[39099] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cable Modem [really good network design]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fletcher E Kittredge)
Tue Jun 26 15:15:22 2001
Message-Id: <200106261904.f5QJ4Et11794@smtp.gwi.net>
To: woods@weird.com (Greg A. Woods)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:37:34 EDT."
<20010626183734.5FBB211D@proven.weird.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 15:04:14 -0400
From: Fletcher E Kittredge <fkittred@gwi.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:37:34 -0400 (EDT) Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > I strongly recommend you spend some quality time with the DOCSIS
> > spec... Personally, I think DSL and wireless modems would benefit from
> > using DOCSIS. I have not thought hard about this issue and am
> > interested in other opinions...
>
> You do learn fast! ;-)
I haven't yet learned not to make weak jokes on mailing lists...
> However you'd better watch out. DOCSIS-1.0 is an implementer's worst
> nightmare. At best it provides a low-level physical layer spec. and the
> rest of it is pretty much useless in prodcution. 2.0 solves some of the
> problems, but introduces more.
My experience has been that DOCIS-1.0 is unusable, 1.1 works well. I
have no experience with 2.0. But then, I don't get out much...
[sorry! weak joke!]
regards,
fletcher
