© 2004 wjr consulting inc. “wireless entertainment - myths, hype, and reality” bill rose wjr...

© 2004 WJR Consulting Inc.

“Wireless Entertainment - Myths, Hype, and Reality”

Bill Rose

WJR Consulting Inc.


Memberships• Chairman, CEA Home Networking Committee (R7)• Chairman, CEA Technology and Standards Council• CEA Home Networking and IT Board of Directors• Video Systems – R4• DTV Interface – R4.8• VHN (IP over 1394) – R7.4• A/V Network – R7.5• Digital Entertainment Network

(IP over Ethernet) – R7.6• Wireless Entertainment Networking – R7.7• Cable Compatibility – R8• IEEE Communication Society


Consumer Electronics A Brief History

• Radio

• TV

• Transistor Radio

• Walkman

• VCR

• Cable TV

• CD

• DVD

Highly Successful Products

• PC???


What Do They Have In Common?

• Simple to Understand– Single, targeted functionality

• Simple to Use– Works out of the box

• Reliable• (Mostly) Interoperable

Except for the PC


PC – Why The Success?• Took 15 Years for Home PC• Games, preloaded software• Windows 3.0/98• Apple• Functionality – Something for everyone• Internet and Porn

And it still doesn’t have the installed base of most of the others


QUESTION 1: • What is the Most Complex Thing

in the Home?

Audience Participation


QUESTION 2: • What is the Most Complex Thing

at the Office?



• Question 3:

• Put Them Together In A Typical Home And What Do You Get?



What if ABS Brakes Were Designed By Network Engineers?

• Menu Driven Options– Update Driver– Road Type– Road Conditions– Type of Driver

– HELP ?

Crash?Crash?


Wireless Entertainment: Consumer Expectations

• Wired Performance w/o the wires– Real-time A/V distribution without interruptions

(QoS)

– Full resolution - SD today, HD tomorrow

– After Overhead, BER / PER, Collisions and Retries, Multi-path loss, Attenuation, ….

– Coverage - Everywhere

– Premium Content: Copy Protection / DRM

– Security


A Word About CP/DRM & Wireless Networking

• It can be done• It must

– Meet minimal content owner requirements– Ensure protection with legacy devices

• 3DES or AES is preferred encryption– Others will need to be examined

• 5C can be extended for wireless 1394 – But issues remain, esp. w/ WiFi

• Will probably need to negotiate w/ AP due to timing issues


Highway or Railroad

• WiFi (CSMA/CA) is like a highway Traffic affects access, time of arrival, number

of accidents – no guarantees

• TDMA/TDD is like a railroadReserved space, known speed, guaranteed time

of arrival


The Wireless Highway – CSMA/CA


The WiFi Highway

• Cars wait to enter until there is space– Contention Period: No traffic cops, stop

and go, delays• Traffic can enter any time • Every vehicle has the same right of way

(without priority implemented)• Collisions - due to hidden nodes• Traffic flow can become unstable - traffic

jams


The WiFi Highway• With “TGe” (depending on the options

selected)– Adds traffic cop – Hybrid Coordinator– Traffic enters based on need/priority

• Emergency vehicles (everyone else waits)

– Smaller but still variable spacing between vehicles to minimize collisions (jitter, delay)

– Increases overhead reducing bandwidth – Traffic can still become destabilized


The TDMA RAILROAD


The TDMA Railroad• Every train (frame) runs on a schedule• Space is reserved• No spacing between cars (no variable back-off/wait)• Arrival times are guaranteed (latency, jitter)• Space can be assigned long term or for a single trip

(Isochronous, asynchronous) • No collisions or hidden nodes – fully managed

system• No traffic jams


802.11 Throughput AnalysisAssumptions

• Favorable– Ideal Conditions (no attenuation)– No Bit Errors/Packet Errors– No Contention (no hidden nodes)– Large Packet sizes (1300 bytes)

• Unfavorable– TCP Traffic– Ack for every packet


Throughput Analysis

Technology Raw Throughput

Actual TCP payload throughput

11b 11 Mbps 5.6 Mbps

11a 54 Mbps 27.3 Mbps

11g, no protection 54 Mbps 29.0 Mbps

11g, CTS-to-self protection

54 Mbps 13.4 Mbps

11g, RTS/CTS protection 54 Mbps 8.9 Mbps


Reductions to Throughput• Hidden Node/Collisions – reduce “b”, “a” and

non-protection “g” by 25-50%• “g” protected mode required for “b” nodes• Bit/Packet Errors - 3 Solutions

– Retransmit packets – 25-50%

– Reduce Packet size – 25-50%

– FEC: Not built in, app layer

• Real World attenuation/noise, other networks


Additions to Throughput• UDP not TCP likely to be used for A/V

– No Acks but leaves bit-error issue to Applic.

• If TCP used, “g” can group Acks• FEC can be added in app layer but

requires more resources• Buffering can minimize delay/jitter effects

Bottom line – Data, music, Yes; Video, No


Throughput Analysis

Technology Raw Throughput

Real World payload Throughput – est.

11b 11 Mbps 1-2 Mbps

11a 54 Mbps 5-10 Mbps

11g, no protection 54 Mbps 4-12 Mbps

11g, CTS-to-self protection

54 Mbps 4-8 Mbps

11g, RTS/CTS protection 54 Mbps 3-6 Mbps


Other WiFi Solutions - ViXS

• Trans-code, Trans-rate solution– MPEG2 <-> MPEG4, etc.

– Varies resolution on-the-fly to deal with variable bandwidth

– Can operate with any wireless solution

• Diversity antenna to maximize signal


ViXS - Issues• Cost

– multiple CODECs – ViXS code/ICs– more device resources

• Variable resolution may not be suitable for service providers

• Consumer blames CE device for loss of resolution


IEEE 802.11x – The Bottom Line

• Many in CE/MSO industries believe 802.11x cannot deliver adequate QoS for streaming video due to its reliance on CSMA/CA

• No Copy Protection/DRM (5C??)• Great for Data, maybe music (point-

point), not video• Industry shake-out has begun


Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA)

• MAC Frame consists of time slots • Allocated by central control point• Typically there is one contention slot

where devices can request a time slot– Also used for asynchronous data

• QoS, reserved bandwidth• Most include encryption, key exchange,

FEC


Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA)

• Most support both Isochronous streams, asynchronous IP/data

• Guaranteed bandwidth

• Determinant latency, jitter

• Enables improved RF performance (distance/throughput)

Advantages


TDMA Network Examples

• Magis AIR5TM

• Hiperlan2

• 802.15.3

• 802.15.3a (UWB)


Magis Networks AIR5• Designed for Entertainment networks

– Full QoS– Security – 3DES, public and private key exchange

(copy protection/DRM)– Support for wireless 1394 – Multiple MPEG2 SD streams– HDTV whole-home throughput– Simultaneous TCP/IP, video, audio

• TDMA MAC, subset of Hiperlan2 MAC

• 802.11a phy - Coexists with 802.11x


Magis AIR5TM

• 42 Mbps real throughput

• Enhanced Phy/RF/Antenna design for extended range

– Multiple Antennas for diversity

– Multi-path improves performance

– 15-20 dB improvement over typical 802.11a implementations

– >30 Mbps over 50 Meters in home environment


Magis AIR5TM

• PER: 10-10 after FEC, minimizes lost packets

• Power and Frequency agile

• Adjacent Channel Utilization

• MPEG2 input port reduces software requirements, overhead, resources

• Strong CE support

• Working with SIG, CEA for standards


Hyperlan 2

• European TDMA based standard for 5 GHz RF networks – derived from access side– Support for roaming– Adds cost to devices through complexity

• >50 Mbps raw throughput (similar to 802.11a)• >40 Mbps payload throughput • Includes excellent QoS, adaptive power, agile

frequency control, 3DES security• Currently not being used in US• Appears to be dying in Europe as well


TDMA Solutions - IEEE 802.15.3

• Also developed for A/V apps– QoS, FEC, etc.

• Wireless PAN solution - <10 meters– Potential for longer distances

• Operates in the congested 2.4 GHz band• IEEE / WiMedia focusing on UWB• Complex implementation at app layer• No products / ICs available at this point


Ultra-Wide Band (UWB) – 802.15.3a

• Uses 802.15.3 MAC• Potential (Claims)

– Huge potential bandwidth (400 Mbps?)– Inherently more secure– Low power – Low or no interference with other RF

implementations• If true, then why go to multi-band?

– Still 2-4 years off


Ultra-Wide Band (UWB) – 802.15.3a

• (At least) 2 Approaches– Multi-channel

• Adaptive approach to avoid bands where other radios are operating – 802.11, etc.

• Strong support by Intel, others• More costly, more power, more flexible

– Single channel• Uses 1 (or 2) wide band for all

communications• Less support among “Bigs”


Ultra-Wide Band• Issues

– Standard in process but contention at IEEE 802.15.3a, WiMedia on approach

– FCC approved for use at 3.1 –10.6 GHz GHz w/ further review possible• 10 meters/30 feet, indoor use• Large drop off in throughput w/ distance

– Must take total cost into account– US only: Europe/Japan pending


RF - Conclusions• WiFi is for PC/Data (802.11g)• A/V is the next Killer App• What to watch:

– Magis Networks AIR5 – Products at CES• UWB for PANs• Wireless and wired are both needed• Security issues

– Wireless devices are behind the firewall

• Ignore the WiFi hype payload at app layer is what counts


CEA and Home Networking Standards

• R7 is Home Networking Committee

• 5 Subcommittees working on HN– R7.1: Controls (LonTalk)– R7.4: IP over 1394 for Backbones– R7.5: A/V Networking higher layer issues– R7.6: IP over Ethernet for Entertainment– R7.7: Wireless


R7.4 – Versatile Home Network

• VHN is IP over 1394b backbone – Connects cluster networks to each other– Proxy non-IP networks

• WG10 – VHN Rewrite– V 1.0 Released– Rewriting to include UPnP for

• Discovery, Addressing, Others

– IPV4/IPV6 issues– Others


R7.5 – A/V Networking

• WG1 Architecture– Adapter Standard: CEA 2005 Draft

• Adapting Ethernet 1394

– Architecture• Discussions ongoing on approach

• WG3: CEA 931b (approved)– Man-Machine interface – Specified in MSO/CE Plug and Play

Agreement, recent FCC NPRM



• WG8 QoS: CEA 2007 DRAFT– 8 Priorities based on 802.1d

• 2-3 Best Effort

• 2-3 Parameterized

• Created to allow connection to isoch networks

• UPnP looking at similar approach



• WG 10 Power – Looking at issues relating power usage

in networked devices• Off, On, Standby, etc. • Similar to Energy Star approach


R7.6 – Digital Entertainment Network

• CEA 2008 (Released)

• IP over Ethernet– Specifies UPnP for discovery, addressing,

etc. – Mandatory and optional media formats– May be broken out into architecture

common across R7.4/R7.5/R7.6, plus Phy/MAC (in discussion in all S/Cs)


R7.7 – Wireless Entertainment Networks

• Currently looking at application needs and mapping to technology solutions

• Future work may include– Std testing of wireless solutions– Wireless standards if needed

• R7.7 Candidate Table


For More Information Contact

Bill Rose

WJR Consulting Inc.

[email protected]

© 2004 wjr consulting inc. “wireless entertainment - myths, hype, and reality” bill rose wjr...

Documents

highway traffic

wireless entertainment

traffic cops

bandwidth traffic

av network r7

ethernet r7

home pcgames

typical home