EPoC System Level Synchronization Transport

802.3bn Interim meeting - Phoenix

Bill Powell
23-25 January, 2013

1
Agenda
• Mobile BackHaul (MBH) & Circuit Emulation Services (CES) sync
requirements
• EPON & EPoC network architecture
• IEEE 1588v2 and EPON / EPoC
• Distributed 1588v2 boundary clock concept
• EPON frequency & time sync distribution method
• EPON + EPoC distributed boundary clock
• ITU sync distribution work, standards, and budget allocations
• Potential time/frequency error budgets for EPON & EPoC
• Summary

2
 Mobile BackHaul synchronization requirements
Wireless Frequency Time Accuracy
Technology Accuracy
GSM 50 ppb -

UMTS FDD 50 ppb -

UMTS TDD 50 ppb 2.5 us

LTE FDD 50 ppb -

LTE TDD 50 ppb 2.5 us

TD-SCDMA 50 ppb 3 us

CDMA 2000 50 ppb 3 us

WiMAX FDD 2 ppm -

WiMAX TDD 2 ppm 3 us

[source: 3GPP, 3GPP2, IEEE 802.16e, ITU G987.1 specifications]

• Newer wireless technologies aiming for 500 ns accuracy at air interface (CoMP -
Coordinated Multi-Point Transmission and Reception [1])
• FCC E911 emergency location services require ~100 ns/UTC accuracy

3
MEF-8 CES Synchronization requirements
May be recovered from PON, EPoC,
SyncE, or IEEE 1588v2 delivery
External Timing
Reference

CESoETH IWF

Clock
MEN-bound
Data
IWF TDM Ext.
To TDM Line To MEN
(or TSP) Clock Clock Eth.
TDM-bound Line Clock
Data Recovery
IWF Data

Free
Run

Figure 6-7/MEF-8 - Synchronization Options for the TDM bound IWF

• The External Timing Reference interface is required for Differential-mode or

"network" CES timing
• MEF-8 TDM synchronization interface requirements
R47 The method of synchronization MUST be such that the TDM-bound IWF meets the traffic interface
requirements specified in ITU-T recommendations [G.823] for E1 and E3 circuits, and [G.824]
for DS1 and DS3 circuits

4
G.8261 CES Synchronization requirements

Case 2 for typical

CES applications

Figure 8/G.8261 - Network models for traffic and clock wander accumulation, Deployment Case 1 and Case 2

10

4. 5

2. 1

M T IE (μs ) 1

0. 45

0. 01
0. 01 0. 1 1 10 10 0 10 0 0 10 0 00 10 0 00 0
0. 47 9 0 0 19 3 0
O b s e rv a t io n In t e rv a l τ (s )

Figure 10/G.8261 - Deployment Case 1: wander budget for 1544 kbit/s interface (also applies to Case 2)

• Synchronization requirements from G.8261 are more stringent than MEF-8

• Lower wander generation requirement
• PDV tolerance test patterns

5
Synchronization delivery for Mobile BackHaul
Distributed IEEE-1588 IEEE-1588
Boundary Clock Master Port
Access CO CNU
IP EPON OLT SyncEnet ToD
Aggregation GE, 10GE
GPS Switch IEEE-1588 FCU +1588 NodeB
or SyncE+158 CNU
FE / 8 S
IEEE-1588
1588
Slave Port
coax SyncE Freq.
1 S NodeB
GPS RX + 5
fiber ONU
1588GM 8

IP 8
SE+1588
ToD
Transport Access CO NodeB
IP
CNU
UTC Aggregation
Switch
G
10 E EPON OLT FCU SE+1588 ToD
GE NodeB
S
CNU
USNO GPS DT
I S coax SyncE
Freq.
GPS RX
1
5
D fiber NodeB
8
8
T
I ONU
SyncE
+1588 ToD
NodeB

• EPoC core architecture & MBH NEs must meet FDD and TDD MBH requirements (15
ppb for Freq. & 1-1.5 usec/UTC for ToD delivery), in both FDD/TDD EPoC modes
• Should meet ITU SG15/Q13 error budget requirements for frequency (G.8261.1)
and time/phase delivery (work in progress in Q13)
• Combination of EPON OLT + FCU + MBH CNU to look like a distributed IEEE 1588v2
BC (boundary clock)
• CNUs for MBH time delivery to support SyncE + IEEE 1588v2 time delivery to MBH
IEEE 1588v2 slave

6
IEEE 1588v2 & EPON / EPoC
• Why can't native IEEE 1588v2 packets be transported through EPON?
- They can, but the result is unusable for MBH time synchronization
- IEEE 1588v2 assumes DS / US delay symmetry for time transport
- EPON downstream TDM delay is minimal (typ. 10's of usec)
- EPON upstream TDMA delay is much larger - polling, gate delays (typ msec)
- Native 1588v2 packets also experience extra congestion-dependent delays
(PDV, or packet delay variation) due to competing EPON traffic
- IEEE 1588v2 assumes the 1-way link delay is ½ of the DS + US delays
=> msec-level time transfer errors through OLT/ONU for native 1588
- Similar issues would be encountered for EPoC for native 1588 packet
transport through PON and/or coax
• Solution?
- Implement IEEE 802.1as protocol between OLT and ONU
- OLT & ONU function as a distributed IEEE 1588v2 boundary clock

7
 EPON Frequency and Time Distribution Method
Distributed 1588v2 Boundary Clock

OLT ONU ToD Output

ToD Input IEEE 1588v2
IEEE 1588v2 OLT ToD
1588v2 pkts Slave Master 1588v2 pkts

ToD & RTT ONU ToD

Logic Ranging
(1) Delay ToD
Logic
OLT TQ MAC MAC
Counter (2) (4) ONU TQ
(3) Counter
PHY PHY
802.1as protocol
Td1 Td4 ToD Correction (5) Td3 Td2

Timestamps on MPCP Packets

• EPON time transport method defined in IEEE 802.1as, clause 13

• The local 32b TQ counter in the OLT (1 TQ = 16ns) is timed from an external time source (1)
• MPCP messages sent to ONUs have OLT TQ counter value loaded into timestamp (TS) field at the OLT EPON MAC (2)
• At the ONU, the timestamp is recovered from RX MPCP messages and used to reset the local ONU TQ counter (3)
• OLT calculates RTT for a particular ONU from local TQ counter vs. return timestamps from the ONU (4)
• Important that (Td1 + Td2) = (Td3 + Td4) [Td1 & Td3 - MAC(TS)->PHYout; Td2, Td4 - PHYin-> TS extracted]
• ToD at ONU calculated from local TQ counter, ranging delay, & slow ToD correction (5)
• Range of current time error: OLT-to-ONU ~120 ns [6] [local ctr - 8ns, ½ RTT drift - 96ns, DS/US fiber -17ns]

8
 EPON + EPoC Distributed Boundary Clock
Distributed 1588v2 Boundary Clock

OLT FCU CNU ToD Output

ToD Input FCU ToD & IEEE 1588v2
IEEE 1588v2
1588v2 pkts Slave OLT ToD RTT Logic Master 1588v2 pkts

CNU ToD
ToD & RTT EPON TQ EPoC TQ Ranging
Logic CNU ToD
(1) Counter Counter Delay
Logic
(4)
OLT TQ (3)
Counter (2) MAC MAC MAC MAC CNU TQ
Counter
PHY PHY PHY PHY

Td4 Td1 Td2 Td3

TS on MPCP Packets TS on MPCP Packets

802.1as protocol 802.1as-like protocol?

• A similar method to 802.1as can be used to transfer synchronization and ToD corrections
between the EPoC FCU and CNU
• Again important for EPoC time transport (and RTT calc) that (Td1 + Td2) = (Td3 + Td4)
• Question: what level of performance is needed so the combination of EPON and EPoC
meets current and emerging MBH time-sync requirements?

9
ITU-T G.8261.1 Sync Distribution Model - Frequency
Packet network
Packet Packet
master slave
clock clock
N = 10
G.8261.1-Y1361.1(12)_F01

Packet node (e.g., ethernet switch, IP router, MPLS router)

10 Gbit/s fibre optical link

1 Gbit/s fibre optical link
Figure 1/G.8261.1 - HRM-1 for Packet Delay Variation network limits
EPON + EPoC
DSLAM DSL
Sync Distribution
m odem
HRM-2a
Error Allocation
Packet network
Packet Packet
master OLT ONU slave
clock clock
N=5 HRM-2b

HRM-2c
G.8261.1-Y1361.1(12)_F02
Packet node (e.g., Ethernet switch, IP router, MPLS router)

10 Gbit/s fibre optical link

1 Gbit/s fibre optical link

Microwave link

Figure 2/G.8261.1 - HRM-2 for Packet Delay Variation network limits

• ITU-T requirements on frequency synchronization of MBH are contained in

G.8261 [2] & G.8261.1 [7], both - consented & active
• ITU-T synchronization studies in performed in Q13/15
10
G.8261.1 Sync Distribution Model - Frequency
End application
clock

C2
PNT-F
Packet master
PRC
clock Timing packets
Physical layer based PNT-F Packet E: End application requirements
synchronization network network (e.g., frequency accuracy)

PEC-M B: PEC-M output PEC-S-F

packet network limits
A: PRC, EEC, SSU
or SEC network limits C1
C: PEC-S-F input PNT-F
packet network limits
End application
D: PEC-S-F output clock
network limits
(deployment case 2)
G.8261.1-Y.1361.1(12)_F03

Figure 3/G.8261.1 -Reference Points for network limits

• Network PDV limits that a 1588v2 slave clock has to tolerate are defined in
G.8261.1
at the "C" interface for the PEC-S-F (packet equipment clock slave - frequency)
• MTIE and frequency accuracy requirements for the PEC-S-F are defined in
G.8261.1 at the "D" interface

11
G.8261.1 Sync Distribution Model - Frequency

50 ppb

MTIE
~1/3 of 50 ppb budget
for MBH frequency
16 ppb sync applications

18 μs

9 μs

Observation
0.05 0.2 32 64 1125 interval τ (s)
G.8261.1-Y.1361.1(12)_F04

Figure 4/G.8261.1 -Output wander network limit for case 3 based on G.823

• The above MTIE interface specification has been consented in G.8261.1 [7] for
MBH frequency synchronization applications
• It is recommended that both EPON ONUs and EPoC CNUs used for MBH
frequency sync applications also meet the above MTIE requirement

12
G.8271 Sync Distribution Model - Time
Radio distributed PRTC, e.g., GNSS or
distribution via cables

Rx Rx
PRTC limits PRTC limits
PRTC limits
End End
application End End End application
application application application
G.8271-Y.1366(12)_F01

Time or phase synchronization distribution via cable

Time or phase synchronization distribution via radio

Figure 1/G.8271 -Example of a distributed PRTC synchronization network

T-BC
T-BC End
T-G M
Application

T-BC

PTP messages

Figure 2/G.8271 -Example of packet-based method with support from network nodes

• The initial Q13/15 network models are contained in G.8271

• Q13/15 is still working on defining network topologies, PDV, and wander (MTIE) limits

13
G.8271 Sync Distribution Model - Time
Radio distributed PRTC, e.g., GNSS or
distribution via cables

Rx
PRTC limits PRTC limits
Packet
End Packet master
application master
clock Packet timing
clock
distribution network
Transport
Packet timing Transport Transport node
distribution network node node

Packet
Packet Packet slave
slave slave clock
clock clock

End End
End End End End application application
application application application application
G.8271-Y.1366(12)_F03

T-BC
Time or phase synchronization distribution via cable
Time or phase synchronization distribution via radio

Figure 3/G.8271 - Example of time synchronization distributed via packet based methods

• Another view of the G.8271 time distribution model currently being studied
in Q13/15

14
G.8271 Sync Distribution Model - Time
Network time reference A B C D E
(e.g., GNSS engine)
Packet Packet
Packet
PRTC master slave
clock network clock
PRTC: Primary reference End application
time clock time clock

Physical timing signal (for phase and/or time synchronization)

Packet timing signal G.8271-Y.1366(12)_F04

A: PRTC network limits

B: Packet master clock network limits
C: Packet slave clock input network limits
D: Packet slave clock output network limits (if applicable)
E: End application requirements (e.g., phase accuracy)
Figure 4/G.8271 -Network Reference Model
PRTC
End
EPON OLT + EPoC FCU + EPoC application MBH base
1
CNU => Distributed 1588 BC station

T-GM T-BC T-BC T-BC T-BC T-TSC

1 1 1 1 1 D 1
Figure 5/G.8271 -Possible locations of external phase/time interfaces in a chain of Telecom Boundary Clocks

• Current goal of Q13/15 is to meet 1.0 us time accuracy at point D relative to UTC

15
Example Error budgets for Time/Frequency
distribution for EPON & EPoC
• For MBH FDD applications, EPoC CNU & EPON ONU should meet MTIE
requirements in Fig. 4, G.8261.1 (slide 12)
• For MBH TDD applications, it is recommended that EPON and EPoC only
consume a fraction of the current 1.0 us error allocation
Possible error allocations
- EPON: ~125-150ns
- EPON + EPoC: ~250 ns
• Emerging MBH time sync requirements are getting tighter: CoMP air
interface ~500ns
=> Would require access segment to drop to ~150ns error budget
• FCC E911 emergency services time sync requirements ~100ns
(limit of GPS + time receiver)
=> Likely not possible to meet with added EPON/EPoC access segment

16
Proposed EPoC Synchronization Evaluation Criteria

• Reference Connection
CLT -> CNU

• Error Criteria
- Frequency transfer Error
</= 15 ppb

- Time-transfer (ToD) Error

- EPoC Link: </= +/-120ns [Tentative]
[Goal: EPON + EPoC combined (OLT->FCU->CNU): +/-250 ns or less]

17
Summary

• Current and emerging wireless standards require precise frequency and

time synchronization to UTC

• Combination of EPON OLT and EPON ONU, or EPON OLT + EPoC FCU +
EPoC CNU can be built to function like a single distributed IEEE 1588v2
boundary clock

• ToD time transfer at OCU/FCU (EPON to coax) should be done with digital
methods relative to local OCU/FCU TQ counters

• Time transfer mechanism on EPoC should function similar to method

described in 802.1as, clause 13

• System level frequency and time transfer error budgets should guide
choice of time transport protocol on the coax

• Proposed Eval criteria frequency/time error budget for EPoC link on

previous slide

18
References
[1] Impact of Synchronization Impairments on CoMP Joint Transmission Performance,
Helmut Imlau, Heinz Droste, Samip Malla, Deutsche Telecom, presentation at ITSF 2012
http://www.itsf-conference.com/agenda_outline/s2627/
[2] ITU-T G.8261/Y.1361, Timing and synchronization aspects in packet networks, April,
2008, http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-G.8261-200804-I!!PDF-E&type=items
[3] MEF-8, Implementation Agreement for the Emulation of PDH Circuits over Metro Ethernet
Networks, October, 2004.
[4] G.823, The control of jitter and wander within digital networks which are based on the
2048 kbit/s hierarchy, March, 2000
http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-G.823-200003-I!!PDF-E&type=items
[5] G.824, The control of jitter and wander within digital networks which are based on the
1544 kbit/s hierarchy, March, 2000
http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-G.824-200003-I!!PDF-E&type=items
[6] Time Synchronization over Ethernet Passive Optical Networks, Yuanqiu Luo, Frank
Effenberger, Huawei, Nirwan Ansari, NJIT, IEEE Communications Magazine, Oct, 2012.
[7] ITU-T G.8261.1/Y.1361.1, Packet delay variation network limits applicable to packet-
based methods (frequency synchronization), February, 2012
http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-G.8261.1-201202-I!!PDF-E&type=items
[8] ITU-T G.8271/Y.1366, Time and phase synchronization aspects of packet networks,
February, 2012, http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-G.8271-201202-I!!PDF-E&type=items
[9] ITU-T Q13/15, WD8271, Helsinki, 4-8 June, 2012, Draft G.8271.1 - Network limits for time
synchronization in Packet Networks, Stefano Ruffini, Ericsson (editor).

19
20