed Apr. 27, 2012, entitled “NETWORK MONITORING WITH ESTIMATION OF NETWORK PATH TO NETWORK ELEMENT LOCATION”; U.S. application Ser. No. 13/458,435 filed Apr. 27, 2012, entitled “MAPPING A NETWORK FAULT”; and U.S. application Ser. No. 13/458,472 filed Apr. 27, 2012, entitled “ESTIMATING A SEVERITY LEVEL OF A NETWORK FAULT”.
Program providers such as multiple system operators, television networks and stations, cable TV operators, satellite TV operators, studios, wireless service providers, and Internet broadcasters/service providers, among others, may require broadband communication systems to deliver programming and like content to consumers/subscribers over networks via digital or analog signals. Such networks and physical plants can be extensive and complex and are typically difficult for an operator to manage and monitor for faults, impairments, and like maintenance and other issues. For instance, the monitoring of network maintenance activities may particularly present problems to operators of extensive cable networks.
By way of example, a cable network may include a headend which is connected to several nodes that may provide access to IP or ISPN networks. The headend typically interfaces with a cable modem termination system (CMTS) which has several receivers with each receiver connecting to numerous nodes each of which connect to numerous network elements, such as modems, MTA (media terminal adaptors), set top boxes, terminal devices, customer premises equipment (CPE) or like devices of subscribers. For instance, a single receiver of the CMTS may connect to several hundred or more network elements. Cable modems may support data connection to the Internet and other computer networks via the cable network, and the cable networks provides bi-directional communication systems in which data can be sent downstream from the headend to a subscriber and upstream from a subscriber to the headend. The cable networks typically includes a variety of cables such as coaxial cables, optical fiber cables, or a Hybrid Fiber/Coaxial (HFC) cable system which interconnect the cable modems of subscribers to the headend in a tree and branch structure where terminal network elements (MTA, cable modem, set top box, etc.) reside on various optical nodes. The nodes may be combined and serviced by common components at the headend.
Typically, the process for tracking which terminal devices are attached to which optical node and the like is a manual process. For instance, as a new customer's services are first enabled, a network operator may identify the specific node or location of the user and enter this information manually into a customer management database. Information of such connections is valuable for resolving physical layer communications issues, performing periodic HFC plant maintenance, and planning future service expansions. However, when the data is inaccurate or incomplete, it can often lead to misdiagnosis of issues, excessive costs associated with maintenance, and prolonged new deployments. In addition, as communication traffic increases or new services are deployed, the need to understand loading of parts of the network becomes important, particularly if existing subscribers must be reallocated to different parts of nodes of the network.
Thus, as discussed above, any kind of topological network location requires the manual entry of information into a database. This can be a fairly time consuming and tedious task. In practice, cable service providers typically solely rely upon customer calls and manual technician analysis to locate issues in their network and physical plants.
Various features of the embodiments described in the following detailed description can be more fully appreciated when considered with reference to the accompanying figures, wherein the same numbers refer to the same elements.
There exists a need for a management and/or monitoring system, tool and/or method that enables issues occurring in a network, such as a cable network, to be proactively and automatically located. For example, information concerning the geographical location of an issue, the nature of the issue, and/or the severity of an issue should provide useful information to a network operator if provided in a timely manner so that issues can be quickly detected, isolated, located and addressed. In addition, historical, long term, and periodic health information about a network may aid in determining trends that may indicate slow and steady degradation of a network element or component. Such degradation may not otherwise be detected based on spot checks until an actual failure occurs. If at least some of these tasks are accomplished automatically and if such a system or tool is able to scale across extremely large networks, this may permit network operators to become more proactive with network maintenance activities and to achieve higher levels of network availability and reliability. This may also enable operational costs to be reduced by decreasing the need for real time troubleshooting at a time after the occurrence of the problem or issue. Still further, the periodic collection and analysis of network conditions may provide a view into critical network indicators and aid in resolving issues prior to customer impact.
This disclosure describes a method of estimating a physical location of a network fault producing linear distortion or excessive loss impairments. Information is received electronically concerning the physical topology of the network by data pulls of information concerning network components and geographic locations of the network components and terminal network elements and geographic locations of the terminal network elements. A network fault is detected by automatically and electronically monitoring at least one performance parameter transmitted via upstream communications from the terminal network elements, and a physical location of a network fault on the network is automatically estimated based on the at least one performance parameter, the information of the physical topology of the network, and the terminal network element or elements from which the at least one performance parameter was received that indicated the network fault. A list of network components that require inspection and that may provide a source of the network fault is automatically generated.
This disclosure also describes a signal processing electronic device for populating a display of an interactive graphical user interface with a diagnostic alarm corresponding to a fault detected on the network. The device has at least one processing unit that is configured to receive information electronically of a physical topology of the network by data pulls of information concerning network components and geographic locations of the network components and terminal network elements and geographic locations of the terminal network elements. The at least one processing unit is also configured to detected a network fault by automatically and electronically monitoring at least one performance parameter transmitted via upstream communications from the terminal network elements and to automatically estimate a physical location of the network fault based on the at least one performance parameter, the information of the physical topology of the network, and the terminal network element or elements from which the at least one performance parameter was received that indicated the network fault. The at least one processing unit is further configured to automatically generate a list of network components that require inspection and that may provide a source of the network fault.
In addition, this disclosure describes at least one non-transitory computer readable storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to receive information electronically of a physical topology of a network by data pulls of information concerning network components and geographic locations of the network components and terminal network elements and geographic locations of the terminal network elements and to detect a network fault by automatically and electronically monitoring at least one performance parameter transmitted via upstream communications from the terminal network elements. In addition, a physical location of the network fault is estimated based on the at least one performance parameter, the information of the physical topology of the network, and the terminal network element or elements from which the at least one performance parameter was received that indicated the network fault, and a list of network components that require inspection and that may provide a source of the network fault is automatically generated.
For simplicity and illustrative purposes, the principles of embodiments are described by referring mainly to examples thereof. In the following description, numerous specific details are set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the embodiments. It will be apparent however, to one of ordinary skill in the art, that the embodiments may be practiced without limitation to these specific details. In some instances, well known methods and structures have not been described in detail so as not to unnecessarily obscure the embodiments.
According to an embodiment, network monitoring is performed such that information concerning geographic location of monitored network elements, such as cable modems or the like, and associated network component topology, such as HFC components and the like, are automatically populated into a network management database or the like for purposes of providing a visual display, such as a geographically accurate street map or satellite image of a region of a service area, that can clearly indicate a fault or other issue and the geographical location thereof. Thus, the path that the network takes geographically is displayed on the map along with the physical location of network elements and components within the network. Such a map provides a useful network management tool to network operators and field technicians for resolving issues in an efficient and prompt manner.
As one contemplated example, the map can be provided as part of a graphical interface which displays faults of varying severity levels ranging from critical to completely non-service affecting. Accordingly, in at least some embodiments, the severity of a fault on the network is automatically determined and displayed with the estimated geographic location of the fault on the map.
In addition, the network monitoring and management system or tool can be provided and fully integrated into software that is loaded and resides on a server or remote server connected to or communicating with the network. Of course, the software may reside on other devices and equipment such as equipment located at the headend of the network, cloud devices, and portable or mobile devices. This approach eliminates the need for manual analysis of data and permits large amounts of data to be automatically analyzed electronically by microprocessors or the like on a large scale.
The network management tool or software may estimate and make assumptions regarding probable tap and passive locations and couple this information with Keyhole Markup Language (KML) geographical data and known optical node location data. From this cumulative information, the network management tool or software can estimate and automatically populate a map or the like of a given service area with monitored cable modem locations and associated network component topology.
The geographic location of a fault and surrounding network path can be estimated, isolated, and displayed despite minimum information and manually entered data concerning the actual network path or network element location being available. The graphical interface can identify and display specific network elements as problematic. As an example, a network or HFC component such as cables, taps, passives, or the like that is identified as a suspect component potentially contributing to linear distortion or excessive loss impairments may be identified and displayed as a location of a fault. Whether a fault impacts a single subscriber or a group of subscribers may also be estimated and shown in the display.
Still further, the network management tool may be used to identify clusters or groups of network elements or cable modems that may share network or HFC infrastructure, such as common components including optics, nodes, amps, cables, taps, passives, and the like. In this regard, Management Information Base (MIB) information for service groups readily available via data pulls from a CMTS or like equipment at the headend of the network can be used in conjunction with the above referenced geographical location information. Network element groups or clusters can be readily displayed via the graphical interface and without the need for the software to reference other sources, perform testing, or wait for common impairment signature alarms to be raised.
Still further, the severity of a fault may be estimated with respect to upstream impairments through association of physical layer metrics including pre and post forward error correction (FEC) along with the number of impacted network elements or subscribers. Higher priority alarms are assigned to groups of network elements or subscribers that exceed threshold values. In contrast, lower priority alarms can be assigned to faults detected for single network elements or subscribers.
According to an embodiment, the graphical interface referenced above may be presented in the form of a so-called “dashboard” to a user such as personnel of a network operations center. Critical alarms may be shown across the entire network in a geographical display of the network or parts thereof. In addition, access may be provided to statistics via use of the dashboard to allow the user to monitor the overall health of their network.
Various snap-shot views of a graphical user interface are provided in
When an issue, fault or alarm is identified, it can be associated and displayed with other issues, faults and alarms based on geographical proximity. For instance, see the alarms 14 within circle 26 in
After an issue is first identified by the network monitoring and management system, tool or software, the operator or user may be provided with several options to further investigate the apparent problem or problems. For instance, network issues may be isolated by “serving group” or “geographic proximity” (i.e., clustering) and may be prioritized by severity based on the number of customers/subscribers affected and the extent to which faults are service-affecting. The network faults can be linked by the management software to a map interface which enables the fault to be connected to a physical location in the network.
In
A more local view of a street map 52 is shown in
Another view similar to
Accordingly, after a network operator center user views the above referenced dashboards and investigates alarms therewith, for instance as shown above, and has identified a particular issue that needs to be resolved, the network monitoring and management tool, software or system can be used to assist the user in sending an appropriate field technician to the correct geographical location. The user can also use the management tool or software to assess the urgency with respect to the need to resolve the issue.
The network monitoring and management system, tool or software can also be used by a service technician in the field. For example, the network monitoring and management software may be run on a remote server that is accessible by the technician such as via a secure wireless web interface. For instance, a mobile device, such as a portable, lap-top, notebook, or tablet computer, a smart phone, or the like may be used to obtain various views, information and maps as discussed above. Accordingly, provided information can be used for rapid, real-time debugging of field issues and provide geographic information, provide real-time monitoring of upstream and downstream performance metrics and error states, and permit a technician to see the interdependency of multiple issues. The above can reduce the need for the technician to access the inside of residences, reduce the number of calls the technician needs to make to the head-end, and enable the technician to update network topology information while in the field. For purposes of this disclosure, “real-time” includes a level of responsiveness that is sufficiently fast to provide meaningful data that reflects current or recent network conditions as well as a level of responsiveness that tolerates a degree of lateness or built-in delay.
By way of example, a tablet 70 is shown in
Various methods are used by the network monitoring and management system, software, and tool described above that enables fault determination, fault location, mapping of the network geographically, displaying of faults with and without network topology information, displaying a cluster of network elements impacted by the same fault, and the severity of the fault. Embodiments of these methods are provided below.
Network operators seeking to implement a large scale network monitoring and management system are challenged by the need to enter all network topology information into a database for use by the network monitoring and management software. This manual data entry process can be extremely time consuming and expensive; however, if accomplished, such a database and information can provide extremely valuable information to the network operator.
An embodiment of the network monitoring and management system includes an automated process of approximating the path of a network. Thus, a manual task of entering and defining network path is not required, and the task of populating a database with such information is accomplished quickly with little or no manual effort. For this purpose, KML data can be used to estimate the path of a cable network, for instance, the path cabling of the network takes between a node (i.e., such as a fiber optic node) and a terminal network element (for instance, a cable modem). With this approach, slight errors in path estimation are tolerated, and the location estimation of network issues can be accurate.
Keyhole Markup Language (KML) is an Extensible Markup Language (XML) notation for expressing geographic annotation and visualization within Internet-based, two-dimensional maps and three-dimensional browsers. The KML file specifies a set of features (place marks, images, polygons, 3D models, textual descriptions, etc.) for display in any type of geospatial software implementing KML encoding. Each place or feature on the map is assigned a longitude and latitude. KML files may be distributed in KMZ files, which are zipped files with a “.kmz” extension. The contents of a KMZ file typically include a single root KML document (notionally “doc.kml”) and optionally any overlays, images, icons, and 3D models referenced in the KML including network-linked KML files. By convention the root KML document is at root level and referenced files are in subdirectories (e.g. images for overlay images).
Accordingly, via the use of KML data, the physical locations of network faults and physical geographic location information of fiber nodes in the network can be displayed on a street map or satellite image. Fiber node information is typically stored by the network operator and would be readily available to the network monitoring and management software by importing such data via data pulls. Determination of network fault locations is discussed later in a separate section.
The method of mapping a network path can include estimating a geographic path of cables of a network between a geographic location of a network component and a geographic location of a terminal network element electronically using Keyhole Markup Language (KML) data of a surrounding geographic area (i.e., streets, etc.). Such a method can also include populating a geographically-accurate map with the geographic location of the network component, the geographic location of the terminal network element, and the estimated geographic path. The produced geographic map data may be displayed via geospatial software implementing KML encoding. During the estimating step, the KML data can be used to electronically determine a path corresponding to a shortest walking distance between the geographic location of the network component and the geographic location of the terminal network element, and the path corresponding to the shortest walking distance can be used as the geographic path of the cables of the network. A visual form of the geographic map can be displayed by a user with geospatial software implementing KML encoding in which the network component, the terminal network element, and the geographic path are graphically shown on the visual form of the geographic map. In addition, a geographic location of a suspected network fault can be added onto the geographic map for being graphically shown on the visual form of the geographic map.
Information can be electronically received concerning the network component and the geographic location of the network component. For example, the network component may be a fiber optic node and the information may be imported from a database via a cable modem termination system (CMTS).
Information can also be electronically received concerning the terminal network element and the geographic location of the terminal network element. For example, a service address of the terminal network element can be imported from a database, and the geographic location of the terminal network element on the geographic map can be marked as the geographic location of the service address. A location of a tap of the terminal network element can be defined as a location on a street in front of the service address. The location of a drop cable can be estimated as a connection between the geographic location of the service address and the estimated location of the tap. A path corresponding to a shortest walking direction from the network component to the terminal network element along streets included in the geographic map can be determined and used as the geographic path of the network between the network component and the tap.
The above path estimating procedure can be repeated automatically by the software for each terminal network element connected to the network component, and the numerous paths estimated can be overlaid to produce an overall estimated network path for a predetermined service area of the network.
A determination as to which cable modem is connected to which fiber node can be made, for instance, by either of the following alternatives. If information is readily available with respect to which network elements are in which DOCSIS serving groups, then a particular fiber node will be connected to the cable modems that are known to be within the same serving group assigned to the node. Alternatively, if this information is not readily accessible by the network monitoring and management software, then each cable modem is determined (estimated) to be connected to the fiber node to which it is physically closest (i.e., Manhattan distance).
With the above information displayed on a geographical map, points where paths intersect, but have not previously been marked as taps, can be identified as splitters. The only actual difference between a tap and a splitter is the power ratio of the outputs. In addition, points of network power level discontinuities observed relative to network architecture can be identified as locations of amplifiers.
With the above information, the network path and location of network elements and components can now be estimated and displayed by the network monitoring and management software. This software also provides the user with the ability to adjust the path and edit (add, delete or move) elements and components within the graphic display of the network and save them to the database as such information is verified by a field technician or the like. Thus, as more and more information is added into the database and saved, the accuracy of the results and future results can be further improved.
A signal processing electronic device, such as a server or remote server can run an application to provide the above process steps. In addition, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the above discussed operations can also be provided.
In addition, various modifications can be implemented with the above described method. For example, corrections of the path estimation based on the curvature of the earth, summation of highly segmented paths into a single path, and removal of redundant data for scalability can be implemented to refine the estimated path or provide a desired view to the user.
Customers/subscribers and their network elements must be linked to points on a map for purposes of being able to connect faults with a proper geographic location on the map. In some instances, there may be only a minimum amount of network element location data available to be accessed and automatically imported by the network monitoring system. When a minimum amount of information can be provided, the following process can be used to geographically locate issues within the network and prioritize the faults in order of severity.
The billing/service address associated with the Media Access Control (MAC) address on the cable modem/network element can be obtained and combined with information concerning DOCSIS serving groups to properly group cable modems together. When a fault is believed to affect such a group of modems, the numerous faults or alarms associated with each individual modem can be combined and prioritized into a single, higher priority, network fault.
For example, the customer's billing/service address is linked to the MAC address of the cable modem. This address is positioned on a map to identify the physical location of this particular cable modem. The MAC addresses are linked to the DOCSIS serving group to group modems in physical groups that will likely share the same network components. Thus, when a fault occurs in the network, the network monitoring and management system searches for groups of modems which are located near each other physically and share the same DOCSIS serving group. These groups are identified as a “Cluster”. Any fault affecting the cluster can be identified as a single higher priority fault, as compared to being identified as a large number of individual and unrelated low priority faults.
Thus, according to an embodiment, a method of mapping a network fault includes the steps of receiving information electronically concerning geographical coordinates of terminal network elements on a network and an association of the terminal network elements with shared network components and monitoring a performance parameter transmitted over the network via upstream network communications from each one of the terminal network elements. Terminal network elements from which the performance parameter monitored is unacceptable relative to a predetermined threshold for the performance parameter are identified. A cluster of terminal network elements estimated to be subject to a common network fault is defined by including terminal network elements within the cluster that are: (i) identified as discussed above; (ii) within a predetermined geographic distance from each other as determined from the geographical coordinates obtained as discussed above; and (iii) are associated with a common shared network component of the network. The geographic coordinates corresponding to a center of the defined cluster and a radius of the defined cluster may also be estimated and indicated. A geographic map is then populated with a single cluster alarm for the network fault including an identification of the terminal network elements within the cluster. The geographic map may be displayable via geospatial software.
During the monitoring of performance parameters, different types of performance parameters may be monitored to identify different types of fault issues. Thus, during the step of defining a cluster, the terminal network elements included within the cluster may or may not be limited to terminal network elements subject to at least one selected type of the different types of fault issues.
For purposes of determining the set of terminal network elements on the network that are within a predetermined geographical proximity of the network fault, service addresses of terminal network elements on the network can be imported and used to determine whether or not terminal network elements are within the predetermined geographical proximity and to provide the geographic locations of the network elements to be populated on the geographic map. Since each terminal network element has a unique Media Access Control (MAC) address, the step of importing service addresses comprises the step of using known information of Media Access Control (MAC) addresses to link terminal network elements to the service addresses.
For purposes of determining which terminal network elements are within a common serving group, information can be imported concerning serving groups to which terminal network elements are linked and which terminal network elements are within a common serving group associated with the operation of the network component. By way of example, information concerning DOCSIS serving groups can be imported via data pulls from a cable modem termination system (CMTS) connected to the network. The data pulls from the CMTS can be from Management Information Base (MIB) information on the CMTS.
Information available with respect to Media Access Control (MAC) addresses of terminal network elements on the network can be used to link terminal network elements to the service addresses and to the common service group. The above described method can also include displaying a visual form of the geographic map with geospatial software in which the alarm or alarms, network component, and the cluster of terminal network elements are graphically shown on the visual form of the geographic map. Examples of shared network components can include a node, a fiber optic node, a passive optic splitter, a passive optic network unit, an amplifier, a tap, a cable, and the like. Still further, the method can further comprise a step of prioritizing the alarm associated with the network fault such that the network fault affecting the cluster is provided with a higher priority as shown on the geographic map than a different alarm for a network fault associated with a single terminal network element.
Based only on the geographic coordinates of each of the cable modems reporting an issue in
A signal processing electronic device, such as a server or remote server, can run an application to provide the above process steps. In addition, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the above discussed operations can also be provided.
A combination of monitored parameters and network topology information can be used to identify the likely physical locations of cable network defects. This approach is able to be implemented in software through straightforward numerical analysis. Complex image recognition and artificial intelligence are not required. In addition, a combination of sub-algorithms can be used to locate a common network failure point even when several different and potentially, seemingly unrelated, issues are observed.
A method of estimating the physical location of a network fault which is producing linear distortion or excessive loss impairments may include the step of receiving information electronically of a physical topology of a network. This may include data pulls of information concerning network components and geographic locations of the network components and terminal network elements and geographic locations of the terminal network elements. The method may also include the steps of detecting a network fault by automatically and electronically monitoring at least one performance parameter transmitted via upstream communications from terminal network elements on the network and automatically estimating a physical location of the network fault on the network based on the at least one performance parameter detected, the information of the physical topology of the network obtained, and the terminal network element or elements from which the at least one performance parameter was received that indicated the network fault. Thereafter, the method includes automatically generating a list of network components that may require inspection and may provide a source of the network fault. By way of example, the network components may include drop cables, taps, trunk cables, amplifiers, and node components.
The network may be a hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) network which interconnects the terminal network elements, such as cable modems, to a headend of the network having a cable modem termination system (CMTS) via a tree and branch network structure. The upstream communications are herein defined as communications transmitted in a direction from the terminal network elements toward the headend.
The method may also include the step of automatically and electronically populating a geographically-accurate map with a geographic location of a network component to which the network fault is attributed, a geographic location of each the terminal network elements impacted by the network fault, and a diagnostic alarm identifying the network fault. According to an embodiment, the map is displayable with the use of geospatial software.
A subset of monitored parameters is used to determine which elements in the physical network are potential points of fault. The monitored parameters can include, for instance: downstream power level (absolute and delta); upstream power level (absolute and delta); microreflections; upstream filter coefficient ratio; carrier-to-noise ratio (CNR)/signal-to-noise ratio (SNR); and modulation error ratio (MER).
According to one example, the upstream filter coefficient ratio, which can also be referred to as an Equalization Power Ratio (EPR), can be used in detecting the presence of faults in a cable network. The equation for this ratio is a 10 log of the ratio between tap energy used for correction divided by the total energy (including the main tap) of the equalizer of the cable modem. Thus, the equation may read: EPR=10*log(TCE/TE); where TCE stands for Tap Correction Energy (i.e., the sum of the energy used by the equalizer in all of the taps, except the main tap) and TE stands for Total Energy (i.e., the sum of all of the energy used by the equalizer in all of the taps, including the main tap). Thus, with this particular parameter, the presence of a fault on the network is detected based on a determination of how much energy is needed by a cable modem for equalization correction of upstream communications. For example, after a certain level of correction is required, this is used as a tool for the indication of a potentially faulty component on the network.
After a fault is detected and relevant network topology is obtained, the following algorithms may be used to estimate the physical location of a fault. For example, if only a single cable modem within a common serving group of modems sharing common network components reports an unacceptable drop in downstream and upstream power level, then it is automatically estimated that the likely network elements which are causing the issue are the drop cable of the single cable modem, the associated tap, and the trunk cable feeding the tap. However, if multiple cable modems in the same serving group report this drop in power level, the drop cables, associated taps, and trunk cables feeding these taps are all identified as likely causes of the issue. However, the elements furthest upstream within the network topology are prioritized as the most likely location of a common defect in the network in this case.
If only a single cable modem within a common serving group of cable modems reports an unacceptable level of microreflections or in its upstream filter coefficient ratio (i.e., EPR as discussed above), or if there is an unacceptable drop in either of these parameters and an absolute power level value that is marginal, then it is estimated that the likely network elements which are causing the issue are the drop cable, the associated tap, and the trunk cable feeding the tap. If multiple cable modems in the same serving group report an unacceptable level of microreflections or in their upstream filter coefficient ratios, or if there is an unacceptable drop in either of these parameters and an absolute value that is marginal, then the drop cables, associated taps, and trunk cables feeding these taps are all identified as likely causes of the issue. However, the network elements which are most frequently identified in common are prioritized as the most likely location of a common defect in the network.
If multiple cable modems within the serving group are showing both reflection and power drop issues, both sets of elements are identified as potential causes. However, the power defect result is prioritized even if the true issue is reflection based. This is because the power defect result will more likely identify the correct point in the network to address to solve the issue.
If a power drop issue is observed on only the upstream or downstream signal, then prioritization is placed upon amplifier and node elements.
If one or more cable modems are showing unacceptable levels of CNR/SNR or MER and are showing acceptable power levels, then priority is placed on the amplifier and node elements within the system. However, if one or more cable modems are showing unacceptable levels of CNR/SNR or MER and are showing unacceptable power levels, then priority is placed on the power level fault identification as discussed above (i.e., drop cable, the associated tap, and the trunk cable feeding the tap).
According to an embodiment, an alarm is automatically raised for the issue shown in
In the example shown in
An algorithm for automatically estimating the location of the reflection related fault may include weighting or assigning each cable drop, tap, and down feeder cable with a value of one for each cable modem reporting a reflection issue, and weighting or assigning a tap or split at a terminating end of the feeder cable with a value of 1 or less. The weight of each element or component is incremented each time referenced by a different cable modem. The fault location is estimated as the component having the highest weight.
In the example shown in
A signal processing electronic device, such as a server or remote server, can run an application to provide the above process steps and analysis. In addition, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the above discussed operations can also be provided.
A challenge associated with large scale network monitoring and alarming is proper determination and assignment of severity level to each alarm. For example, this is particularly important when dealing with extremely large networks where there may be thousands of alarms across millions of customers.
An embodiment of the present development monitors numerous performance parameters which can individually, or in concert, indicate a wide variety of performance or potential performance issues. Thus, it is necessary to consistently and accurately rate and prioritize network alarms in a manner that can scale across these very large scale networks.
According to the embodiment, a bank of parameters are monitored on the cable modems and include absolute value of the parameters, the delta in the values and the delta as a function of the absolute value for each modem. If any of these values drop below a configurable threshold, an alarm is raised. Once an alarm is raised, it is assessed for its severity level based on the following.
If an alarm is raised, but both the pre-FEC and post-FEC Bit Error Rates (BER) are acceptable, then the alarm is determined to be at the lowest (minor) level, is not service-affecting, and is a candidate for proactive maintenance at the convenience of the network operator.
If the alarm is raised and the pre-FEC BER is unacceptable, but the post-FEC BER is acceptable, then the alarm is determined to be at the middle (major) level. This is still a candidate for proactive maintenance but should be monitored for deterioration as it can quickly become service-affecting.
If the alarm is raised and the post-FEC BER is unacceptable, then the alarm is determined to be at the highest (critical) level, is service-affecting, and must be addressed.
Once the severity of the alarm is estimated as described above, the alarms within each severity level are prioritized based upon the number of customers that are affected by the alarm.
Thus, as described above, a large number of parameters are monitored, and the severity of the alarm is assigned by the pre-FEC and post-FEC error rates, and not the severity of the impairment as shown by the original performance parameter that was being monitored. In a case where a single impairment is affecting multiple customers, each alarm will be detected individually, but then the alarms will be combined into a single, higher priority alarm. Otherwise, a single network issue which is affecting several customers would be viewed as several, independent low priority alarms, when in fact resolving a single issue would address many customers simultaneously.
By way of example, an embodiment may include estimating a level of severity of a network fault by monitoring performance parameters on upstream and downstream links to terminal network elements on a network to detect potential network faults and raising an alarm with respect to a potential network fault automatically if at least one of the performance parameters obtained crosses a preset threshold. After an alarm is raised, a level of severity is assigned to the alarm automatically based on pre and post forward error correction (FEC) bit error rates (BER) with respect to communications between an impacted terminal network element and headend equipment of the network, such as the CMTS. A total number of terminal network elements that may be impacted by the network fault is estimated and, when multiple alarms are raised of an equal level of severity, a higher priority is placed upon an alarm that affects service to a greatest number of terminal network elements.
The level of severity may be assigned a lower level of severity when the pre-FEC BER is within a predetermined acceptable range for pre-FEC BER and the post-FEC BER is within a predetermined acceptable range for post-FEC BER as compared to when at least one of the pre-FEC BER and the post-FEC BER is outside of its respective predetermined acceptable range. Further, the level of severity may be assigned a higher level of severity when the post-FEC BER falls outside of a predetermined acceptable range for post-FEC BER as compared to when the post-FEC BER is within the predetermined acceptable range.
Following the detection of a fault and the assignment of severity level, a geographically-accurate map can be automatically populated with a geographic location of a network component to which the network fault is attributed, a geographic location of each terminal network element impacted by the network fault, and a diagnostic alarm identifying the network fault and the level of severity of the network fault. The map may be displayable via geospatial software.
A signal processing electronic device, such as a server or remote server, can run an application to provide the above operations. In addition, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the above discussed operations can also be provided.
The above referenced signal processing electronic devices for carrying out the above methods can physically be provided on a circuit board or within another electronic device and can include various processors, microprocessors, controllers, chips, disk drives, and the like. It will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art the modules, processors, controllers, units, and the like may be implemented as electronic components, software, hardware or a combination of hardware and software.
While the principles of the invention have been described above in connection with specific networks, devices, apparatus, systems, and methods, it is to be clearly understood that this description is made only by way of example and not as limitation on the scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3838221 | Schmidt et al. | Sep 1974 | A |
4245342 | Entenman | Jan 1981 | A |
4385392 | Angell et al. | May 1983 | A |
4811360 | Potter | Mar 1989 | A |
4999787 | McNally et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5228060 | Uchiyama | Jul 1993 | A |
5251324 | McMullan | Oct 1993 | A |
5271060 | Moran et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5278977 | Spencer et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5347539 | Sridhar et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5390339 | Bruckert et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5463661 | Moran et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5532865 | Utsumi et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5557603 | Barlett et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5606725 | Hart | Feb 1997 | A |
5631846 | Szurkowski | May 1997 | A |
5694437 | Yang et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5732104 | Brown et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5771274 | Harris | Jun 1998 | A |
5790523 | Ritchie et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5862451 | Grau et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5867539 | Koslov | Feb 1999 | A |
5870429 | Moran et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5886749 | Williams et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5939887 | Schmidt et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5943604 | Chen et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
6032019 | Chen et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6061393 | Tsui et al. | May 2000 | A |
6108351 | Hardy et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6154503 | Strolle | Nov 2000 | A |
6229792 | Anderson et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6230326 | Unger et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6233274 | Tsui et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6240553 | Son et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6272150 | Hrastar et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6278730 | Tsui et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6308286 | Richmond et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6310909 | Jones | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6321384 | Eldering | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6330221 | Gomez | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6334219 | Hill et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6377552 | Moran et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6385773 | Schwartzman et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6389068 | Smith et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6434583 | Dapper et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6445734 | Chen et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6456597 | Bare | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6459703 | Grimwood et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6477197 | Unger | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6477526 | Hayashi et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6480469 | Moore et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6483033 | Simoes et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6498663 | Farhan et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6512616 | Nishihara | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6526260 | Hick et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6546557 | Ovadia | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556239 | Al Araji et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556562 | Bhagavath et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556660 | Li et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6559756 | Al Araji et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
6563868 | Zhang et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6570394 | Williams | May 2003 | B1 |
6570913 | Chen | May 2003 | B1 |
6574797 | Naegeli et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6588016 | Chen et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6606351 | Dapper et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6611795 | Cooper | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6646677 | Noro et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6662135 | Burns et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6662368 | Cloonan et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6671334 | Kuntz et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6687632 | Rittman | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6690655 | Miner et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6700875 | Schroeder et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6700927 | Esliger et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6711134 | Wichelman et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6741947 | Wichelman et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6748551 | Furudate et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6757253 | Cooper et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6772388 | Cooper et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6772437 | Cooper et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6816463 | Cooper et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6839829 | Daruwalla et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6853932 | Wichelman et al. | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6877166 | Roeck et al. | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6895043 | Naegeli et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6895594 | Simoes et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6906526 | Hart et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6928475 | Schenkel et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6944881 | Vogel | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6961314 | Quigley et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6961370 | Chappell | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6967994 | Boer et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6973141 | Isaksen et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
6985437 | Vogel | Jan 2006 | B1 |
6999408 | Gomez | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7002899 | Azenkot et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7010002 | Chow et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7017176 | Lee et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7032159 | Lusky et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7039939 | Millet et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7050419 | Azenkot et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7054554 | McNamara et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7058007 | Daruwalla et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7072365 | Ansley | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7079457 | Wakabayashi et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7099412 | Coffey | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7099580 | Bulbul | Aug 2006 | B1 |
7139283 | Quigley et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7142609 | Terreault et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7152025 | Lusky et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7158542 | Zeng et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7164694 | Nodoushani et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7177324 | Choudhury et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7197067 | Lusky et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7222255 | Claessens et al. | May 2007 | B1 |
7227863 | Leung et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7242862 | Saunders et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7246368 | Millet et al. | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7263123 | Yousef | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7274735 | Lusky et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7315573 | Lusky et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7315967 | Azenko et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7400677 | Jones | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7421276 | Steer et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7451472 | Williams | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7492703 | Lusky et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7554902 | Kim et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7573884 | Klimker et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7573935 | Min et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7584298 | Klinker et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7616654 | Moran et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7650112 | Utsumi et al. | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7672310 | Cooper et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7684315 | Beser | Mar 2010 | B1 |
7684341 | Howald | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7693042 | Wei | Apr 2010 | B1 |
7716712 | Booth et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7739359 | Millet et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7742697 | Cooper et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7742771 | Thibeault | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7764231 | Karr et al. | Jul 2010 | B1 |
7778314 | Wajcer et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7787557 | Kim et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7792183 | Massey et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7856049 | Currivan et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7876697 | Thompson et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7953144 | Allen et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7970010 | Denney et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
8000254 | Thompson et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8037541 | Montague et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8040915 | Cummings | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8059546 | Pai et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8081674 | Thompson et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8116360 | Thibeault | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8265559 | Cooper et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8284828 | Cooper et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8345557 | Thibeault et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
20010055319 | Quigley et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020038461 | White et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020044531 | Cooper et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020091970 | Furudate et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020116493 | Schenkel et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020154620 | Azenkot et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020168131 | Walter et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020181395 | Foster et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030028898 | Howald | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030043732 | Walton et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030067883 | Azenkot et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030101463 | Greene et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030108052 | Inoue et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030120819 | Abramson et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030138250 | Glynn | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030149991 | Reidhead et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030158940 | Leigh | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030179768 | Lusky et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030179770 | Reznic et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030179821 | Lusky et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030181185 | Lusky et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030182664 | Lusky et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030185176 | Lusky et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030188254 | Lusky et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030200317 | Zeitak et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212999 | Cai | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040015765 | Cooper et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040042385 | Kim et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040047284 | Eidson | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040052356 | McKinzie et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040062548 | Obeda et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040073937 | Williams | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040096216 | Ito | May 2004 | A1 |
20040109661 | Bierman et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040139473 | Greene | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040163129 | Chapman et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040181811 | Rakib | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040208513 | Peddanarappagari et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040233234 | Chaudhry et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040233926 | Cummings | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040248520 | Miyoshi | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040261119 | Williams et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050010958 | Rakib et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050025145 | Rakib et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050034159 | Ophir et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050039103 | Azenko et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050058082 | Moran et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050064890 | Johan et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050097617 | Currivan et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050108763 | Baran et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050122996 | Azenkot et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050163088 | Yamano et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050175080 | Bouillett | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050183130 | Sadja et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050198688 | Fong | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050226161 | Jaworski | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050281200 | Terreault | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060013147 | Terpstra et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060121946 | Walton et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060250967 | Miller et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060262722 | Chapman et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070002752 | Thibeault et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070058542 | Thibeault | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070076592 | Thibeault et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070076789 | Thibeault | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070076790 | Thibeault et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070086328 | Kao et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070094691 | Gazdzinski | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070097907 | Cummings | May 2007 | A1 |
20070133672 | Lee et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070143654 | Joyce et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070147489 | Sun et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070177526 | Siripunkaw et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070184835 | Bitran et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070189770 | Sucharczuk et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070206600 | Klimker et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070206625 | Maeda | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070211618 | Cooper et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070223512 | Cooper et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070223920 | Moore et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070245177 | Cooper et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080056713 | Cooper et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080062888 | Lusky et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080075157 | Allen et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080101210 | Thompson et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080125984 | Skendzic et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080140823 | Thompson et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080193137 | Thompson et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080200129 | Cooper et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080242339 | Anderson | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080250508 | Montague et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080274700 | Li | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080291840 | Cooper et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090031384 | Brooks et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090103557 | Hong et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090103669 | Kolze et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090158096 | Ali et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090249421 | Liu et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20100083356 | Steckley et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100095360 | Pavlovski et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100154017 | An et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100157824 | Thompson et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100158093 | Thompson et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100223650 | Millet et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100322390 | Bialk et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110026577 | Primo et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110030019 | Ulm et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110069745 | Thompson et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110110415 | Cooper et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110194418 | Wolcott et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110194597 | Wolcott et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110197071 | Wolcott et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110243214 | Wolcott et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20120054312 | Salinger | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120084416 | Thibeault et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120147751 | Ulm | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130003565 | Gotwals et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
69631420 | Dec 2004 | DE |
1235402 | Aug 2002 | EP |
1257089 | Nov 2002 | EP |
1341335 | Sep 2003 | EP |
55132161 | Oct 1980 | JP |
04208707 | Jul 1992 | JP |
6120896 | Apr 1994 | JP |
6177840 | Jun 1994 | JP |
09008738 | Jan 1997 | JP |
9162816 | Jun 1997 | JP |
10247893 | Sep 1998 | JP |
11230857 | Aug 1999 | JP |
2001044956 | Feb 2001 | JP |
2003530761 | Oct 2003 | JP |
2004172783 | Jun 2004 | JP |
2004343678 | Dec 2004 | JP |
0192901 | Jun 2001 | WO |
0233974 | Apr 2002 | WO |
0233980 | Apr 2002 | WO |
2004062124 | Jul 2004 | WO |
2008103262 | Aug 2008 | WO |
2009146426 | Dec 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Patent Cooperation Treaty, International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for International Application No. PCT/US2013/038217, Aug. 5, 2013, 11 pages. |
“DOCSIS Best Practices and Guidelines: Proactive Network Maintenance Using Pre-Equalization”, Cable Television Laboratories, Inc., Document ID# CM-GL-PNMP-V02-110623, Jun. 23, 2011. |
“A Simple Algorithm for Fault Localization Using Naming Convention and Micro-reflection Signature,” Invention Disclosure 60193, Cable Television Laboratories, Inc., Jun. 2008, p. 2. |
“Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specifications DOCSIS 3.0: MAC and Upper Layer Protocols Interface,” CM-SP-MULPIv3.0-I16-110623, Cable Television Laboratories, Inc., Jun. 2011, section 8, pp. 242-266. |
“Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specifications DOCSIS® 3.0—MAC and Upper Layer Protocols Interface Specification,” CM-SP-MULPIv3.0-I17-111117, Cable Television Laboratories, Inc., Nov. 17, 2011, pp. 770. |
“Pre-Equalization Based Pro-active Network Maintenance Process Model for CMs Transmitting on Multiple Upstream Channels,” Invention Disclosure 60203, Cable Television Laboratories, Inc., May 2009, pp. 2. |
“Pre-Equalization based pro-active network maintenance process model”, Invention Disclosure 60177, Cable Television Laboratories, Inc., Jun. 2008, pp. 2. |
Campos, L. A., et al., “Pre-equalization based Pro-active Network Maintenance Methodology,” Cable Television Laboratories, Inc., (presentation), 2012, pp. 32. |
Howald, R., “Access Networks Solutions: Introduction to S-CDMA,”presentation to Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) South Florida Chapter, Motorola, Inc., 2009, pp. 15. |
Howald, R., “Upstream Snapshots & Indicators (2009),” Regional Samples, Presentation to Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) South Florida Chapter, Jan. 2010, pp. 22. |
Howald, R., et al., “Characterizing and Aligning the HFC Return Path for Successful DOCSIS 3.0 Rollouts,” Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) Cable Tee Expo, Oct. 2009, pp. 66. |
Howald, R.,“DOCSIS 3.0 Upstream: Technology, RF Variables & Case Studies,” Access Networks Solutions, 2009, presentation to Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) South Florida Chapter, Jan. 2010, pp. 23. |
Hranac, R., “Linear Distortions, Part 1,” Communication Technology, Jul. 1, 2005, accessed at www.cable360.net/print/ct/operations/testing/15131.html, pp. 6. |
Liu, X., and Bernstein, A., “Variable Bit Rate Video Services in DOCSIS 3.0 Networks,” NCTA Technical Papers, 2008, pp. 12. |
Motorola., “White Paper: Expanding Bandwidth Using Advanced Spectrum Management,” Sep. 25, 2003, pp. 12. |
Newton's Telecom Dictionary, Sep. 1995, Flatiron Publishing, 9th Edition, pp. 216 and 1023, definitions of “carrier to noise ratio” and “signal to noise ratio”. |
Patrick, M., and Joyce, G., “Delivering Economical IP Video over DOCSIS by Bypassing the M-CMTS with DIBA,” SCTE 2007 Emerging Technologies, Topic Subject: Service Velocity & Next Generation Architectures: How Do We Get There?, 2007, pp. 17. |
Popper, A., et al, “An Advanced Receiver with Interference Cancellation for Broadband Cable Networks,” Juniper Networks, International Zurich Seminar on Broadband Communications Access 2002, pp. 23-1-23-6. |
Popper, A., et al, “Ingress Noise Cancellation for the Upstream Channel in Broadband Cable Access Systems,” Juniper Networks, IEEE International Conference on Communications 2002, vol. 3, pp. 1808-1812. |
Qureshi, S. U. H., “Adaptive Equalization,” IEEE, vol. 73, No. 9, Sep. 1985, pp. 1349-1387. |
Ramakrishnan, S., “Scaling the DOCSIS Network for IPTV,” Cisco Systems, Inc., SCTE Conference on Emerging Technologies and the NCTA Cable Show, 2009, pp. 19. |
Shelke, Y. R., “Knowledge Based Topology Discovery and Geo-localization,” Thesis, 2010, pp. 173. |
Thompson, R., et al., “256-QAM for Upstream HFC,” Spring Technical Forum Proceedings, 2010, pp. 142-152. |
Thompson, R., et al., “256-QAM for Upstream HFD Part Two,” SCTE Cable Tec Expo 2011, Technical Paper, pp. 22. |
Thompson, R., et al., “Multiple Access Made Easy,” SCTE Cable Tec Expo 2011, Technical Paper, pp. 23. |
Thompson, R., et al., “Optimizing Upstream Throughput Using Equalization Coefficient Analysis,” National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) Technical Papers, Apr. 2009, pp. 35. |
Thompson, R., et al., “Practical Considerations for Migrating the Network Toward All-Digital,” Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) Cable-Tec Expo, Oct. 2009, pp. 22. |
Thompson, R., et al., “64-QAM, 6.4MHz Upstream Deployment Challenges,” SCTE Canadian Summit, Toronto, Canada, Technical Paper, Mar. 2011, pp. 25. |
Volpe, B., and Miller, W., “Cable-Tec Expo 2011: Advanced Troubleshooting in a DOCSIS© 3.0 Plant,” Nov. 14-17, 2011, pp. 17. |
Wolcott, L., “Modem Signal Usage and Fault Isolation,” U.S. Appl. No. 61/301,835, filed Feb. 5, 2010. |
Zhao, F., et al., “Techniques for minimizing error propagation in decision feedback detectors for recording channels,” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 37, No. 1, Jan. 2001, pp. 12. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 13/458,368 dated Mar. 6, 2013, 21 pages. |
Patent Cooperation Treaty, International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for International Application No. PCT/US2013/038225, Jul. 29, 2013, 11 pages. |
Patent Cooperation Treaty, International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for International Application No. PCT/US2013/038202, Jul. 29, 2013, 10 pages. |
R. Hranac: “BER and MER fundamentals”, CISCO, 2007, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:http://www.gcscte.org/presentations/2008/Ron.Hranc—presentation-BER%20+%20MER%20Fun.pdf, [retrieved on Jul. 3, 2013], all pages. |
Patent Cooperation Treaty, International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for International Application No. PCT/US2013/038220, Jul. 18, 2013, 12 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 13/458,368 dated Oct. 18, 2013, 26 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130286852 A1 | Oct 2013 | US |