Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 FITCE 2008 London September 23th, 2008 Next Generation Access Networks: Perspectives and regulatory options.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "1 FITCE 2008 London September 23th, 2008 Next Generation Access Networks: Perspectives and regulatory options."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 FITCE 2008 London September 23th, 2008 Next Generation Access Networks: Perspectives and regulatory options

2 2 Next Generation Network

3 3 FTTx

4 4 FTTx drivers and challenges FTTH –Completely new deployment –Most costly solution –More bandwidth –High dependence on population pattern (single/multi-dwelling, rural/urban) –Need to access to the inside of the buildings. FTTN –Reuse of the last part of the access network –Less costly solution –Possible bandwidth limitations –High dependence on current layout of access network –Need to use street cabinets FTTB –Intermediate solution

5 5 Regulatory approaches: FTTH Preferred option by regulators in the long-term (more bandwidth, more infrastructure). To encourage fibre investments, no general obligation of fibre unbundling. –Active option (bitstream) preferred. –But unbundling required when functional separation includes NGA. Specific actions to solve bottlenecks: –Access to existing civil infrastructure (ducts) to alleviate costs. –Access to the buildings (sharing of infrastructure).

6 6 Regulatory approaches: FTTN FTTN reuses part of the current access network. The trend between regulators is to keep the existing regulation: – Subloop unbundling and backhaul to exchange site. – Bitstream access. Some studies suggest replication of infrastructure (street cabinets) is not profitable excepting specific areas. –Allow access to the existing cabinet. FTTN have a big impact on unbundling. –Possible closure of exchanges. –Competitive operators need to reassess their strategies. Up-down the investment ladder

7 7 Examples: France Commitment to FTTH at government level. –4 millions of users at 2010. Orange, Illiad and Cegetel started the deployment in 2007, focused in Paris and main cities Regulator ARCEP has two main concerns: –Sharing of civil infrastructures Ensure access to ducts of FT, first offer available dec 2007 –Access to the inside of the building Only one fibre network per building, so access from first operator is required. Sharing point in the outside of the building. New law includes provisions to facilitate the deployment of fibre inside the buildings.

8 8 Examples: The Netherlands KPN will deploy a FTTN network to provide VDSL services –It implies the closure of most of the existing exchanges. The regulator OPTA encouraged agreements between KPN and the alternative operators. –Initial agreement signed with several operators during 2007. KPN shall offer alternative services when closing an exchange site: –Collocation at the street cabinet –Bitstream access KPN will continue to offer unbundling at the exchanges sites that are not closed. Partial deployments of FTTH by alternative operators and municipalities. KPN partnership with Reggefiber to deploy FTTH in selected areas.

9 9 Examples: Germany DT has deployed a FTTN network to offer VDSL services (including HDTV). The German Parliament approved an amendment to the Telecommunications Act in November 2006. –The amendment introduces a new concept, the new market, on which regulatory restrictions (e.g. open access) does not apply. The European Commission initiated an infringement procedure against Germany, referred to the European Court of Justice in June 2007. –Decision still pending The German regulator BNetzA presented in June 2007 its analysis of the local loop unbundling market. –DT must grant the rest of the operators access to its ducts between the exchange site and the street cabinets. –In case there is no space in the ducts, the operator can have access to the dark fibres. –possibility of collocation at the DT street-cabinets, in a case-by-case basis.

10 10 Examples: United Kingdom The main concern of the regulator Ofcom is to ensure that regulation is not a barrier for operators investing in NGA. Ofcom foresees two kind of remedies: –Passive remedies (infrastructure reuse) in the more profitable areas. –Active remedies (bitstream) in the rest of areas. BT initially focused in increasing coverage and speed with the current access network. BT announced in July 2008 a new strategy to deploy NGA for 10 million customers in 2012 –Mainly FTTN –FTTH in selected areas. –The NGA network will be open to the competitors.

11 11 Conclusions No single fit-all solution –Several architectures to choose from –Different conditioning factors Competition, current network, expected returns, volume of investment. No single regulatory treatment –Regulation depending on market analysis in a particular country Just some simple guidelines –Pragmatism (What?, Why?, How?, When?, How much?), no universal dogma –Priority to market development with no undue interferences

12 12 Edificio Bronce Plaza Manuel Gómez Moreno s/n 28020 Madrid. España Tel.: 91 212 76 20 / 25 Fax: 91 212 76 35

Download ppt "1 FITCE 2008 London September 23th, 2008 Next Generation Access Networks: Perspectives and regulatory options."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google