Re: [homenet] “Hybrid Access for Broadband Networks” (WT-348)

Alexandru Petrescu <> Wed, 22 October 2014 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE77E1ACD42; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:29:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.1
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_84=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xk2Tkobiww9v; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB541AC417; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:28:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id gf13so3618655lab.29 for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=V9HQLAdS8ya5z3ymKsxztFUc2VdSOBbAv3VyKzmb114=; b=Iu3R1tHX5P5tR4fVfSrM5MATPT4DvQnrJ4FjnvGeur8+erOB7WBLvbun2dlPMZi3X8 9to0Q/tnbmgW937A6UuJGNKYD387VUvFMwtd7RiNj5taQyjE4vZyb1zkFH+qB25uNiFq dRMbcGHZyNzIHQm6wLOidKb0gbfiYAvliwBpLtj56ezWQJt7qaue1QH3Y3HrMxZA7ItC fGsIcaRF1Jwz5b3AUncmAGqviMD2ImpO4+lYaFyfKJCVKx/tEuSjYw8qDrldFvPDZHzT wUe6dRE41HObmZwMQo9dDrmiCUqchpbmluRQhn84Td5SJT22+9hO78z+l8hsoQyCiIWI YMcw==
X-Received: by with SMTP id i2mr11928858lam.7.1413995338221; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:28:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id bn6sm4600139lbc.5.2014. for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:28:57 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 18:28:16 +0200
From: Alexandru Petrescu <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Xueli <>, Ted Lemon <>, "STARK, BARBARA H" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: HOMENET Working Group <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [homenet] =?windows-1252?q?=93Hybrid_Access_for_Broadband_Network?= =?windows-1252?q?s=94_=28WT-348=29?=
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:29:02 -0000

Hello Xueli,

Several people look at this problem as an IP problem.  Instead of 
considering a cellular+dsl combination in a homebox, they considered 
cellular+wifi on a smartphone.   But the goal was the same: augment the 
bandwidth perceived by the end user.

In implementation it is however quite challenging.  The more tempting 
the expectations of augmenting bandwidth by simply adding network 
interfaces (as in adding RAM to a busy computer), the higher the 
desillusion when facing the challenges of implementation.

Some consider it simply as a local computer policy problem (and hence no 
new communicaiton standards needed), but others consider that there is a 
need of a server in the infrastructure to which these interfaces would 
first connect (a sort of an 'anchor').

If such a technology is developped, it will surely be useful for more 
than homenets - it will be useful for multi-interfaced smartphones, 
useful for mobile routers installed in vehicles, and more that I can not 
think of.

PS: there are a few IETF Internet Drafts about how would smartphones 
would use this, with Mobile IPv4 and Mobile IPv6 extensions, but there 
are no widespread implementations.

Le 22/10/2014 11:48, Xueli a écrit :
> Hello
> Thanks Barbara to send this liaison out.
> Hybrid Access network is that Residential gateway (RG, or CPE) is
> extended with more than two access lines
> (e.g. DSL + LTE) in order to provide higher bandwidth for the
> customers. The scenario and architecture are shown as follows
> cid:image002.jpg@01CF9A07.BF8CD480
> Right now, we have two individual drafts, one for architecture and
> requirements, and the other one is for an optional solution.
> The draft
> (
>  ; ) proposes the architecture and gap analysis.
> The solution draft proposes one option for the solutions,
> We did not combine them as one draft, because we believe there may be
>  other candidates, and we would like to have further discussions in
> the related groups and IETF.
> We used to present it in Homenet in Toronto.
> Now the authors have invited Orange to join this architecture work.
> We will send out the new version of these drafts soon.
> We are glad to invite the experts for comments.
> Best Regards
> Li Xue on the co-authors behalf
> -----Original Message-----
> From: homenet [] On Behalf Of Ted
> Lemon
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:05 AM
> Cc: HOMENET Working Group
> Subject: Re: [homenet] Fwd: New Liaison Statement, "Broadband Forum
> Work on “Hybrid Access for Broadband Networks”(WT-348)"
> On Oct 21, 2014, at 2:55 PM, STARK, BARBARA H <>
> wrote:
>> FYI. I made sure they were aware of IETF mif and homenet activities
>> in this area. I intend to try to prevent having to track efforts
>> that try to do the same thing in two different ways. But some of
>> the BBF effort  may be focused on what can be done around "bonding"
>> of multiple
> interfaces that are under the control of a single service provider. I
>  don't see this in mif or homenet.
> Thanks.   I couldn't really tell what was being proposed from the
> Liaison statement, so this information is helpful.
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list