G-point.pdf

The Fibre-to-

the-Distribution-

Point (FTTdp)

Option for the

NBN Dr Craig Watkins

Ing. Kelvin Lillingstone-Hall

FTTdp for the NBN, 4th August 2014 2

Presentation Outline

Why we need the NBN

What must the NBN deliver

How can this be delivered (technology

options)

FTTP, FTTN, HFC

Introduction to FTTdp

Cost considerations of FTTdp

Conclusions


NBN Objectives

To provide communications renewal

Augment commercial delivery modes

Supply natural monopoly infrastructure

Facilitate enterprise growth/allow nation

to compete on the global stage

Supply infrastructure for today and the

future


What Makes NBN A Challenge?

Commercial and regulatory concerns

Extensive requirements for skilled staff

Uncertain demand projections

Yet to emerge applications/technology ecosystem issues

Technology development that may reduce NBN usage base

Evolving and developing core technologies

An inherently complex problem with some uniquely Australian aspects


Need for Informed Debate

Political and commercial forces can not be allowed to overshadow logic

Media focus/public interest in sensationalism doesnt aid national interest

The academic/industry divide appears stark A role for EA?

ITEE-driven position paper in the works EA engagement in the national and

engineering interest?

Tap collective expertise to find solutions to complex national infrastructure problems...


What are future needs?

Communications convergence

Replace legacy fixed-line network?

Growth in demand, but do trends

continue?

Is wireless a real alternative?


Nielsens Law


Bandwidth Usage


A slightly more recent

example:


4K Video Bandwidth Demand

Netflix recently announced 4K streaming at 15.6 Mbps

Conservatively allow 20 to 25 Mbps for 4K

4K appears set to dominate, but higher formats may ultimately obtain market share

Multiple streams per premises already a reality for many

100 Mbps minimum must be short term target


NBN Technology Options

FTTP Fibre-to-the-Premises

FTTN Fibre-to-the-Node

FTTdp Fibre-to-the-Distribution-Point

HFC Hybrid Fibre Coax

FTTB (FTT-Building/Basement) discussed as part of FTTN

Fixed Wireless and Satellite are useful where higher levels of connectivity are not economic


Fibre-to-the-premises

Clearly provides extremely robust

capability

Future proof in the sense that new active

equipment can ultimately provide almost

unlimited capability

Cost is a major concern, both financially

and in terms of network build time

$3260 per premises under NBN Co

radically redesigned FTTP for brownfields


FTTP Advantages

Single national network build

No RF interference concerns

Low power consumption of optical fibre technology

Provides sufficient connectivity for demands of effectively all users

No relative advantage/disadvantage provided to those in fibre deployment areas

Possibility of removing artificial pricing structures that shackle usage


FTTP Concerns

12 million construction sites problem (7 million?)

Overall cost that translates to stepped pricing structure that appears to provide little 'empowerment' stimulation

Complex Distribution Fibre Network/Local Fibre Network build

Little ability to exploit large numbers of independent contractors

Need for professional install of CPE (with concerns that this is overly bulky and ugly)


FTTP Prospects Complexity in the Distribution Fibre

Network/Local Fibre Network may be reduced through judicious engineering that accounts for practical concerns of: Design complexity, and to what extent 'crowd

sourcing' can help provide design input; and

Physical installation difficulty, and incorporation of improved processes

FTTP deployment still appears expensive and slow

Aerial FTTP may need reconsideration? Existing HFC infrastructure can be exploited to

improve coverage concerns throughout the 10-15 year FTTP build process


Hybrid Fibre Coax (HFC)

DOCSIS (Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification) 3.0 and 3.1

Level of sharing must be reduced over time as demand grows

HFC receives fair criticism today, so significant room for improvement exists

Yet the existing assets have potential to be exploited

How does the nation ensure that the assets are exploited and yet a satisfactory service is provided?


A push from global Cable

The global cable industry is far more competitive and progressive than the Australian HFC experience might suggest

The cable industry has been serious about the broadband data industry for some time (DOCSIS 3.0 or 3.1)

Cable community appears to acknowledge that judicious node splitting and deeper fibre deployment is necessary

End-game appears to be EPON, possibly exploiting RFoG (speculative at present)


Engineering an HFC pathway

NBN Co must move from nebulous considerations related to HFC assets toward concrete engineering development plans for the assets

We must understand the level of investment and time required to migrate to a robust and capable access network infrastructure in HFC areas

Positive: New NBN Co CTO, Dennis Steiger, comes from cable background

Negative: Zero progress has been made on the HFC equation to date by NBN Co


Fibre-to-the-Node

FTTN reduces the overall deployment cost by using copper pairs for the last several hundred meters connection

VDSL provides robust capability at short distances

Signal attenuation and crosstalk (interference), causes concern at large distance

Node equipment is bulky, requires power, cooling, battery back up

Retained copper is a maintenance issue


FTTN Limitations

Distances involved, coupled with elementary geometry, imply many will obtain relatively poor FTTN bandwidth outcome

Vectoring is necessary for any hope of decent output, but even vectoring can not create miracles with large numbers of concurrent streaming users

Limited match to user demand profiles with limited scope of economic augmentation for high-demand users

Single VDSL profile limits ability to provide symmetric upload capability (very important for some users)


FTTN Core Technology is Copper

Installed twisted pair copper still has

value, but caution is needed

The copper network is clearly not a

modern hassle-free technology


Where FTTN Makes Sense

Small regional towns, highly clustered around central exchange facilities Vectored VDSL2 implementation in exchange provides far greater network capability than fixed wireless

For FTTB (FTT-Building/Basement). MDU deployment of Vectored VDSL2 involves short copper runs, providing high capacity, albeit with cross-talk complications

Some ability to reduce crosstalk component exists with future in-building wiring upgrade, but FTTP option would likely dominate at that stage


Vectoring is Vital for FTTN


The Vectoring Miracle!

Vectoring exploits crosstalk to maximise transmission bandwidth to individual lines

Primary limitation related to neighbouring lines transmitting concurrently

Prevalence of this limitation becomes more significant as bandwidth usage statistics continue to evolve

Problem for neighbouring high-demand users, or for moderate demand user in proximity to high demand users

Ultimately a more chaotic level of service is provided, with limited ability to guarantee anything


The FTTN Risk Unknown future network demand growth is likely

to bypass FTTN capability very quickly The need to deploy fibre closer to premises may

become obvious well before a national FTTN build is complete, and long before the sunk investment pays off

FTTN does not provide for the needs of high-demand users economically, and hence does not act to more fully stimulate the domestic economy

FTTN only meets projected demand from average users on low-end projections

FTTN appears likely to fall short of demand requirements of a significant number of moderate users (neighbour issues etc.)


The FTTN Value Equation

When compared with the challenges of

FTTP, FTTN appears to have some merit

However, we must consider whether other

technology options provide better value for

the nation

The possibility of extending fibre closer to

premises in the initial NBN build must be

properly considered

FTTdp Fibre-to-the-Distribution-Point provides this option


Fibre-to-the-Distribution-Point


The Short Copper Advantage

VDSL performs exceptionally well for short

loops

Profile 30a provides 100 Mbps symmetrical

Bonding and Phantom Mode allow ~250

Mbps (extra lead-in pair availability)

90% reduction in copper, and practical

elimination of all copper joints

G.fast and FTTP on demand become

possible


The G.fast Promise


Crosstalk with G.fast

Substantially increased G.fast bandwidth causes severe issues with crosstalk (from tens of MHz with VDSL to hundreds of MHz with G.fast)

New vectoring approaches show promise, but also promise to be CPU intensive

Short copper loops perfect for G.fast

FTTdp with lack of shared lead-in is ideal

G.fast has Time Domain Duplexing (TDD), providing symmetrical service


Limiting Crosstalk

G.fast is unlikely to provide value in

environments with significant crosstalk, so

FTTB and FTTN are not promising

Short copper loop lengths of FTTdp

reduce crosstalk

Limited shared lead-in is the ideal situation

Statistical concerns apply to small shared

lead-in situations


Beyond G.fast

G.fast is a maturing technology, and there are even faster speeds on the horizon for copper

Alcatel Lucent have recently publicised XG-Fast, promising up to 10 Gbps speeds on 30m copper pairs

1 Gbps symmetrical services are promised by future standards such as what may evolve from the Alcatel Lucent XG-Fast push and other commercial input

There are engineering considerations, and such technologies are clearly not a panacea


The G.fast Prospect

It is as yet unclear whether G.fast provides

a next step for the masses

The FTTdp approach allows flexible

upgrade to GPON or G.fast on an

individual as-demanded basis

G.fast likely to have deployment value,

but FTTP upgrade is expected to be

competitive for many users


FTTdp with VDSL2 Variation in end-user demand is a major consideration

Short-loop VDSL2 provides capability to reliably match the needs of all but extreme user demands for the immediate future, including prospects of bonded VDSL

Flexible on-demand GPON upgrade capability ensures that there is no requirement for a second major network construction effort

While large construction companies may prefer a secondary network build phase, the absence of such is positive news for the nation

Robust capability is provided by the FTTdp approach that greatly exceeds what is possible with FTTN

No user is left behind!


FTTdp compared to FTTP

FTTdp (in the form of fibre to the lead in pit)

has a fibre deployment identical to that of a

dual-stage splitter FTTP deployment

We would not necessarily choose a dual-

stage split model for FTTP, but it does provide

benefits:

Smaller FDH enclosures, including retractable design;

Reduced fibre count in distribution fibre network, allowing deployment flexibility


The Cost Equation for FTTdp


Cost reduction compared to

FTTP NBN Co Strategic review quotes $2100 average

brownfields premises connection cost

$800 equipment allowance plus $800 for multiple truck rolls, gives $400 per premises

Saving of $1600 per premises, for 7 million premises, equals $11.2 billion

Lower fibre counts in LNDN may be already accounted for in NBN Co radically redesigned FTTP

Cost equation in aerial distribution areas differs here FTTP may still be preferable (also suggests the FTTP figure for underground installations is worse than the $2100 quoted above)


Cutover in FTTdp Cutover of copper occurs on premises-by-

premises basis with physical connection at street pit, by a suitably approved installer

Avoids larger disruptions, as may be involved with FTTN cutover

Pre-delivery of CPE allows customer install concurrent with street-pit scheduled work

May be benefit to bulk scheduling of connections (to reduce truck rolls). This can be facilitated by a competitive private contractor industry. (Room for innovation on a small scale!)


Is FTTdp cost-comparable with

FTTN?

We reduce time consuming copper patching work at nodes

No need to supply power or batteries to nodes

No large street cabinets, reducing council and community concerns

Improved work-flow practices with FTTdp

Cut-over greatly simplified compared to FTTN

No need for vectoring implementation

Reduction in maintenance costs as well


The benefits of FTTdp

Robust capability with VDSL (~ 250 Mbps)

On-demand upgrade to G.fast and FTTP

Single network build phase

Effectively zero wasted infrastructure should future FTTP be necessary widely

No opportunity for criticism of network capability (PR benefit)

Encourage commercial installer eco-system


Conclusions

It is vital that all options are weighed carefully

Modern communications infrastructure considerations are inherently complex

FTTdp appears to offer network capability very close to that of full FTTP for greatly reduced cost

FTTdp may be the ideal solution from all angles


Contact Email

[email protected]

[email protected]

G-point.pdf

Documents

Transcript of G-point.pdf