UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`ARRIS GROUP, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`TQ DELTA, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 7,835,430
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF LANCE MCNALLY
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Table of Contents
`I.
`Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4
`List of documents I considered in forming my opinions ................................. 9
`II.
`III. Background and Qualifications ......................................................................11
`IV. Person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA) .....................................................15
`V. Relevant Legal Standards ...............................................................................16
`VI. The State of the Art ........................................................................................18
`A. Overview of Diagnostic and Testing Techniques .......................................18
`B. Overview of Link Protocols ........................................................................19
`C. Overview of Multicarrier Modulation Techniques .....................................23
`D. Historical Background and Implementations of Discrete Multi-Tone
`(DMT) ..................................................................................................................24
`E. Overview of Telebit 2500 Product and Technical Manual .........................27
`F. Overview of Held, “Data Communications Networking Devices, 4th" .....42
`G. Discussion of USENET News Groups ........................................................43
`H. Non-Transitory Storage and Device Architecture.......................................44
`I. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 4,679,227 (‘227 Patent) ................................46
`J. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 4,438,511 (‘511 Patent) ................................46
`K. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,268 (’268 Patent) ................................46
`VII. Overview of U.S. Patent No. 7,835,430 (‘430 Patent) ................................47
`VIII. Claims 1-6 Are Obvious in View of the combination of the “Telebit 2500
`Technical Manual” with Gilbert Held’s “Data Communications Networking
`Devices, 4th" ............................................................................................................48
`A. Claim 1 ........................................................................................................48
`B. Claim 2 ........................................................................................................56
`
`2
`
`

`
`C. Claim 3 ........................................................................................................61
`D. Claim 4 ........................................................................................................62
`E. Claim 5 ........................................................................................................63
`F. Claim 6 ........................................................................................................65
`IX. Claims 1-6 of the ‘430 Patent are Obvious over U.S. Patent No. 4,679,227
`(“’227”) to Hughes-Hartogs in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,438,511 (“’511”) to
`Baran and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,838,268 (“’268”) to Frankel .........66
`A. Claim 1 ........................................................................................................66
`B. Claim 2 ........................................................................................................69
`C. Claim 3 ........................................................................................................71
`D. Claim 4 ........................................................................................................73
`E. Claim 5 ........................................................................................................74
`F. Claim 6 ........................................................................................................75
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`I.
`1.
`
`Introduction
`I am over the age of eighteen (18) and otherwise competent to make this
`
`declaration.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained as an expert witness on behalf of Petitioner ARRIS
`
`Group, Inc. I am being compensated for my time in connection with this
`
`IPR. My compensation is in no way dependent on the outcome of this IPR.
`
`3.
`
`I have been informed and understand that this Petition for inter partes
`
`review involves Claims 1-6 (collectively “the Challenged Claims”) of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 7,835,430 (the “‘430 Patent”). (Ex. 1001).
`
`4.
`
`I have been informed and understand that the ‘430 Patent issued on
`
`November 16, 2010, from U.S. Patent Application No. 12/477,742 (the
`
`“‘742 Application”) filed on June 3, 2009. I have been informed and
`
`understand that the ‘970 Patent was filed as a continuation of application No.
`
`10/619,691, filed on July 16, 2003, now U.S. Patent No. 7,570,686, which is
`
`a division of application No. 09/755,173, filed on January 8, 2001, now U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,658,052. I have also been informed and understand that the
`
`‘430 Patent additionally claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No.
`
`60/224,308, filed on August 10, 2000 and Provisional application No.
`
`60/174,865, filed on January 7, 2000.
`
`4
`
`

`
`5.
`
`For the purposes of my opinions expressed herein I will use January 7, 2000
`
`as the priority date of the subject matter of the Challenged Claims.
`
`6.
`
`I have been informed and further understand that, according to USPTO
`
`records, the ‘430 Patent is assigned to TQ Delta, LLC.
`
`7.
`
`Independent claims 1-6 of the ‘430 Patent are reproduced below.
`
`1. A transceiver capable of transmitting test information over a
`
`communication channel using multicarrier modulation comprising:
`
`a transmitter portion capable of transmitting a message,
`
`wherein the message comprises one or more data variables that
`
`represent the test information, wherein bits in the message are
`
`modulated onto DMT symbols using Quadrature Amplitude
`
`Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit per subchannel and
`
`wherein at least one data variable of the one or more data
`
`variables comprises an array representing frequency domain
`
`received idle channel noise information.
`
`2. A transceiver capable of receiving test information over a
`
`communication channel using multicarrier modulation comprising:
`
`a receiver portion capable of receiving a message, wherein the
`
`message comprises one or more data variables that represent
`
`the test information, wherein bits in the message were
`
`5
`
`

`
`modulated onto DMT symbols using Quadrature Amplitude
`
`Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit per subchannel and
`
`wherein at least one data variable of the one or more data
`
`variables comprises an array representing frequency domain
`
`received idle channel noise information.
`
`3. In a transceiver capable of transmitting test information over a
`
`communication channel using multicarrier modulation, a method
`
`comprising:
`
`transmitting a message, wherein the message comprises one or
`
`more data variables that represent the test information, wherein
`
`bits in the message are modulated onto DMT symbols using
`
`Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit
`
`per subchannel and wherein at least one data variable of the
`
`one or more data variables comprises an array representing
`
`frequency domain received idle channel noise information.
`
`4. In a transceiver capable of receiving test information over a
`
`communication channel using multicarrier modulation comprising, a
`
`method comprising:
`
`receiving a message, wherein the message comprises one or
`
`more data variables that represent the test information, wherein
`
`6
`
`

`
`bits in the message were modulated onto DMT symbols using
`
`Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit
`
`per subchannel and wherein at least one data variable of the
`
`one or more data variables comprises an array representing
`
`frequency domain received idle channel noise information.
`
`5. A non-transitory computer-readable information storage media
`
`having stored thereon instructions that, if executed, cause a
`
`transceiver to perform a method comprising:
`
`transmitting a message, wherein the message comprises one or
`
`more data variables that represent the test information, wherein
`
`bits in the message are modulated onto DMT symbols using
`
`Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit
`
`per subchannel and wherein at least one data variable of the
`
`one or more data variables comprises an array representing
`
`frequency domain received idle channel noise information.
`
`6. A non-transitory computer-readable information storage media
`
`having stored thereon instructions that, if executed, cause a
`
`transceiver to perform a method comprising:
`
`receiving a message, wherein the message comprises one or
`
`more data variables that represent the test information, wherein
`
`7
`
`

`
`bits in the message were modulated onto DMT symbols using
`
`Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) with more than 1 bit
`
`per subchannel and wherein at least one data variable of the
`
`one or more data variables comprises an array representing
`
`frequency domain received idle channel noise information.
`
`8.
`
`In preparing this Declaration, I have reviewed the ‘430 Patent,and
`
`considered each of the documents cited herein, in light of general knowledge
`
`in the art as of January 7, 2000. In formulating my opinions, I have relied
`
`upon my experience in the relevant art. I have also considered the viewpoint
`
`of a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSA”) of a diagnostic link using
`
`multicarrier modulation messaging as of January 7, 2000. As described in
`
`detail below, I offer the following opinions in this Declaration:
`
`a. A POSA would have found the invention of Claims 1-6 of the ‘430
`
`Patent to be obvious in view of the combination of the “Telebit
`
`2500 Technical Manual” (Ex. 1004) with Gilbert Held’s “Data
`
`Communications Networking Devices, 4th" (Held-
`
`DataComNetDev4, Ex. 1006). The Telebit 2500 Technical Manual
`
`combined with Held-DataComNetDev4 teaches each element of
`
`Claims 1-6 to a POSA. To the extent that the patent owner may
`
`attempt to distinguish one or more elements of Claims 1-6 from the
`
`8
`
`

`
`teachings by the Telebit 2500 Technical Manual combined with
`
`Held-DataNetComDev4, a POSA would have found such
`
`distinctions to be obvious. Furthermore, the teachings of both the
`
`Telebit T2500 manual and also the relationship between Discrete-
`
`Multi-Tone and the modulation and link protocols of the Telebit
`
`T2500 modem were well known in the art before the Jan. 7, 2000
`
`priority date of ‘430.
`
`b. A POSA would have found the invention of Claims 1-6 of the ‘430
`
`Patent to be was obvious over U.S. Patent No. 4,679,227 (“’227”)
`
`to Hughes-Hartogs (Ex. 1008) in view of U.S. Patent No.
`
`4,438,511 (“‘511”) to Baran (Ex. 1010) and further in view of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 5,838,268 (“’268”) to Frankel (Ex. 1011). ‘227 in view
`
`of ‘511, and further in view of ‘268 teaches each element of
`
`Claims 1-6 to a POSA. To the extent that the patent owner may
`
`attempt to distinguish one or more elements of Claims 1-6 from the
`
`teachings of ‘227 in view of ‘511 and further in view of ‘268, a
`
`POSA would have found such distinctions to be obvious.
`
`II.
`9.
`
`List of documents I considered in forming my opinions
`In formulating my opinions, I have considered the following documents:
`
`9
`
`

`
`Ex.
`No.
`1001 U.S. Patent No. 7,835,430 to Krinsky
`
`Brief Description
`
`1003 Curriculum Vitae of Lance McNally
`1004 Telebit T2500 Reference Manual (90100-02 Rev. C) (“T2500
`Manual”)
`1005 Telebit T1000 Reference Manual (90062-02 Rev. E) (“T1000 Manual”)
`1006 Held, Gilbert, “Data Communications Networking Devices: Operation,
`Utilization and LAN and WAN Internetworking, 4th,” Jan. 1999.
`(“Held-DataComDev4”)
`1008 US Patent 4,679,227, “Ensemble modem structure for imperfect
`transmission media” to Dirk Hughes-Hartogs (“’227”)
`1010 US Patent 4,438,511, “Packetized Ensemble Modem” to Paul Baran
`(“’511”)
`1011 US Patent 5,838,268, “Apparatus and methods for modulation and
`demodulation of data” to Liron Frenkel (“’268”)
`
`1016
`
`1013 Telebit TrailBlazer datasheet (Received by USPTO mailroom on Aug.
`15, 1986 as trademark specimen for SN: 73/480,840. Source: USPTO
`Trademark Status and Document Retreival (TSDR):
`http://tsdr.uspto.gov/#caseNumber=73480840&caseType=SERIAL_N
`O&searchType=statusSearch)
`“Telebit introduces asynchronous error correcting modem,”
`Computerworld, July 22, 1985, pp. 63, 68.
`Jim Schefter, “Fast-lane modems,” Popular Science, Nov. 1985, pp. 44,
`46.
`1024 Cerf, Vint; “Computing Technology and Military Communications,”,
`IEEE InfoCom 1986, April 1986, p. 240.
`
`1017
`
`10
`
`

`
`Ex.
`No.
`
`1040
`
`1041
`
`1043
`
`1045
`
`1050
`
`Brief Description
`
`“T2500 Regester access,” Usenet news group comp.dcom.modems
`(Aug. 17, 1990), currently available from at least
`http://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.dcom.modems/Eghhcli0AHU/d
`iscussion.
`“Telebit registers,” Usenet news group comp.dcom.modems (Aug. 17 –
`20, 1990), currently available from at least
`http://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.dcom.modems/aqsNKN8gGeA/
`discussion.
`“T2500's and v.32bis -- rumors?,” Usenet news group
`comp.dcom.modems (March 14 – 22, 1991), currently available from at
`least
`http://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.dcom.modems/m3ufre6XIEo/di
`scussion.
`“need info on Telebit modems,” Usenet news group
`comp.dcom.modems (Feb. 3 – 7, 1993), currently available from at
`least
`http://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.dcom.modems/BDm3DexVdQ
`U/discussion.
`“Modem Line Corruption,” Usenet news group comp.dcom.modems
`(Jan. 10 – 21, 2002), currently available from at least
`http://groups.google.com/d/topic/comp.dcom.modems/2xyANA6Sjw8/
`discussion.
`
`
`III.
`10.
`
`Background and Qualifications
`I am an expert in the field of electrical communication protocols, which
`
`include diagnostic modes using various modulation techniques. Throughout
`
`the remainder of this Declaration, I will refer to the field of electrical
`
`communication protocols as the “relevant field” or the “relevant art”. In
`
`11
`
`

`
`formulating my opinions, I have relied upon my training, knowledge, and
`
`experience in the relevant art. A copy of my current curriculum vitae is
`
`provided as (Ex. 1003), and it provides a comprehensive description of my
`
`academic and employment history.
`
`11. My qualifications are stated more fully in my curriculum vita, which is
`
`attached to this declaration. A brief summary of my qualifications follows:
`
`12.
`
`I am currently a principal of Harbor Falls, Inc., a consulting firm
`
`specializing in computer, data networking and telecommunication technical
`
`expertise applied to patents. Previously, I served as Vice President of
`
`Engineering at OPVISTA, Inc.; Director of Engineering at Bay/Nortel
`
`Networks, Inc., in the area of data and telecommunication systems; and
`
`Director of Engineering at Honeywell, Inc./Honeywell Ericsson, Inc./Zenith
`
`Data Systems, Inc., in the area of computer server, data and
`
`telecommunication systems.
`
`13. At Honeywell Ericsson, Inc., I was involved in developing switching
`
`software for least cost routing and integrated service digital network (ISDN)
`
`hardware interfaces for Ericsson private branch exchange (PBX) and class 5
`
`central office switch products.
`
`14. At Honeywell/Zenith Data Systems, Inc., I served several positions. Initially,
`
`I was a senior staff analyst for telecommunications with responsibilities that
`
`12
`
`

`
`included being the corporate representative on the T1S1 American National
`
`Standard Institute (ANSI) committee in the definition of telecommunications
`
`services, architecture, and signaling. Additionally, I was one of the key
`
`architects in the definition, implementation, and deployment of the first
`
`nationwide Electronic Funds Transfer Point-of-Sale network, for which I
`
`received the highest divisional achievement award. Prior to leaving
`
`Honeywell/Zenith Data Systems, Inc., I was responsible for the design and
`
`development of Intel processor based servers. The servers were built to order
`
`with pre-loaded operating systems (e.g., Windows NT Server, Netware and
`
`SCO UNIX).
`
`15. As part of Bay/Nortel Networks, I also held numerous positions including
`
`development responsibility of DOCSIS CMTS(Cable Modem Termination
`
`System)/CM(Cable Modem), Network Processor and router products. I was
`
`selected as the Design Authority for Network Processor Units that were used
`
`corporate-wide for the implementation of ATM/IP routers and Ethernet-
`
`based switches.
`
`16. At Opvista Inc., I lead the engineering organization in the devolvement of
`
`Optical networking equipment.
`
`13
`
`

`
`17.
`
`I received a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from Purdue
`
`University in 1979 and a Master in Business Administration from the
`
`University of Dallas in 1985.
`
`18.
`
`I’m a co-inventor on ten U.S. Patents: 4,831,634 (Modem backplane
`
`interconnections); 4,879,716 (Resilient Data Communication Systems);
`
`4,999,787 (Hot extraction and insertion of logic boards in an on-line
`
`communication system); 5,517,648 and 5,522,069 (Symmetric
`
`multiprocessing system with unified environment and distributed system
`
`functions); 5,809,340 (Adaptively generating timing signals for access to
`
`various memory devices based on stored profiles); 5,956,522 (Symmetric
`
`multiprocessing system with unified environment and distributed system
`
`functions); 6,098,131 (Network apparatus with removable electronic
`
`module); 6,125,436 (Symmetric multiprocessing system with unified
`
`environment and distributed system functions wherein bus operations related
`
`storage spaces are mapped into a single system address space); and
`
`6,311,286 (Symmetric multiprocessing system with unified environment and
`
`distributed system functions.
`
`19.
`
`I have severed as a technical consultant in a number of patent related legal
`
`matters, and am familiar with terms of art.
`
`14
`
`

`
`IV.
`20.
`
`Person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA)
`I am familiar with the knowledge and capabilities of one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art. For example, my work as a practicing engineer and engineering
`
`manager during that period allowed me to become personally familiar with
`
`the level of skill of individuals and the general state of the art. Unless
`
`otherwise stated, my testimony below refers to the knowledge of one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art as of 2000, the period that includes the earliest
`
`effective priority date of the Challenged Claims.
`
`21.
`
`I have been informed and understand that a Person of Ordinary Skill in the
`
`Art (“POSA”) is a hypothetical person who is presumed to be aware of
`
`pertinent prior art, thinks along conventional wisdom in the art, and is a
`
`person of ordinary creativity. With respect to the ‘430 Patent, in my opinion,
`
`a POSA would have had education and/or experience in the field of
`
`electronics, specifically messaging and modulations techniques, and
`
`knowledge of the scientific literature concerning the same. Within the field
`
`of electronic messaging, a POSA would have had education and/or
`
`experience in a variety of modulation techniques, and knowledge of the
`
`scientific literature concerning the same.
`
`22. The education and experience levels may vary between persons of ordinary
`
`skill, with some persons holding a basic Bachelor’s of Electrical
`
`15
`
`

`
`Engineering, Computer Science, or equivalent degree, but with more than
`
`three years of relevant work experience, or others holding more advanced
`
`degrees—e.g., Masters or Ph.D.—but having fewer years of experience.
`
`23. A person of ordinary skill in the field often works as part of a
`
`multidisciplinary team and draws upon not only his or her own skills, but
`
`also takes advantage of certain specialized skills of others in the team, to
`
`solve a given problem.
`
`V.
`24.
`
`Relevant Legal Standards
`I understand that a patent claim in an inter partes review is given its
`
`broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification of the patent, as
`
`would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`claimed invention. I understand that claims should be construed consistent
`
`with the patent itself as well as the prosecution history. I understand that a
`
`patentee can explicitly set a definition for a specific term for purposes of the
`
`patent. I understand that words of the claims should be given their plain
`
`meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification.
`
`25.
`
`I understand that a claim may be held invalid as obvious to one of ordinary
`
`skill at the time of the invention on the basis of a combination of one or
`
`more prior art references. Situations in which teachings of two or more
`
`references may be combined include: (1) the elements are combined
`
`16
`
`

`
`according to known methods to yield predicable results; (2) one known
`
`element is simply substituted for another to obtain predictable results; (3) a
`
`known technique is applied in the same way used to improve a similar
`
`subject; (4) a known technique is applied to subject matter ready for
`
`improvement to yield predictable results; (5) the solution is one of a finite
`
`number of identified, predictable solutions, and there is a reasonable
`
`expectation of success; (6) known work in one field is varied for use in the
`
`same field or in a different field based on design incentives or other market
`
`forces, and the variations are predictable; and (7) the references include a
`
`teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine. Objective evidence, such as
`
`commercial success of the invention, long felt but unresolved need, failure
`
`of others, copying, industry acceptance, and praise may show that an
`
`invention appearing to be obvious in light of the prior art was in fact not
`
`obvious. I understand that obviousness analysis must focus on the
`
`knowledge and skill of one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
`
`invention to avoid improper hindsight. I understand that a prior art reference
`
`must be considered in its entirety, including portions that would lead away
`
`from a claimed invention.
`
`17
`
`

`
`The State of the Art
`VI.
`26. The ‘430 Patent is directed towards a diagnostic/test mode function in a
`
`communication system. In communication systems, a device (e.g., modem,
`
`networked computer, etc.) is usually provided with various methods to
`
`troubleshoot issues during the initiation and operation of the device’s
`
`communication with another device. Typically there are many link protocols
`
`and modulation techniques that handle such functions. Often times the
`
`implementation may vary, but the underlying motivation and functions
`
`remain the same; that is, to ensure robust and reliable communications.
`
`Overview of Diagnostic and Testing Techniques
`A.
`27. Electrical communications equipment can provide for a variety of diagnostic
`
`and testing methods for real-time troubleshooting. Diagnostics and/or testing
`
`can operate during initial connection or during normal usage. Standards
`
`bodies can define required diagnostic modes, or a device can provide for a
`
`proprietary implementation. In the nomenclature of electronic
`
`communications devices, “diagnostic mode” is synonymous with a “test
`
`mode” or “troubleshooting mode.” It should be understood that a device
`
`need not enter a dedicated “mode” to record diagnostic metrics used to
`
`improve signal quality, increase bandwidth, or perform another desired
`
`device function, though if the diagnostics to be performed require exclusive
`
`18
`
`

`
`use of one or more resources within a communications device, a diagnostics
`
`mode may operate exclusive of normal operation. Furthermore,
`
`troubleshooting can be performed automatically in response to a condition,
`
`schedules, or spontaneously initiated on an ad hoc basis.
`
`Overview of Link Protocols
`B.
`28. Modem link protocols are a fundamental tier of abstraction for modern
`
`electrical communication devices. Protocols can either be defined and
`
`implemented based on a standard or a proprietary protocol. Among the
`
`typical functions of link layer protocols include: data link control, error
`
`control, and signal conversation. The following rudimentary figure displays
`
`functionality commonly provided by a link protocol operating between two
`
`modems:
`
`
`
`19
`
`

`
`29. Link Protocols also allow the multiplexing of user data with control data and
`
`may use one or more bits in frames to identify or tag different types of data.
`
`Different types of data also might be identified in other ways such as but not
`
`limited to the location within a flow of traffic. With a link protocol, data
`
`from multiple source processes (such as, but not limited to, user data and
`
`control data) can be multiplexed together for transmission over a link. In the
`
`case of modems which operate synchronously and/or asynchronously, the
`
`signal conversion function provides a method of communication of the link.
`
`Then functionality in a receiver can use the identifier, tag, or other method to
`
`separate out the multiplexed data (such as user and control) for delivery to
`
`different destination processes. These functions at the level between
`
`modems are often generally categorized as data link control. A diagnostic
`
`mode or test mode is also often categorized under the data link control.
`
`Diagnostic modes can also function to carry remote commands through
`
`messages between local and remote modems.
`
`30. Examples of common voice frequency modem link protocols include
`
`Microcom Networking Protocol (MNP) and V.42 (LAPM) from ITU
`
`(formerly known as CCITT). In other cases, a proprietary implementation
`
`can be used, such as Packetized Ensemble Protocol (PEP), which will be
`
`discussed in further detail under the Telebit section below. Differences
`
`20
`
`

`
`between link protocols typically include specific supported functions and
`
`implementation details.
`
`31. The following Usenet exchange of messages describes operation of a non-
`
`DAMQAM/non-PEP Telebit modem, the single-carrier T1600 modem. In
`
`the exchange, a Telebit technical support representative explains that remote
`
`access functionality (using the “%” operator) for MNP and V.42 link
`
`protocols could be implemented using some link protocol extensions to
`
`identify the remote access (“%”) command and response messages. Thus,
`
`this Usenet conversation provides insight into the way Telebit may have
`
`implemented remote access functionality (for the “%” operator) not only for
`
`MNP and V.42/LAPM, but also for PEP over multicarrier DAMQAM.
`
`[Greg Andrews] Why no [support for another Telebit
`proprietary-feature in the CCITT link protocol of] V.42?
`Simple - the CCITT wasn't registering extensions to the
`V.42 protocol when Telebit wanted to add protocol
`support. Microcom was willing, so it was implemented in
`MNP mode. There are some "unregistered" extension
`codes available, but only at the risk of colliding with
`someone else's private V.42 extension... Telebit will keep
`checking with the CCITT so [Telebit proprietary
`features] can be added to V.42 mode also.
`…
`
`21
`
`

`
`[Ken Mandelberg] I had been wondering why on the
`T1600 the "remote access" commands only work in MNP
`mode and not V.42. I guess the reason may be the same
`as suggested above for [other proprietary Telebit
`features].
`[Greg Andrews] Exactly right.
`(Usenet: Ex. 1043 at 2-3.)
`32. Who was Greg Andrews to make the above statements regarding the
`
`underlying functional operation of Telebit’s remote configuration capability,
`
`accessed with the “%” operator? Another Usenet post describes Greg
`
`Andrews’ background and why the above 1991 Usenet conversation is a
`
`rational description of the operation of Telebit’s remote access commands
`
`over link protocols such as Microcom’s MNP, V.42/LAPM if the ITU had
`
`allowed vendor-extension codepoints, and also over Telebit’s PEP link
`
`protocol.
`
`(Perhaps someone should point out that in the past Greg
`Andrews was a major contributor to this newsgroup... he
`worked for Telebit and during the heyday of Telebit
`modems, and provided many many *many* helpful
`articles here to assist grateful users! We also were
`blessed in those days with Toby Nixon, from Hayes, and
`I can't remember who it was from USR. We didn't lack
`for credible insights back then... we'd get the word right
`from the horse's whatever itself!)
`
`22
`
`

`
`(Usenet: Ex. 1050 at 27.)
`33. From my background in developing communications devices, and
`
`knowledge of general functionalities in link protocols, including cable and
`
`telco technologies, Greg Andrews’ description of how Telebit implemented
`
`remote (“%” operator) commands for the non-PEP/non-DAMQAM T1600
`
`modem, provides insight into possible ways that Telebit could or would have
`
`implemented modem remote access functionality for multicarrier
`
`PEP/DAMQAM modems such as the T2500 and T1000.
`
`Overview of Multicarrier Modulation Techniques
`C.
`34. Modulation is generally encoding of information, often digital data, into an
`
`analog signal. Demodulation is the recovery of information from the analog
`
`signal. In the context of a simple MODEM (MOdulator/DEModulator), the
`
`encoding process occurs prior to transmission across a wired or wireless
`
`connection by the transmitting modem and is reversed by a receiving
`
`modem.
`
`35. Modern modulation techniques can include numerous schemes and
`
`techniques to increase bandwidth and reduce errors during communication.
`
`A modulation technique employing more than one carrier frequency
`
`contemporaneously in parallel generally is referred to as a multicarrier
`
`modulation technique.
`
`23
`
`

`
`36.
`
`In my opinion, once multicarrier modulation techniques were developed, a
`
`POSA would have found it obvious to use more carriers and a wider
`
`bandwidth with more available spectrum in a multicarrier system.
`
`37.
`
`In addition, some modulation schemes (e.g., Telebit modem) used the voice-
`
`frequency (VF) channel with characteristics well-known to those familiar
`
`with the analog telephone network, using frequencies around 300 Hz to
`
`3,400 Hz, although this band is often identified less accurately as 0 to 4
`
`KHz. Other techniques, such as ADSL, use a broader spectrum, generally
`
`above the VF band in ranges generally from 25 – 1,100 KHz. Moreover,
`
`VDSL uses an even broader spectrum, beginning around 25 KHz and going
`
`to about 12 MHz. In my opinion, a POSA would have found it obvious to
`
`increase the broadness of the spectrum band from a VF channel to ADSL,
`
`VDSL, or any other ranges for application of multicarrier modulation
`
`techniques.
`
`D.
`
`38.
`
`Historical Background and Implementations of Discrete Multi-
`Tone (DMT)
`In a narrow and specific case, discrete multitone (DMT) is a method of
`
`dividing an Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line (ADSL) signal so that the
`
`usable frequency range is separated into 256 frequency bands (or channels)
`
`of 4.3125 KHz each. DMT generally is implemented using the Fast Fourier
`
`24
`
`

`
`transform (FFT) algorithm (or variants thereof) for modulation and
`
`demodulation.
`
`39. DMT was formally adopted by the T1E1.4 committee as the standardized
`
`line code for ADSL in ANSI T1.413-1995. Although competing single
`
`carrier techniques of CAP (Carrierless Amplitude/Phase Modulation) and
`
`single-carrier QAM (Quadrature Amplitude Modulation) were proposed,
`
`DMT-based ADSL (and VDSL) modems out-performed single-carrier CAP
`
`and QAM in Bellcore testing. In the early 1990s various telcos were looking
`
`for cheaper and faster digital line solutions than the then adopted four-wire
`
`Alternate Mark Inversion (AMI) T1 line and the two-wire 2-Binary-1-
`
`Quatenary (2B1Q) Basic Rate ISDN U-Interface. One of these new digital
`
`line development projects was known as High-Rate Digital Subscriber Line
`
`(HDSL), and various individuals, companies and research universities
`
`submitted proposals for the modulation or line code for HDSL.
`
`40.
`
`In particular, professor John Cioffi of Stanford University and some of his
`
`Ph.D. students submitted proposals to T1E1.4 to use Discrete Multi-Tone
`
`(DMT) modulation for the yet unstandardized HDSL transmission line
`
`format to more cost effectively provide symmetric T1 service. John Cioffi
`
`and his students had been consulting with Telebit Corp. and particularly
`
`Telebit engineer, John Bingham. T1E1.4 ultimately adopted a line code for
`
`25
`
`

`
`HDSL that was similar to the 2B1Q line code of Basic Rate ISD