To: Hiram Walker who wrote (4576 ) 7/10/1999 8:27:00 PM From: Raymond Duray Respond to of 12823
Hi Hiram, Glad to recieve your reply. Fertile grounds for further discussion. this renders TERN modems obsolete if it flies TTBOMK, only on completely new system built to suit this particular technique. Of which there are present 0% of all existing systems using this technique. It is a LAN environment, takes way most of the electronics in the last mile. I am curious if it is 100Base-T based or Gigabit Ethernet? Does it rely on new CAT5 UTP to be installed to every node or utilizes existing "last 300 yards Co-ax" or will they have to glass to the node? What's the maximun feasible distance from the muxer to the node? TERN uses QPSK on the upstream from what I have read,this is bandwidth inefficient,but the loss of bandwidth is made up for by the signal robustness. This is in agreement with my understanding. Libit uses INCA technology on the upstream which increases the signal,and narrows the channels increasing the capacity. TTBOMK, the USA standard is 6Mhz per channel, Europe is 8Mhz. How does the Libit solution fit in with the standards? Is it downstream and therefore irrelevant? Are they going to simply sidestep CableLabs and Docsis 1.x? TERN to me is for outdated,old tree and branch coax systems that are very poor in quality. And that for me is the beauty of their solution. No MSO "wants" to rip out existing plant. What business man would. TERN has come up with a very clever kludge and should rightly be proud to offer the MSOs a quick and dirty entry onto the infobahn. poor areas of Europe and Asia,especially Japan. Japan is poor? Wow, I didn't know that. <ggg> Ok, Ok, I know what you meant, I just couldn't resist. Best, Ray