Cable Engineers Debate Best Way to Make IP Video Transition
TORONTO -- Cable engineers are debating the best way to make the big transition to all-Internet Protocol service delivery, now that operators are starting to embrace IP video technology. Speaking at the Society of Cable Telecom Engineers’ Canadian meeting last week, senior cable technologists spelled out several different ways to use bonded DOCSIS 3.0 broadband channels to transmit IP video programming to customers’ homes. By bonding several channels together, operators believe they can cobble together the capacity needed to carry bandwidth-rich IP video content.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
"We see the future as getting IP content to the home,” said Senior Vice President Dermot O'Carroll of Rogers Communications. “In a cable company, getting IP to the home means using DOCSIS.” He thinks cable operators will need anywhere from eight to 20 bonded DOCSIS 3.0 channels to bring IP video programming to subscribers. He said the range depends upon their node and service group sizes and the extent of fiber lines. O'Carroll said operators may need another 12 or more DOCSIS 3.0 channels to deliver data downstream at 150 Mbps or more to subscribers.
Some executives have set the bar for IP video even higher. John Ulm, a fellow on Motorola Mobility’s technical staff, told another SCTE panel that operators will need 24 to 32 QAM channels -- roughly 132MHz to 196MHz of capacity -- to place their entire video programming lineups on IP. He recommended that operators start moving in the IP direction right away by deploying specialized transcoding devices or hybrid QAM/IP video gateways in homes and serving the second and third screens in the home. “The video gateway is part of the migration strategy,” he said. “Ultimately, you want the transcoding to be done in the headend.”
Others agree. At a recent Denver conference hosted by Light Reading, ex-Charter Communications Chief Technology Officer Marwan Fawaz estimated operators will need to set aside 24 to 32 QAM channels to replicate their entire video lineups in IP and add such new services as network DVRs. A founding principal of Sarepta Advisors, Fawaz argued that a full IP simulcast would likely be the easiest transition path for operators. But he noted the method could also be the costliest path because of the heavy bandwidth load, making the approach a non-starter for some. He also noted the path would probably require cable providers to reclaim most, if not all, of their current analog spectrum and recycle the spectrum for the IP simulcasts.
If cable operators don’t have that much capacity available, Fawaz suggested they take some smaller steps first, such as moving VOD services and some “niche” networks over to IP and supporting them with hybrid QAM/IP set-tops or gateways. Another option is to use specialized transcoding devices, which would convert QAM video to IP video and beam those streams to tablets, PCs and other IP-enabled devices over a home Wi-Fi network, he said. Fawaz views cable’s IP video transition as inevitable. “It’s not a matter of if, but when, to make it, and how,” he said. He conceded the migration will take some time, even for the largest, most prepared operators.
O'Carroll countered that the combined bandwidth load for IP video and broadband data may not prove to be as great as many fear. He argued that cable providers may not have to dedicate a dozen or more channels for both IP video and high broadband data speeds because customers would likely just use such high downstream speeds to get IP video content on their own. He said operators might be able to get by with lower downstream speeds, and fewer broadband data channels, if they deliver strong enough IP video offerings.