Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : COM21 (CMTO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Laubach who wrote (1643)	2/1/2000 10:40:00 PM
From: lml	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2347

Mark: Thanks for your response to my inquiry, albeit it was a bit more than I expected, particularly on the MAC layer, which I now identify as Layer 2. PHY and MAC Layers [T]here is always some form of strict timing that is either derived directly from the downstream transmission itself or time stamps that are passed as MAC packets. These are used to precisely control the timing of the upstream PHY. DOCSIS does timing in . . . the PHY. . . DOCSIS is an asynchronous upstream packet burst. Why talk about PHY timing? Basically to give a sense that the time synchronization stability is a big deal and beyond the range of most microprocessors - at least in the price range required for cable modems. Processing packets in the MAC is more suited to general CPUs, but directly related to the $'s for performance of them. So, in short, timing is controlled by downstream transmission or packets in the MAC layer, where processing power is capable of meeting the demands imposed by the layer. This data is then utilized to control the upstream burstible traffic at the PHY layer. Am I thinking this through correctly? Also, what is the distinction between "transmission itself" and "time stamps that . . passed as MAC packets?" ASICs From your response to this question, I conclude that such a chip is not readily available in the market at least not yet at an affordable price. So the conclusion is it is highly unlikely that a proprietary protocol modem today can migrate to one that is DOCSIS compliant. Notwithstanding, I am aware of a company I have had the misfortune to be invested in for some time that has developed a IC with such characteristics, however, manufacturing issues are still being worked out. See Subject 4900 for an "SI" overview. The product is essentially a reprogrammable ASIC, as distinguished from an FPGA, due to its ASIC like qualities. At present, the exclusive rights to non-embedded applications to the technology have been licensed to ACTL. The company also maintains a strategic partnership with Infineon (fka Siemens Semi-conductor) in which Siemens has licensed the core technology for its owned embedded applications. The foregoing is why I inquired about the migration ability of proprietary cable-modems to DOCSIS standards.