Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Chipwa1:
From what "Derbinski" posted on the board a while back, the shares were likely issued to settle a claim by a debenture holder. I could not access the settlement online but that is far more likely why the shares were issued.
Spoke:
Unless I am mistaken, you have made a big deal out of standards as being a major problem with generating sales. It is really pointless to debate this any futher though.
I have said that the company needs to generate revenues soon or it will cease to exist. I do not see where I am sugar coating anything.
You are so certain that all of this is a scam. When I read your posts, you seem to use some leaps of faith to reach your conclusions. You may be right, but I just do not think that referring to opinions as outright facts means that something is a fact.
My only point is that I just do not know how Telcordia would endorse something that is a scam. And there are a lot of other good companies such as e-silicon, ATIS (listed on the Rim Semi Website) and now Teleconnect.
How does the company keep roping qualified companies into this if it is a scam?
If the company is able to at least get a commitment from someone (anyone) to actually use the chips, then maybe they could borrow money at decent terms and then remain a going concern. This could all be a pipe dream.
I haven't the faintest idea what is really happening and it would not surprise me if they close the doors tomorrow.
There is really no point in discussing this any futher.
427: I am impressed with Teleconnect -- they look like a real company who is very well established in the industry. My concern is that Rim Semi needs revenue (and soon).
Hound
Goldrusher:
Maybe the hotel was fooled by the company you have mentioned but I do not think that it is possible to fool Telcordia on DSL technology. I think that something close to 100% of the technologies in use today by phone companies were either invented, tested or endorsed by Telcordia.
I found a study on the web where a large Telco paid Telcordia - the same scientist who reviewed Cupria - to present to them what is wrong with VDSL2. They are clearly having trouble with performance IMO by looking at the presentation. I am not an expert at looking at technical PowerPoints but it sure looked like VDSL2 performance when faced with noise and cross-talk drops off significantly.
The industry looks to Telcordia for solutions. Now why this has not turned into orders for Cupria is a mystery to me.
Hound
Spoke:
The company controls its success or failure.
To be absolutely clear, I am not happy with what is going on and I certainly question why there are no orders to date for the technology.
You have always stated that standards are more important than anything else to drive revenue. Well that could be the issue. I have not a clue what the issue really is.
I believe that the company must get substantial orders for volume shipments soon or they will cease to exist - soon.
We will hopefully see soon whether or not this has all been lies or there is truth in all of this. I am willing to accept either way at this point.
I just do not believe right now that it is possible to buy Telcordia and get their chief DSL scientist to make such strong statements in a press release if they are not true.
Hound
Excel:
You're comparing apples to oranges. Clearwire is offering a service. Cupria is a product. They (Clearwire) could have selected WiMax or Qualcomm's MediaFlo technology to offer the same wireless internet service.
I would also venture to guess that WiMax has been in development longer than VDSL2 or IPSL.
I fail to see what Clearwire or WiMax has to do with Cupria.
Hound
Chipwa1:
I agree that the company is short on orders. If they do not get an order soon for something of substance then they will likely cease to exist.
Hound
Goldrusher:
I have no direct evidence that the tech actually works. I am just reading the PRs, President's letters and filings. My point is that I have not seen anything on this board that convinces me that it does not work as advertised.
Telcordia endorsed the technology -- the scientist that did that is extremely well respected in the industry as being an expert on DSL. If you Google on his name you will find that he is one of the world's foremost experts on the subject.
Hound
ChipsNW:
If you read the filings you will note that $395,000 was given to e-silicon and an additional $500,000 is necessary to complete the ASSP.
Sales would cure all. The question remains as why there has not been any. I have not seen any convincing arguments on this board that the company's PR and president's letter which state 40 and 40+ Mbps at 5500' feet was not actually achieved as reported. 3X better than ADSL2 and VDSL2 does not work at all at that distance.
Rim Semi is clearly out of money from one look at the balance sheet and the share price is almost zero. The market does not give them any credit for having a DSL chip which they claim is "best in class".
My point is that it is still at least possible that the business goals at at least one or two major telcos will make it required to save the company. I have no idea what is holding up orders but somebody could still decide that 40 Mbps at 5500 feet is just too compelling to pass up. If deployed on shorter loops one can only guess that the speed is much higher.
All IMO and to be clear, the shares could more easily go to zero before they ever see $1.
DERB:
If you look at the 8K from 23 April, $425K was extended for 30 days for about $23,000 or 5% per month.
Teleconnect looks impressive to me -- I could not tell how large they are but I doubt that they are located next to Fred's plumbing.
WHP:
I don't believe that the current management has raised $70MM. Doesn't the accumalated deficit date back to the inception of New Visual in 1985?
The tech was publicly endorsed by Telcordia via PR as being 40 to 100% better than existing VDSL2 12A and endorsed e-silicon (since they joined the IPSL SIG).
But, the company is undercapitalized and missed all stated deadlines.
They appear to have something viable to sell. The question is whether they will ever sell chips and achieve volume?
I do not know why a senior VP from Intel would get involved for stock options unless the tech is viable?? Options are worthless unless the company achieves success.
There is a growing market for IPTV worldwide that should require a solution if Rim Semi can ever get it together.
Excel:
I concur with you that WIMAX is a real product, but I also believe that copper broadband will still have its place.
WIMAX speeds are impressive only for short distances. I also do not believe that WIMAX is intended for everyday cable TV - just portable hand held TV devices and of course laptops.
The need for speed and reach for IPTV means that products like Cupria are still required.
Rim Semi just needs to get their act together and get the product to market.
Spoke:
I thought that you had discussed Intel providing funding to Ikanos - if that was not you, then my mistake.
I am also not trying to convince anything to anyone. I am just making a point that it is significant that Will Swope has joined the board of directors. I said myself that I did not know how significant. I am not stating that just because Swope joined the board that all of the problems with liquidity and lack of sales have been resolved.
I am not a blind supporter of the company. The company needs to raise money in a non-dillutive way and sell some chips (like soon).
There must be a chance for success -- just do not know how much of a chance.
Beechbreak: Then please explain how Swope is a paid supporter if all he received are worthless options in a company without any value (per what most write)?
Everyone should also consider that Intel is very much involved with WIMAX technology, so if that was going to end DSL, why would Swope waste his time with Rim Semi or with any DSL company?
The company has missed all deadlines and it is very frustrating but despite what everyone writes, a Senior VP at Intel believes enough in Rim Semi to join the board (for worthless options). That means something - for now not much but time will tell.
427:
The shares have to appreciate or the options awarded to Will Swope are worthless. I believe that his were priced at .03 cents (or something like that).
People appear to be very concerned that Will Swope might bring value to the company. When I Googled him, he appears to be involved in at least one high profile project for Intel. He might know a thing or two about guiding Rim to the finish line.
Spoke used to make a big deal about Intel giving funding to Ikanos -- but now a Senior VP from Intel joining the board means nothing. I suppose it would mean a lot more if Intel endorsed Rim vs. a senior employee, but its a start in my opinion.
The company has a lot more work to do to get things going in the right direction though - like selling some chips.
Goldrusher:
There are no products as the telco equipment makers will make the final "end user" products (line cards and modems) if there ever are purchase orders by telephone companies.
All Rim is claiming to make or wanting to make are the chips that go inside the products (whether FPGA or ASSP)
They can't go out and test the "chips" without development type equipment (which would not resemble a product that a consumer would ever use or a telco for that matter to deliver service in my opinion.
Spoke:
On the Rim website is states that the product is a development system "engineered to simplify the testing, evaluation and qualification process for R&D and product development teams" By "breadbox", he likely means that there are only products for testing available vs. anything that the telco or consumer can use today for deployment.
The test results represent a breakthrough if they are validated by the industry, but without disclosing all of the test parameters, I am not certain that they mean much (as the company designated itself "best in class".)
None of this really tells how long it would take to go to the fab if there are ever purchase orders.
Spoke:
Your "guess" may or may not be correct about actual Cupria performance, but I agree that so far there has been no actual verifiable 3rd party confirmation for the performance of Cupria in field trials (and no one other than Extreme Copper has purchased the product). And, there is no confirmation whether the order was shipped.
The Telcordia report does not state whether field trials were used so not certain that the 384 MBps figure is really valid for maximum speed (as we're left guessing as to how it was achieved).
But, a senior exec from Intel has just joined the board, which seems to be illogical if RIM does not have a real product with a chance to be commercially viable. I believe that Intel funded part of Ikanos (and I do not think that anyone can say that they are not a real company (other than LOY).
LYCUS:
In South Korea the majority of the population lives in towers where the 30 MHz profile of VDSL2 is effective because it can transmit 700 meters.
In the USA and a lot of the world, loops are a lot longer.
Spoke:
I understand your logic (that at the 30 MHz profile), speeds are higher at shorter distances (and that comparison at shorter distances should be with the 30 MHz profile to 30 MHz profile.
But, if Carriers are mainly looking at long loop applications, they would not use the 30 MHz profile (as speeds drop off signicantly with greater distance (as the article stated beyond 700 meters).
So, if 12 MHz profile is the profile of choice for longer loops it appears be a valid point of comparision to compare 12 MHz VDSL2 vs. Cupria (presumably at 12 MHz too???).
I may be incorrect, but the real value in the USA is what technology can transmit the furthest and the fastest without deploying fiber optics.
It remains to be seen whether it is Cupria as RIM has not released any results of field trials (based on the FPGA chipset version).
But, from everything that I have read VDSL2 DMT (in any profile) up to 30 MHz has not been able to provide 20-25 MBps of throughput at distances beyond 3-4 thousand feet which means carriers must spend a lot on fiber to shorten the copper loops.
Spoke:
I realize that this article is very dated but it explains that:
“Beyond 12 MHz — and in reality you don't even get that at the loop lengths we're talking about — it's not a service that we think is going to be very valid,” he said. “We're not really interested in saying ‘what can you do at 700 meters?’”
Based on this article, it appears to me that 12 MHz was compared because that is the profile for longer loops and is what the Carriers are using in the US and Canada.
There would be no reason to compare 30 MHz applications if that spectrum is not being used.
VDSL2 standard put on fast track for U.S. market
By Vince Vittore
May 9, 2005 12:00 AM
The next gen IP network needs to be able to handle a wider range of services and applications - and service providers are going to need intelligence at the IP network core. Get more info in this live Telephony Webcast: Thursday Jan. 24 2:00 PM ET | 11 PM ET.
For a number of reasons, not the least of which was a drawn-out debate over line coding that stalled initial phases, it took the better part of 10 years for ADSL to go from the lab to a mass consumer product that could deliver 3 Mb/s for Internet access. And even now, that speed is more the exception than the rule. The time frame for VDSL2, which moves into a critical two-week development period later this month, should be less than half of that if U.S. carriers get their way.
Very high-speed DSL (VDSL) technology in its original form has been available for at least six years, and, in fact, at one time was thought to be the solution for Bell companies' video plans. However, because the first version of the technology did not go through the traditional standardization process, few vendors developed products, and only Qwest, a handful of independent telcos and, more recently, some select Asian carriers, ever deployed the technology.
VDSL2, which promises speeds of 30 Mb/s and beyond, is starting life in an International Telecommunications Union (ITU) standards committee, and most of the technical debates have been settled. More important, both SBC Communications and BellSouth, along with a group of CLECs, are pushing for the technology as soon as possible. In fact, both RBOCs are perhaps more significantly involved in the development of the VDSL2 standard than most other technologies. Some of that stems from the fact that they want to use the technology as a sort of natural expansion of their ADSL deployments.
“In pushing for VDSL2, there are a number of objectives,” said Ralph Ballart, vice president of broadband infrastructure and services for SBC Laboratories. “One is compatibility with ADSL. That's reflected in the commitment we made to use [discrete multi-tone line coding]. The standard has been created with an eye to getting rapid VDSL2 compliance by the chip vendors.”
What makes the development of VDSL2 and ADSL significantly different, though, is the competitive dynamic faced by telcos. In the mid-1990s, when ADSL was still in its formative years, cable operators had vague designs on providing residential voice service but no real solid business plans, voice over IP (VoIP) was barely in the hobbyist phase and cable modem-based Internet access was a mere novelty for a lucky few. Fast forward a decade and cable operators are gobbling up chunks of the residential voice market fast, more than 1000 service providers are vying for attention in the VoIP market and cable modems have continued to hold a 2:1 ratio lead on DSL for broadband access. In order to respond, the largest telcos have greatly accelerated their video deployment plans. And in order to do that, VDSL2 can't come soon enough.
The urgency is so great, in fact, that some vendors are already preparing “pre-standard” VDSL2 equipment, hoping to tweak the gear when the standard is approved.
“I believe that the VDSL2 chipsets will appear as soon as the standard is closed,” said Ed Eckert, director of strategic standards for chip vendor Ikanos. “We're ready to go now.”
For its part, SBC will begin testing VDSL2 equipment even if the standard is not 100% complete, as long as future upgrades can be handled by uploading firmware to the chipsets, Ballart said. In addition, the company wants vendors to begin interoperability testing soon but won't stall deployment plans without it.
“We'll be expecting that we have a substantial effort around interoperability after the standard is final, but we're not going to wait for that,” said Gene Edmon, executive director of broadband for SBC Laboratories.
Several executives involved in the standardization process say the desire for VDSL2 is so strong that some carriers in particularly competitive markets won't wait even for the close of the standardization process.
“One result may be that people don't worry about standardization, particularly some of the CLECs,” said Ken Madison, senior product marketing manager of Centillium.
“If they can deploy in three months and provide 25 Mb/s symmetrical service, they'll do it.”
And like the early deployments of ADSL, carriers won't kill time waiting for full interoperability, he added. “I don't see any carrier daring to buy CO equipment from one vendor and CPE from another because interoperability is not going to be there for another two or three years.”
So what exactly will SBC, BellSouth and others get out of VDSL2 that they don't have with the various flavors of ADSL? In a word, speed. VDSL2 as it currently stands will have at least three different versions. In one, which calls for a spectrum allocation of up to 12 MHz, carriers will be able to provide up to 30 Mb/s over loop lengths up to 6000 feet. Beyond that, there's a significant drop off, but the profile is such that most believe it will gain most significant traction among U.S. carriers.
“You basically kick ADSL's butt up to 6000 feet and keep up with it after that,” Eckert said.
Another version will allow for longer loop lengths — but not nearly the same speed — and still another flavor, which calls for spectrum allocation up to 30 MHz and may be among the last to reach standardization, will push speeds to 100 Mb/s on both the upstream and downstream paths. The latter, however, has extreme limitations in loop length and is of little interest to SBC, Edmon said.
“Beyond 12 MHz — and in reality you don't even get that at the loop lengths we're talking about — it's not a service that we think is going to be very valid,” he said. “We're not really interested in saying ‘what can you do at 700 meters?’”
In SBC's Project Lightspeed plan, fiber will be run to remote cabinets, where VDSL2-based gear will sit. The goal in most cases is to get cabinets within 6000 feet of subscribers and be able to provide anywhere from 20 Mb/s to 25 Mb/s of total bandwidth. At that level, the company could offer one high-definition video stream, perhaps two standard-definition streams and still have plenty of bandwidth left for high-speed Internet access and voice.
“There's no question that VDSL2 will allow speed in excess of that,” Ballart said. “It's nice to know that, but typically, we're talking 20 to 25 Meg for customers served out of those cabinets. Also there will definitely be MDU deployments [where cabinets are deployed in the basement of buildings]. The total strategy around that is stuff that is still being worked through.”
Though others are deploying fiber deeper into the access network, there appears to be a general agreement among U.S. and Canadian carriers to only operate up to 12 MHz right now, Eckert said.
“Instead of spending the committee's time arguing about what to do above 12 MHz, they're saying ‘let's do what we need now,’” he said. “Qwest is quite interested, and they've made it quite clear that they want this done in May.”
From May 16 to 27, the ITU will host meetings to take the next major step in the process. During those gatherings, the VDSL2 specification is expected to begin the final steps toward completion, with ratification scheduled for later this year. And while carriers often support and observe such proceedings, VDSL2 is getting what can only be characterized as “strong encouragement” from numerous service providers.
“We are getting enough pull from the service providers that we will have positive results [from the meetings],” Madison said. “It's a formidable task, but it's doable.”
Like in most standards process, getting the final pieces of the puzzle in place is a mix of politics and technology debate. At the same time, the industry is looking to the standard to be more than a stopgap measure.
“With VDSL2, I think you're going to see a technology that is going to have a long shelf life,” Madison said. “VDSL2 has everything one needs to deploy any application I can see.”
Spoke:
Two days ago when I asked you my question about the 8-K, I did so to obtain your opinion on the true extent of possible dilution. When you replied, I considered your answer and acknowledged I was not disagreeing with your conclusions about the funding.
I followed up with you on the subject because you then stated later that it would take more than 900MM shares to cover the debentures. I read the 8-K some more and was only pointing out that it appears that there is no duty to supply an endless or floorless amount of shares as you were atleast implying.
Excel:
Not Cobra.
Spoke stated that the expected float is not going to cover the debentures. I am merely stating that if I understand the filing correctly (which is a big if) that the max the holders can get is the available authorized float.
Spoke:
I have been re-reading the filing to attempt to determine if this is actually "death spiral" financing or if there is a maximum limit. If I am understanding this correctly (which is a big if), the share maximum maxes out at the maximum available authorized shares because the number of issuable shares "shall not be greater than the number of such
shares which the SEC permits to be included in the Registration
Statement)",
If I am correct about this, it is not actually floorless as you were saying because the agreement does not state that they have a duty to increase authorized shares beyond 900MM.
And again, I could be wrong with this interpretation.
_____________________________________________________________
(Y) if such Registration Statement has been declared effective by the
SEC at that time, file with the SEC an additional Registration
Statement (an "Additional Registration Statement") to register the
number of shares equal to the excess of the Increased Number of Shares
to Be Registered (where the number of shares determined by clause (x)
is based on the Conversion Price in effect on, or within three (3)
Trading Days prior to, the date the additional Registration Statement
(or any amendment thereto) is filed, over the aggregate number of
shares of Common Stock already registered.
Spoke:
I re-read the statement in the filing per your reply and I am just not exactly certain what is meant in regards to filing an additinal registration.
So at this point, I will not disagree with you.
(Y) if such Registration Statement has been declared effective by the
SEC at that time, file with the SEC an additional Registration
Statement (an "Additional Registration Statement") to register the
number of shares equal to the excess of the Increased Number of Shares
to Be Registered (where the number of shares determined by clause (x)
is based on the Conversion Price in effect on, or within three (3)
Trading Days prior to, the date the additional Registration Statement
(or any amendment thereto) is filed, over the aggregate number of
shares of Common Stock already registered.
Spoke:
It appears to be fixed by the price at registration less 30% + 200%.
In my example at 16 cents, 146,000,000 shares divided by $6,000,000, the share price floor would be .041
Do you disagree that there is a shareprice floor?
Spoke:
Looks to me that the debentures are not floorless:
The holders appear to receive the value of their investment (less 30%) in shares at the current price when the registration is effective + 200%.
For example:
$6,000,000 + 30%
= $7,800,000 divided by .16 = 48,750,000
+ 200% of the share balance
= 146,250,000 shares.
Registered" is a number of shares of Common Stock which is at least
equal to (A) the number of shares theretofore issued on conversion of
the Debentures (including any interest paid on conversion by the
issuance of Conversion Shares) and on exercise of the Warrants, plus
(B) the sum of (x) two hundred percent (200%) of the number of shares
into which the unconverted Debentures and all interest thereon through
their respective Maturity Dates would be convertible at the time of
filing of such Registration Statement or amendment (assuming for such
purposes that all Debentures, reduced by any previously converted
Debentures, had been issued, had been eligible to be converted, and had
been converted, into Conversion Shares in accordance with their terms,
whether or not such issuance, eligibility, accrual of interest or
conversion had in fact occurred as of such date) based on the
Conversion Price in effect on, or within three (3) Trading Days prior
to, the date the amendment to the Registration Statement is filed, (y)
the number of Warrant Shares covered by the unexercised Warrants
(assuming for such purposes that all the Warrants, including Additional
Warrants, reduced by any exercised Warrants, had been issued, had been
eligible to be exercised and had been exercised for the issuance of
Warrant Shares in accordance with their terms, whether or not such
issuance, eligibility or exercise had in fact occurred as of such
date), (z) the number of Other Issuable Shares as of the date of the
filing of the Registration Statement or any amendment thereto
(provided, however, that for purposes of this provision, the number of
Other Issuable Shares shall not be greater than the number of such
shares which the SEC permits to be included in the Registration
Statement), or
(Y) if such Registration Statement has been declared effective by the
SEC at that time, file with the SEC an additional Registration
Statement (an "Additional Registration Statement") to register the
number of shares equal to the excess of the Increased Number of Shares
to Be Registered (where the number of shares determined by clause (x)
is based on the Conversion Price in effect on, or within three (3)
Trading Days prior to, the date the additional Registration Statement
(or any amendment thereto) is filed, over the aggregate number of
shares of Common Stock already registered.
The Company will use its reasonable best efforts to cause such Registration
Statement to be declared effective on a date (each, an "Increased Required
Effective Date") which is no later than (q) with respect to a Registration
Statement under clause (X) of this subparagraph (iii), the Initial Required
Effective Date and (r) with respect to an Additional Registration Statement, the
earlier of (I) five (5) days after notice by the SEC that it may be declared
effective or (II) thirty (30) days after the Increased Registered Shares Date.
Spoke:
I have not re-read the 8K from the $3.5MM debentures but thought they were cashless and would not have resulted in proceeds to the company. For example, when the stock was trading at .25, the warrant holders could have converted and earned .10/share without proceeds to the company or any additional investment.
The amendment which lowered the strike price to .05 cents also appears to have changed the cashless requirement to requiring cash. If I recall the original 8-K correctly.
It appears that the same 40,000,000 warrants/shares which were not going to result in one cent to the company may have fetched up to $2MM.
Spoke:
I thought the warrants were cashless prior to the reduction in strike price. I believe the cashless exercise type does not result in proceeds to the company.
You did not answer my question. Is it possible that $2MM could produce anything that would further the development of the tech?
Spoke:
When I first read the 8K, I concur that this deal looked to be a bad move for the company, but if you consider that in the original $3.5MM debentures deal that the company was to receive zero funds for these 40MM warrants and now potentially managed to bring in $2MM without additional dilution then it looks much better.
40,000,000 shares is far fewer than were required to raise the initial $3.5MM...
Now RIM only needs $10-20MM more to build an ASIC. Can $2MM produce anything?
Spoke: I thought incorporating conversion features constituted some level of work on the ASSP. From what you have explained I concur with you.
From the website. This seems to say that work on the FPGA also includes coversion features for the ASSP. This would constitute some level of work on the ASSP if correct.
Manufacture in the form of a finished chip (which will require additional engineering)
During this interval between the release of the FPGA and the release of the finished chip, we will wish to fine-tune our computer coding and system design. Accommodating the needs of our prototype customers, the industry standards bodies, and further innovations on our part would be the types of drivers that could cause us to fine-tune our designs. Of course, we would like to believe that we won't have to make changes to our software and designs during this phase, but it would be absolutely typical for changes to be made prior to committing the design to final silicon. Our design team is planning for the FPGA-to-ASIC phase by incorporating conversion features into our design now. Rim Semi is now in preliminary discussions with chip manufacturers on costs and time to market and will provide you with an update from time to time as the status of those business arrangements.
Thanks Deeba EOM
Spoke: change the word "standard" with requirement. I know there is no "US" standard - but it's basically one in the same.
Why so defensive? You can't help it if the VDSL2 marketing claims can not be substantiated in the real world because eventhough you claim NV/Rim is so far behind - the real VDSL2 chips just are not available for testing - you think they are being stock-piled and saved for future tests since VDSL2 companies are so concerned about Embarq?
Spoke:
"SBC has specified that it wants equipment that will operate in the 12 MHz profile and expects to provide for 30 Mb/s at 6000 feet. “We are absolutely putting out a requirement that we go no higher than 12 MHz,” said Gene Edmon, executive director of broadband for SBC Labs, before the Geneva meeting."
Why would they test 8 MHz VDSL2 chips when you have stated VDSL2 chips are available today and have been for many months? Would seem counter-intuitive since VDSL1 (old standard) also utilizes 12 MHz.
It would go to reason that they are testing what they are evaluating for actual deployment. (4000' at 20-25 mbits is better than using FTTH if nothing else materializes since the goal is to be able to compete with cable - if telcos spend billions on fiber - there will not be the ability to compete on price and make a profit.)
CARRIERS GET THEIR WISHES: ITU APPROVES VDSL2 STANDARD
by Vince Vittore
Jun 6, 2005 12:00 PM
Increase Flexibility and Profitability with These Infrastructure Solutions
Optimize your wireless network with Modular Building Blocks, Advanced TCA, and IMS architecture. Learn More.
Read White Papers Now.
Sponsored by Intel.
SBC Communications has made no secret of its desire to begin testing VDSL2 equipment as soon as possible. That day is now significantly closer after the International Telecommunications Union's grueling two-week meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, which concluded with the ITU announcing a finalized agreement on a VDSL2 standard.
The standard, which was accelerated at the urging of several large carriers, provides for a number of bandwidth options. At its highest level, the standard will allow carriers to transmit data at 100 Mb/s in both the upstream and downstream paths over relatively short copper loops. From a more practical perspective, particularly in the North American market, the standard provides for 30 Mb/s at 6000 feet.
“We worked a lot of 12-hour days, and there were a couple of sessions that went until three in the morning,” Ed Eckert, director of strategic standards for chip vendor Ikanos, which announced a pre-standard VDSL2 chip set late last year.
The result, like most standards, includes a little something for everyone, he said. As expected, it will include three profiles for chip vendors to build to: one at 8 MHz, one at 12 MHz and one at 30 MHz ( mostly for Asia and some select European markets).
SBC has specified that it wants equipment that will operate in the 12 MHz profile and expects to provide for 30 Mb/s at 6000 feet. “We are absolutely putting out a requirement that we go no higher than 12 MHz,” said Gene Edmon, executive director of broadband for SBC Labs, before the Geneva meeting.
At that level, the company will be able to provide a true triple-play package of one high-definition video stream, two standard-definition video streams and two voice-over-IP channels and still have enough left over for high-speed Internet access, according to Ken Madison, senior product marketing manager for Centillium. The carrier also included a bit of a “fudge factor” in its requirements, knowing that all copper plant isn't equal.
Despite agreement by most sectors of the industry that the VDSL2 standardization will go a long way toward making it a widely deployed technology, there are several hurdles. Key among them is how the standard will be interpreted by chip vendors and others.
Just days after the official ITU announcement, a spokesperson for Infineon said the company has developed a chipset that complies with the standard. “It's sampling now, and we expect to have it in production quantities in the third quarter of the calendar year,” the spokesperson said.
Making the standard work in a real-world environment will take time, though, Madison said.
“It has become a standard that means everything to everyone,” he said. “The question is how the standards are going to be translated.”
Eckert said he wasn't surprised by a competitor timing its announcement to be immediately after the ITU meeting, but getting the chipsets functional is another thing. Ikanos is one of only a small group of VDSL chip vendors
“It's going to take six to twelve months from the time chipsets are out that they're going to get this right,” he said. “We know that from experience.”
Beyond implementation, carriers also will demand interoperability, Eckert said. Eckert is editor of the VDSL2 interoperability group within the DSL Forum and expects that group to have its first plugfest by the end of the year and an interoperability document out by September.
“I'm really hoping we don't go down the same path that ADSL2 and ADSL2+ have gone down because that's been an interoperability nightmare,” he said. “There were a lot of bells and whistles in ADSL2 and 2+ that frankly didn't get used in the field.”
LOY: the details of milestone 1 are also unknown.
No - have not seen anything what states what milestone 2 is or when it is going to be completed.
Spoke: The standard in the US for VDSL2 called for 12 MHz of spectrum (do you want me to post?)
I asked you some questions way back when regarding spectrum and you gave me your typical answer which did not answer the question (at least for me).
In order to take this debate further, Embarq's spectrum requirements must be compared - since it is unknown- not much more we can discuss on the subject of low profile VDSL2 chips.
LAS VEGAS--SBC this week at the Telecom 05 show in Las Vegas defended its plan to provide IPTV service using a fiber-to-the-node architecture as part of its Project Lightspeed.
Jeff Weber, vice president of product and strategy for SBC, was particularly ardent on the company’s decision to use VDSL2 instead of bringing fiber all the way to the home in most of its existing territories. Several analysts (and even a few vendors) during the show criticized the company’s move, saying it didn’t give them enough bandwidth to provide multiple streams of high-definition video.
However, Weber said SBC already is through the first set of tests with its technology and has been happy with the results.
“In the short-term, we’re looking at 20 Mb/s to 25 Mb/s at 4000 feet,” he said in an interview. “A year ago bandwidth was an issue. We made a bet, and quite frankly that bet has paid off. The good news is that it looks a lot less risky than a year ago.”
SBC is building its bandwidth budgets on the assumption that it will be providing four streams into the home with one as HD. “HD is a big part of what we need to do,” Weber said.
The company also has decided to use both MPEG-4 and Windows Media/VC 1 compression with the former likely to be used mostly for linear programming and the latter for static content such as video-on-demand. Verizon, which is just launching its FiOS TV service, is using MPEG-2 because the technology is readily available and it has had 10 years to mature and come down in cost. MPEG-4 and VC 1 allow for greater compression and don’t require nearly as much bandwidth. In SBC’s case, though, it didn’t make sense to use only one, Weber said