[wp_tech_share]

We just wrapped up the 3Q24 reporting period. And per our latest RAN findings, 2024 is so far not a great year from an Open RAN revenue perspective. As a reminder, Open RAN investments accelerated at a torrid pace between 2019 and 2022. This remarkable ascent was then followed by a ~$0.5 B decline in 2023 as activity in the US slowed. Market conditions remain challenging in 2024, and helping to explain the 30 % year-over-year (Y/Y) decline for the 1Q24-3Q24 period is the state of the 5G market in Japan and the US combined with the commercial readiness of next-generation O-RAN ULPI technologies.

In other words, the long-term trajectory is positive, but the short-term picture remains blurry. With large-scale greenfield deployments now mostly in the past, the broader market sentiment will remain uncertain until 5G activity in the US/Japan improves or modernization projects utilizing the latest O-RAN ULPI interfaces firm up.

Additional Open RAN highlights from the 3Q2024 RAN Report:

  • Virtualized RAN is down 15 % Y/Y for the 1Q24-3Q24 period.
  • The top 3 Open RAN suppliers for the 1Q24-3Q24 period based on worldwide revenues are Samsung, NEC, and Fujitsu.
  • The top 3 vRAN suppliers for the 1Q24-3Q24 period based on worldwide revenues are Samsung, Fujitsu, and Ericsson.
  • Short-term projections have been revised downward, while the long-term outlook remains unchanged. Open RAN is now projected to comprise a mid-single-digit share of the 2024 RAN market and 8 to 10 % of the combined proprietary plus Open RAN 2025 revenues.

About the Report

Dell’Oro Group’s RAN Quarterly Report offers a complete overview of the RAN industry, with tables covering manufacturers’ and market revenue for multiple RAN segments, including 5G NR Sub-7 GHz, 5G NR mmWave, LTE, macro base stations and radios, small cells, Massive MIMO, Open RAN, and vRAN. The report also tracks the RAN market by region and includes a four-quarter outlook. To purchase this report, please contact us by email at dgsales@delloro.com.

[wp_tech_share]

Importance of Optical Transport

When asked to explain optical transport, people usually use automobiles and roads as an example. A person can reach their destination faster in a sports car than in a sedan since the former can travel at higher speeds. Adding more lanes reduces traffic or congestion, allowing vehicles to reach their destination on time without delay. These examples, using cars and roadways, are analogous to optical wavelength signal speed and dense wavelength-division multiplexing (DWDM). While this metaphor is a great way to explain the purpose of DWDM technology, it fails to capture the importance.

I like to use trees to illustrate the importance of optical transport. Beneath every tree lies roots that ferry resources to the branches and leaves and must scale proportionally. If the root system is inadequate, the branches won’t receive enough nutrients and will eventually break. In general, the bigger and more stable the roots, the stronger and healthier the tree, as realized by the many healthy branches and leaves that we see.

In a service provider network, the optical transport layer plays a crucial role. It serves as the roots of a tree that supports all the branches of services offered to customers. Just as tree roots provide the necessary nutrients for healthy growth, the optical transport layer ensures better connectivity to homes, mobile devices, enterprises, and data centers. It needs to be robust enough to support all the services that operators want to deliver. Otherwise, the branch will break. Stated another way—like a tree, the customers see the branches, but they experience the network beneath it through its beauty.

Therefore, like a tree, with each new generation of access technology, there is a need for a new generation of optical transport. I bring this to your attention because of the visible work by service providers to roll out next-generation services, such as Mobile 5G Advanced and Fixed 5G Advanced (F5G Advanced), and enterprise investments in developing new applications using artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML). These buzzword access technologies will need a matching optical transport layer to support the resources they need.

 

Next-Generation Services

Access is moving to a new generation of services that deliver higher speeds, lower latency, and greater reliability. Some of these service offerings include 50 Gbps PON to homes, 5G-Advanced to devices, and ultra-high-speed connections between AI/ML data centers. In some cases, the bandwidth at the network edge will need to double, and in many cases, it will need to increase by over 10 times. For example, in residential broadband, the market is moving from the current technology (2.5 Gbps PON) to 10 Gbps and then 50 Gbps PON. This means the backhaul capacity may need to increase by as much as 20x.

In addition, the applications run by end users over their network will determine the speed and architecture required by the service provider to meet consumer expectations on quality and latency. Imagine a customer with a broadband service of 10 Gbps using the operator’s 50 Gbps PON network playing a virtual reality game with the same latency and service quality as before. Was the higher price for the 10 Gbps connection worth it? Will they keep it? The answer is “no” to both. And while we do not know what applications and services will emerge from AI/ML, we do know they will require more bandwidth, ultra-low latency, and much higher network quality. Additionally, due to the higher power consumption of AI/ML systems, data centers are required to be geographically distributed and interconnected (DCI) with a high-speed, high-availability optical network.

Therefore, beyond the new generation of access technology, the optical transport layer must also be upgraded to match it. The roots of the tree must grow to support the bigger branches.

 

Next-Generation Optical Transport

What are the requirements for the next-generation optical transport network? To answer this, we listed some key optical network technologies that are mapped to critical customer needs.

(1) 400+ Gbps wavelength speeds: End users want faster connections to their devices, using new broadband access technologies that require higher backhaul speeds. Therefore, the transceiver speed in the aggregation, metro, and long-haul network will need to increase beyond the installed base of 100/200 Gbps. The optical transport network will need to move to at least 400 Gbps wavelengths and, ultimately, 800 Gbps to support the higher load placed on the network. Additionally, there are many benefits to moving to 400+ Gbps wavelengths, including higher network efficiency, less rack space, lower power per bit, and lower cost per bit.

(2) C+L band amplifiers and filters: Two factors heighten the need to increase the capacity per fiber. The first is that demand for bandwidth has risen every year since the beginning of the Internet era, and it will continue to rise for many more years into the future. The second reason is that, because of Shannon’s Limit, every new generation of wavelength speeds utilizes higher baud rates, consuming more spectrum. As a result of these factors, operators need fiber strands to carry more capacity. Otherwise, they will need to add more strands of fiber, which may not be possible, causing network congestion along some routes. The solution is to add more usable spectrum in a fiber.

Originally, optical equipment was designed to operate in 4 THz (80 channels @ 50 GHz) of fiber spectrum located in the C-band. Over time, equipment manufacturers increased it to 4.8 THz (96 channels @ 50 GHz). The next generation of equipment will inevitably be designed to operate in 6.0 THz (120 channels @ 50 GHz) of spectrum, referred to as Super C-band. This action alone increases the amount of bandwidth-per-fiber by 25 percent. The spectrum can be nearly doubled by adding L-band, which supports 100 channels @ 50 GHz. Consequently, a fiber that had a maximum capacity of 38.4 Tbps (calculated using a spectral efficiency of eight) can now support 88.0 Tbps.

(3) All optical transmission and switching: The speed of transmission is important, but for some applications that require real-time response and feedback, latency is critical. We mentioned gaming as one application for consumers, but there are numerous additional applications in industries such as medical, power utility, automotive, and aerospace, where lower latency is a major requirement. One way to improve or lower latency is to remove any points along the signal’s route where it must be read, processed, buffered, or converted to electrical and then back to optical. Hence, the approach would be to use optical transmission and switching, such as reconfigurable optical add/drop multiplexers (ROADM) or optical cross-connect (OXC), as much as possible.

(4) Mesh topology for shortest path and multi-path protection: Mesh topology has many benefits: reduction of the number of hops between endpoints, improved path protection, and increased network scalability. More importantly, due to the exponentially higher number of paths a signal can take versus a ring topology to its destination, network quality is dramatically improved, moving the network towards six 9s availability.

 

“At the Root of It All”

Optical Transport is the network layer that delivers on the services and features that consumers want. Hence, any upgrades or addition of new services to end users will require changes in the optical layer. Using our tree analogy: there is no tree without the roots, and there is no network without optical transport. Therefore, to support all the next generation of services (5G Advanced, F5G Advanced, AI/ML applications, and DCI) that operators and cloud service providers are rolling out and ensure a high-quality of experience, the optical transport layer must also be upgraded.

[wp_tech_share]

Late last week, Vecima Networks announced that it was acquiring Falcon V, a Polish developer of access network orchestration software designed to facilitate the deployment of vendor-agnostic DOCSIS, fiber, and wireless networks. The acquisition will help accelerate Vecima’s Entra vCMTS product development and help the company build closer ties to Charter as the cable operator continues its Distributed Access Architecture (DAA) network transformation. The deal also helps to soothe the sting of Vecima’s unsuccessful bid for the cable assets of Casa Systems, despite establishing itself as the stalking horse bid in the auction.

Falcon V, which originated in 2018 as a joint venture between Liberty Global and equipment supplier Vector Group, received an investment from Charter and Liberty Global in 2021 to focus on developing SDN and NFV solutions to allow for the deployment of open DAA systems. At the time of the investment, Charter was focused on deploying Remote MACPHY technology, as opposed to Comcast and other operators, who were moving forward with Remote PHY. Falcon V was said to be working on software that could accelerate vendor interoperability and help Charter move more quickly in the direction of Flexible MAC Architecture (FMA), which offered the operator far more flexibility in where it could locate the MAC (Media access control) function, be it in nodes, hub sites, headends, or centralized data centers.

But in October 2022, Charter changed direction and moved away from Remote MACPHY toward Remote PHY. That strategic shift left many wondering whether Falcon V would still have a role to play in Charter’s transition to DAA. In actuality, nothing changed much for the software supplier, as it was still focused on developing orchestration software as well as an interop testing suite designed to ensure Charter could have a truly open, vendor-agnostic DAA network.

In March 2023, Charter announced that it had selected Harmonic as a vCMTS and Remote PHY Device (RPD) technology supplier while also selecting Vecima as a supplier of its ERM 3 RPDs, which can be installed in its EN 9000 Generic Access Platform (GAP) nodes, all clearly indicating its commitment to a multi-vendor deployment. Vecima had already been selected as the lead supplier of Remote OLTs (R-OLTs) in Charter’s RDOF network buildouts and is presumably a lead supplier of these platforms in potential non-RDOF deployments, as well.

In September 2023, Vecima also announced it had entered into a warrant agreement with Charter, providing Charter the opportunity to purchase up to 361, 050 shares of Vecima stock through 2031 at a strike price of C$17.09 per warrant. That translates into an agreement of roughly US$4.5M and is dependent on Charter achieving certain spending targets.

So, even before the Falcon V acquisition, the relationship between Vecima and Charter was already strong. The addition of Falcon V and its employee base extends that relationship further into the realms of vCMTS, software orchestration, and DAA interop testing.

 

An Answer to Charter’s Interop Issues?

Back in February 2024, Charter’s Chris Winfrey announced that the start of phase two of its network transformation—the phase focused on RPD and vCMTS deployments—would be delayed from the beginning of the year to late 2024, at best. The culprit? DAA equipment certification delays due to greater-than-expected challenges with interop testing. Though Winfrey didn’t provide specifics on the delays, Charter’s multi-vendor strategy is already ambitious, especially when the company continues to build out RDOF properties with R-OLTs and is also trying to roll out new nodes and amplifiers.

Thus, Vecima’s acquisition of Falcon V could very well have been pushed by Charter as a way to reduce the number of discrete vendors it has to coordinate with as it goes through the interop and homologation process. Charter has already made financial commitments to both vendors, so why not advocate for a marriage to help potentially speed up the DAA rollout process? The double-edged sword of DAA network rollout delays and subscriber losses is beginning to weigh heavily on Charter’s investors. So, anything that its vendor partners can do to solve those issues will certainly be welcomed by the operator.

 

Accelerating Vecima’s vCMTS Development

Beyond tightening its relationship with Charter, the addition of Falcon V’s products, as well as its software development teams will certainly help bring Vecima’s Entra vCMTS platform to market more quickly so that it can compete with Harmonic and Commscope. Though the Falcon V acquisition doesn’t completely make up for missing out on acquiring Casa’s cable assets, including its Axyom vCMTS and vBNG platforms, it does help to add pieces to what is an incredibly complex platform.

Vecima needs to accelerate the time to market of its Entra platform, especially at a customer like Charter, which has said it wants to move forward with a multi-vendor core, not just a multi-vendor PHY layer. While the details of just what a multi-vendor core might look like and how it will benefit Charter with all of the many balls it already has in the air, it certainly represents an opportunity for Vecima to position itself with a major operator that has plans beyond just the upgrade of its HFC network.

Charter likely similarly views the vCMTS as Comcast: As an edge compute platform that will ultimately enable services beyond those in the DOCSIS realm. The first workload after vCMTS is vBNG to support FTTH services and then perhaps an AGF (Access Gateway Function) workload to deliver converged fixed and mobile services over the existing HFC plant. Beyond that, perhaps a truly converged fixed and mobile core.

[wp_tech_share]

At last week’s SCTE TechExpo, Comcast announced that Rogers Communications, Canada’s largest cable operator, will be licensing Comcast’s broadband access network design. This includes DAA equipment, CPE, and other network monitoring and management elements. Now, Rogers syndicates Comcast’s broadband access architecture and components, in addition to the X1 video platform, which it has been licensing since January 2017.

This announcement was only a surprise in its timing, as rumors had been swirling for months, if not years, that Comcast would be syndicating its broadband network design and corresponding network elements to other cable operators. In fact, back in 2017, I wrote an article titled “Comcast’s Hands-on Approach to the Headend and Home,” where we speculated about Comcast moving in this direction. This was largely because it had already gained experience by syndicating its X1 video platform and aimed to “streamline the lengthy cycle of product definition, development, testing, homologation, and deployment. Comcast has signaled its intention to define the future access network in conjunction with its technology suppliers. Through the development of an RDK-like operating system designed to provide a standard reference point for the creation, provisioning, and management of broadband traffic and services.”

 

Virtualizing the Broadband Access Infrastructure

Further, the article argued that Comcast is working on virtualizing its broadband access infrastructure and all the software elements in order to create an operating system for DOCSIS networks and broadband services, in general. “Again, we believe the idea here is for Comcast to exert the same level of operational control over its broadband access network as it is doing in subscribers’ homes (with X1), by developing an access network operating system upon which all CCAP, optical node and optical line terminals (OLTs) will run. This operating system will extend the existing DOCSIS specification into a virtualized environment, providing specifics for the provisioning of broadband services across the entire access network. Additionally, it will incorporate APIs to tie into RDK-B and extend service provisioning into the home. This new system, called s RDK-A (RDK for Access) will allow Comcast and any of its licensees to move faster toward a more virtualized future.”

 

Comcast’s Partnership with Harmonic and CableOS

At the time the article was written, the focus was on software, particularly the CableOS vCMTS platform from Harmonic that Comcast had selected to serve as its primary platform moving forward. Back in September 2016, Harmonic announced a warrant agreement with Comcast allowing the operator to potentially acquire 7.8 million shares of Harmonic stock based on sales and deployment milestones of Harmonic’s CableOS product. At the time, the article noted that “the agreement with Harmonic is interesting because the company has not been a major supplier of CCAPs to Comcast. But Harmonic’s CableOS (now cOS) platform addresses the anticipated changes Comcast and other MSOs will see in their broadband access networks.” We speculated that “not much is known regarding the specific software elements that Comcast is looking to incorporate into its longer-term vision of an access network OS. If this is the case, it is a potentially huge win for Harmonic. It could mean the licensing of its CableOS software to other cable operators. For Comcast, this would ultimately mean more control, technologically and economically, over how broadband services are created and delivered from its network, which will be absolutely critical as broadband encompasses fixed, Wi-Fi, and mobile networks.”

We could not have predicted that Comcast’s licensing blueprint would go well beyond software and control plane functions to also encompass amplifiers, remote PHY devices, and machine learning tools all designed to help cable operators reduce their time to market and improve their overall network reliability.

 

Why Rogers is the Right Partner

Beyond having already been a long-time customer of Comcast’s X1 video platform and having recently signed a 10-year deal for ongoing access to Comcast’s video platform and CPE, Rogers Communications was the right partner at the right time for Comcast, for two reasons: First, the company has been occupied with its massive merger with Shaw Communications, Canada’s second-largest cable operator. The deal, which was first announced in 2021, officially closed in 2023. However, the hard work of bridging their networks and vendors is still ongoing, taking valuable network planning resources and personnel.

Second, back in July 2022, Rogers experienced a major network outage that impacted not only 12 million Rogers broadband and mobile customers, but also a number of ISPs with wholesale access to Rogers’ network. The outage, lasting from 15 hours to multiple days, resulted in Rogers having to give out approximately $150 million in customer credits. Rogers also developed a $10 billion plan to improve network reliability over three years to prevent, or at least minimize future outages.

Adopting Comcast’s broadband access network blueprint made sense for an operator under heavy pressure to prove to its subscribers and the Canadian Government that its network challenges were behind it. Now, Rogers can focus on marketing and selling its services, especially as it faces intensifying competition from Telus and Bell Canada, both of which are moving forward with major fiber overbuilding projects.

 

Which Access Technology is Right for Rogers?

Comcast is moving full-speed ahead with Full Duplex (FDX) DOCSIS 4.0. Rogers has already publicly communicated that it is testing FDX technology in its lab. However, is that the right choice for Rogers, and, does the licensing of Comcast’s access network blueprint mean it is on a path to FDX, as opposed to Extended Spectrum (ESD)?

Similar to Comcast, Rogers has both a node plus zero portion of their HFC networks, as well as a more traditional node plus five or six portions. We estimate that the node plus zero covers around 1 million homes, while the more traditional HFC plants 3 million homes. In that node plus zero portion, Rogers has deployed GPON but is in the process of upgrading to XGS-PON. Shaw also has a smaller fiber footprint, but instead of GPON, Shaw has deployed 10G EPON.

For the bulk of its HFC footprint, Rogers was previously rumored to be on the path toward deploying ESD using 1.8GHz amplifiers. However, given the new licensing arrangement with Comcast and the additional spectrum management tools the Comcast solution provides, Rogers could very well be considering deploying more FDX throughout its system. This is especially the case if the amplifiers are proven to work consistently in node plus 6 and even node plus eight environments. Both the Rogers and Shaw plants have long spans and larger amplifier cascades to deal with.

Though FDX amplifiers are presumed to be considerably more expensive than 1.8GHz amplifiers, it can be argued that the cost savings in not having to swap out taps, which is required in ESD deployments, makes FDX a wash on a per-home basis. Time will tell whether this is true or not.

Also, there is something to be said for the idea of being able to use the shared spectrum of 108 MHz to 684 MHz dynamically across both the upstream and downstream based on traffic demands. Combining that flexibility with additional machine learning tools to anticipate network issues could go a long way to restoring customers’ faith in the Rogers network.

It’s also worth noting that Comcast’s licensing arrangement also provides for the management of fiber networks using both headend OLTs and remote OLT modules. So, Rogers and any other potential licensees could adopt the framework across both their DOCSIS and fiber footprints.

 

Will Comcast Technology Solutions License to Additional Cable Operators?

The ongoing (and now very real) threat of Comcast’s entry into the broadband access technology licensing game has certainly disrupted the vendor landscape. If you have not been supplying Comcast with vCMTS, RPD, amplifiers, or other technologies, then the TAM for your products certainly takes a hit, especially now with the combined entity of Rogers and Shaw being taken off the table.

The question now is this: Are there any other operators who could potentially license Comcast’s broadband access solution? The obvious candidates are the operators who have been licensing Comcast’s X1 video platform. Besides Rogers and Shaw, these include Cox Communications and Videotron.

At this time, however, we don’t believe any of these remaining operators are interested in licensing Comcast’s broadband architecture and services. X1 was timely because it provided an advanced UI and backend video management platform for a service (broadcast TV) that was hemorrhaging subscribers amidst increasing content costs. Broadband is not in that same situation. Plus, operators are far more reluctant to potentially cede roadmap control to another operator—especially since they have already been doing that in some cases with their equipment vendors.

But if operators continue to have difficulty adding broadband subscribers, especially with competition increasing and margins potentially decreasing, then that could open the door for Comcast to expand its broadband access licensing footprint. Just as Broadcom has made its unified DOCSIS 4.0 chipset available to all operators in an effort to build scale, Comcast is looking to build a similar scale for its offering. It won’t be a significant money-maker for the operator, but more a mindset and market-maker.

[wp_tech_share]

Two startups with shared advisory board members are hitting the market with solutions designed to facilitate cable’s convergence with wireless and 5G. The announcements are well-timed, given the funk cable operators find themselves in as net broadband subscriber losses mount, but also as those same operators continue to take a sizable share of new mobile subscribers. Additionally, the cable industry, which has for years benefited from decades of shared development cycles and deployments of the latest DOCSIS technologies, finds itself with multiple paths forward (DOCSIS 3.1+, DOCSIS 4.0, fiber, FWA, etc.) and trepidation that the next technology decision will leave it further behind its competitors.

Air5 and Air Wireless each aim to solve different problems cable operators face today. However, both share a core belief: cable operators’ future success depends on their ability to get to market quickly and build networks that transparently handle both fixed broadband and wireless traffic and services across their networks. In a recent blog, I detailed how US telcos are betting on service convergence to continue to chip away at cable’s massive broadband subscriber base. It stands to reason that cable operators will fight back using the same approach.

 

Extending DOCSIS Wirelessly

First, Air Wireless is pitching a solution that allows cable operators to extend their DOCSIS networks and services wirelessly using E-band spectrum, ranging from 60 GHz to 90GHz, and a point-to-multipoint architecture that looks and feels very similar to how optical nodes are distributed throughout an HFC network. The technology isn’t new. In fact, Air Wireless acquired the assets from a Slovenian startup known as Globtel, which had developed the Gigaray platform to transport voice, video, and DOCSIS data traffic wirelessly from a base station to transceivers located at businesses, MDUs, and residences. The transceivers connect to existing DOCSIS 3.1 modems and set-top boxes, allowing for a quick and easy method for aggregating and backhauling DOCSIS traffic.

The primary benefit of the Air Wireless solution to operators is time-to-market. Operators can extend their DOCSIS networks without having to run fiber to a new node location. Or, an operator can deploy the solution as a way to get services to an MDU or new neighborhood quickly and in advance of a more traditional buildout of an HFC network. In rural areas or regions where the costs associated with deploying fixed infrastructure just don’t make sense relative to subscriber ARPU, the Air Wireless solution gives operators a more cost-effective option for DOCSIS network extensions. Because of this flexibility, the company is reported in customer trials around the globe.

In the US, the key opportunity lies in the upcoming BEAD-, RDOF-, and Capital Projects Fund-related rollouts, which are time-sensitive and aimed at addressing lower-density rural and underserved areas. In India, cable operators such as Hathway, Den, and others are seeking ways to expand their networks and remain competitive with Reliance Jio and Bharti, both of which have begun significant fiber expansions. The Indian government continues to subsidize rural broadband rollouts to remote villages, where the Air Wireless solution could play a role in distributing broadband services. In Europe, where permitting delays and labor costs make network expansions costly, the Air Wireless solution could be used to extend DOCSIS networks more quickly.

One of the more interesting applications for the Air Wireless solution that also has global appeal is using the platform as a way to overbuild and upgrade existing HFC plants to deliver end-to-end DOCSIS 3.1 capabilities and take advantage of the more flexible modulation formats offered by OFDM. Many operators are still using DOCSIS 2.0 and DOCSIS 3.0, in some cases without channel bonding. Instead of potentially swapping out amplifiers or doing faceplate upgrades for new diplex filters, operators could use the Air Wireless platform with Remote PHY or Remote MACPHY modules to move to DOCSIS 3.1 more cost-effectively. In Latin America, for example, where cable operators are moving to fiber instead of upgrading from DOCSIS 2.0 or 3.0 to DOCSIS 3.1, the Air Wireless platform could give them a more cost-effective way to add throughput without the significant labor costs associated with trenching fiber.

 

Converging DOCSIS and 5G

While Air Wireless is focused on extending DOCSIS networks wirelessly, Air5 is focused on converging DOCSIS and wireless networks, taking advantage of architectural similarities between mobile backhaul networks and DAA-based DOCSIS networks. The CU (Centralized Unit) and Distributed Unit (DU) of 5G networks are roughly equivalent to the Remote PHY, Remote MACPHY, and select functions of the vCMTS in DAA networks.

Ultimately, the vision is that optical nodes become small cell sites with a shared infrastructure allowing cable operators to continue delivering DOCSIS data services as they do while also either continuing to offload their MVNO mobile traffic onto their Wi-Fi networks or directly onto the converged network via radio units that can handle the frequency conversion required to hand off mobile traffic. The shared infrastructure will require an upgrade to existing outside plant equipment so that DOCSIS data can still be delivered in spectrum up to 1.2 GHz, while 5G traffic can be transported anywhere between 3 GHz-5 GHz. New amplifiers, which Air5 is working on with partners, will have to be deployed. That might be a hard pill to swallow for operators who are just about to upgrade much of their installed amplifier base to 1.8 GHz.

Fixed-mobile convergence has been in various stages of discussion and deployment for years if not decades. So, why is this time different? Let’s consider a few different reasons:

  1. Mobile subscriber growth and service bundling are critical for cable operators. In the US, the largest cable operators have seen significant growth in their mobile subscriber numbers, providing a silver lining to the dark cloud of broadband subscriber losses. Cable operators have grown their mobile subscriber base via MVNO relationships with Verizon and T-Mobile, but they are increasingly looking to deploy their own CBRS spectrum to become more self-reliant. Service bundling—especially if it allows subscribers to do truly seamless hand-offs between 5G and Wi-Fi networks while maintaining a single subscriber identity—is a critical goal of all operators.
  2. Cable operators have powered outside plants. One of the biggest arguments against HFC networks, when compared with PON-based fiber networks, is actually a significant advantage when it comes to convergence: Power. HFC networks rely on signals that need to be amplified approximately every 2500 feet. To support this, 90-volt AC power inserters have been deployed at consistent intervals to provide for the powering of nodes, amplifiers, and Wi-Fi access points. In fact, US cable operators have deployed over 600 K Wi-Fi access points partially due to the availability of power at strategic locations. Cable operators not only have enough power to deploy small cells but also the fiber necessary to backhaul these small cell sites.
  3. Control and user plane separation makes convergence easier. Because 5G core networks provide control and user plane separation, it becomes easier to converge 5G and Wi-Fi networks across the RAN and core. Additionally, cable operators’ transition to DAA architectures helps to virtualize DOCSIS networks. This gives operators much greater flexibility to offer network slicing, allowing Wi-Fi traffic can ultimately be managed by a converged 5G and DOCSIS core. This process begins with an evolution of the vCMTS to a vBNG and then an AGF (Access Gateway Function), which essentially serves as the bridge between the wireline network and the mobile core.

 

Expanding the Component Vendor Ecosystem

One of the benefits of convergence is the potential increase in the number of component vendors developing new chips to support the larger, combined TAM (Total Addressable Market.) There is probably no segment in the communications sector that could use a supplier expansion other than DOCSIS, which has historically been dominated by Broadcom. In fact, in a recent blog, we argued that Broadcom’s decision to accelerate the availability of a 3 GHz-capable unified chip that supports DOCSIS 5.0 could be an effort to “pre-empt efforts by upstarts such as Air5, which is developing products that fuse 5G and DOCSIS networks and, simultaneously, opening up the shrinking DOCSIS component ecosystem to suppliers in the RAN and mobility sectors.”

We have already seen significant consolidation of DOCSIS infrastructure and CPE suppliers in the last year and we fully expect that this will continue, as the DOCSIS equipment TAM, by itself, is not enough to sustain the current vendor ecosystem. Component supplier consolidation is expected soon, as well, certainly with Qualcomm’s rumored exploration of an acquisition of Intel.

Lurking around are the likes of Nvidia and AMD, who are looking to merge signal processing and GPUs. Though these components would be designed for use in mobility networks, there is no reason they couldn’t be adapted to work in converged networks, as well.