[an error occurred while processing this directive] EPON book - List of Figures

Ethernet Passive Optical Networks

ISBN: 0071445625

List of Figures

Figure 1–1 Hybrid Fiber–Coax Architecture.
Figure 1–2 Fiber–to–the–Home (FTTH) deployment scenarios.
Figure 2–1 Light propagation in fiber
Figure 2–2 Comparison of Multi–mode and single–mode fiber
Figure 2–3 8x8 couplers created from multiple 2x2 couplers.
Figure 2–4 PON topologies.
Figure 2–5 PON using a single fiber.
Figure 2–6 Illustration of near–far problem in a TDM PON: a snapshot of power levels received from four ONUs.
Figure 3–1 Comparison of Ethernet framing overhead and ATM cell tax.
Figure 4–1 Relationship of IEEE 802.3 layering model to Open Systems Interconnection reference model.
Figure 5–1 Downstream transmission in EPON.
Figure 5–2 Upstream transmission in EPON.
Figure 5–3 Processes and agents involved in bandwidth assignment.
Figure 5–4 Sequential and pipelined timeslot assignments.
Figure 5–5 In "Just–in–time" granting schemes, data collisions are possible due to delayed GATE message.
Figure 5–6 Decoupled GATE arrival time and timeslot start time.
Figure 5–7 Processes and agents involved in auto–discovery.
Figure 5–8 Relationship of discovery slot and discovery window.
Figure 5–9 Applying random delay during discovery process to avoid persistent collisions.
Figure 5–10Discovery attempt with and without REGISTER_REQ collision.
Figure 5–11Round–trip time measurement.
Figure 5–12Pre–calculation of arrival time when the OLT and ONUs use different GATE timestamp reference points.
Figure 5–13Pre–calculation of arrival time when the OLT and ONUs use different REGISTER_REQ timestamp reference points.
Figure 6–1 Point–to–point virtual topology emulation.
Figure 6–2 Bridging between ONU 1 and ONU 2 using the point–to–point emulation.
Figure 6–3 Shared–medium emulation.
Figure 6–4 Combined point–to–point and shared–medium emulation mode.
Figure 6–5 Format of frame preamble in EPON.
Figure 6–6 Position of SLD field depending on odd/even byte alignment.
Figure 6–7 Shift register generating CRC–8.
Figure 6–8 Function calculating CRC8 value.
Figure 7–1 Timing diagram of Data Detector function.
Figure 7–2 Illustration of partial laser shut down during ONUs transmission.
Figure 7–3 Data Detector state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE)..
Figure 8–1 Format of generic MPCP frame.
Figure 8–2 Format of REPORT frame.
Figure 8–3 Example of queues composition and reported values.
Figure 8–4 REPORT frame formats with different numbers of reported queues and queue sets.
Figure 8–5 Format of GATE message: (a) discovery GATE and (b) normal GATE.
Figure 8–6 Grant structure.
Figure 8–7 Format of REGISTER_REQ frame.
Figure 8–8 Format of REGISTER frame.
Figure 8–9 Format of REGISTER_ACK frame.
Figure 8–10(a) OLT Control Parser state diagram and (b) PARSE TIMESTAMP state in ONU Control Parser (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–11Accumulation of delay variabilities in MAC and PHY sub–layers.
Figure 8–12ONU Control Multiplexer state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–13Relationship of multiple MPCP instances and Multi–Point Transmission Control.
Figure 8–14Multi–Point Transmission Control state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–15OLT Control Multiplexer state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–16Gate Generation state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–17ONU Gate Reception state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–18ONU Gate Activation state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–19Examples of (a) back–to–back grant and (b) hidden grant.
Figure 8–20REPORT Generation state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–21OLT Report Reception state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–22Auto–discovery message exchange.
Figure 8–23OLT Discovery Gate Generation (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–24OLT Request Reception state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–25OLT Register Generation state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–26OLT Final Registration state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 8–27ONU Discovery state diagram (reprinted from IEEE Std802.3ah with permission from IEEE).
Figure 9–1 Structure of FEC–coded frame.
Figure 9–2 Hamming distance between /T_FEC_O/ and /T_FEC_E/ delimiters.
Figure 9–3 Example of bit stream matching both /T_FEC_O/ and /T_FEC_E/ delimiters.
Figure 9–4 FEC encoder block diagram.
Figure 9–5 FEC decoder block diagram.
Figure 10–1Implementation of Counter Mode.
Figure 10–2Relation of cipher counter to MPCP counter.
Figure 10–3Relationship between cipher counter sequence, block counter sequence, and cipher input values.
Figure 10–4128–bit cipher input block is produced by concatenation of cipher counter and block counter.
Figure 10–5Alignment of cipher counter with an upstream burst.
Figure 11–1Redundant PON topologies.
Figure 12–1Guard band components.
Figure 12–2Structure of a FEC–coded frame.
Figure 13–1Graphical representation of pair–wise collision probability.
Figure 13–2Average number of successful registrations in one attempt.
Figure 13–3Efficiency of the discovery slot size.
Figure 13–4Optimal discovery slot size as a function of the number of contending ONUs.
Figure 14–1Simulation model of EPON segment with SSA.
Figure 14–2Average packet delay as a function of ONU's offered load.
Figure 14–3Average queue size as a function of ONU's offered load.
Figure 14–4Packet loss ratio as a function of ONU's offered load.
Figure 14–5Illustration of packet scheduling.
Figure 14–6Average link utilization (FIFO vs. First Fit).
Figure 14–7Algorithm for connection–based packet reordering.
Figure 15–1Operation of DBA agent at the OLT.
Figure 15–2Time diagram of the limited service in IPACT algorithm.
Figure 15–3Components of packet delay at the ONU.
Figure 15–4Average packet delay.
Figure 15–5Average cycle times for various service disciplines.
Figure 15–6Average packet delay as a function of effective network load and ONU offered load.
Figure 15–7Packet–loss ratio as a function of effective network load and ONU offered load.
Figure 16–1Intra–ONU and inter–ONU scheduling.
Figure 16–2Packet delay for limited/priority service.
Figure 16–3Tandem queue at an ONU.
Figure 16–4Packet delay for limited/tandem scheme.
Figure 16–5Packet delay for CBR–credit/priority scheme.
Figure 16–6Calculation of the credit interval.
Figure 16–7Histogram of unused slot remainder and most frequent preemption combinations.
Figure 16–8Average slot remainder.
Figure 16–9Average cycle time: (a) absolute value and (b) normalized to limited/priority service.
Figure 16–10Bandwidth utilization.
Figure 17–1Direct (single–level) scheduling in EPON.
Figure 17–2Hierarchical scheduling in EPON.
Figure 17–3(a) Sibling–fair scheduling based on cumulative group weight Σφ
(b) Sibling–fair scheduling based on cumulative group work Σq;
(c) Cousin–fair scheduling.
Figure 18–1Construction of service envelopes.
Figure 18–2PROCESS_GRANT procedure calculates start times for all children of node i.
Figure 18–3Granting phase for the scheduling hierarchy shown in Figure $X$(c).
Figure 18–4Approximation of SE function in Min–Error approach.
Figure 18–5Approximating the service envelope E using the Min–Points approach.
Figure 18–6The CONSTRUCT_APPROX_LINEAR algorithm
Figure 18–7TEST_TANGENT(point, n) function
Figure 18–8The CONSTRUCT_APPROX_BINARY algorithm.
Figure 18–9MIN_POINT_APPROX() procedure.
Figure 18–10Approximation error for Min–Error and Min–Points schemes.
Figure 18–11Collecting all requests before scheduling grants.
Figure 18–12Scheduling two groups of nodes separately.
Figure 18–13Size of unused remainder in an ONU.
Figure 18–14Experimental EPON model.
Figure 18–15Throughput of test queues under different ambient loads.
Figure 18–16Ratio of throughputs for queues located in different ONUs.
Figure 18–17Maximum difference in bandwidth allocated to queue #4 in ONUs A and B.
Figure A–1Scaling behavior of LRD and SRD traffic flows.
Figure B–1Variance–time log–log plot.
Figure B–2Aggregation (multiplexing) of multiple substreams produces self–similar traffic.
  [an error occurred while processing this directive]