Tag: "technical"

Posted November 20, 2010 by Christopher Mitchell

Chattanooga continues to generate a lot of press since their announcement of the nation's fastest broadband speeds.

For those who crave technical details, this article from Cable 360 looks into the tech behind the network:

EPB contracted with Alcatel-Lucent as its GPON network supplier. "We've designed our network a little bit different, with our control center located where our operations center is," says Wade. "We've designed a series of fiber rings that circle our city, allowing us to have multiple 10 Gig MPLS rings, terminating in 17 communications hubs connected back with our control center."

Another article from Cable 360 (affiliate) gets into the smart-grid details of the network:

As far as the cost savings of the smart grid are concerned, users often don't realize that it costs several times more at certain times of day to generate electricity than it does at others, says EPB COO David Wade.

But perhaps the most interesting update from EPB is another window into their take rates (from Tecca.com):

We are ahead of our business plan projections for this time frame. Since our launch last September (2009), we have signed up 18,873 homes to our EPB fiber optics services. That is a 15.45% take rate. Our goal is a 35% take rate, and we believe we will reach that in 2 years. Of our EPB fiber optics customers, 81% are receiving our Fi-Speed internet service. We are still building out fiber optics as well, and our entire 600-square-mile customer service area will have access to these advanced services by the end of the this year (2010).

And finally, a short interview (audio quality is not good) with an EPB employee discussing Chattanooga's community fiber network. An interesting piece: noting that EPB views all employees as ambassadors of their product and offered them public speaking training.

...

Read more
Posted July 8, 2010 by Christopher Mitchell

The May/June issue of Broadband Properties Magazine continued the Muni FTTH snapshot series, this time focusing on a small network in Auburn, Indiana. The network currently has 500 subscribers as it continues its buildout, which is scheduled to finish in 2011. By 2013, the business plan calls for serving 3200 subscribers.

The public power utility, Auburn Electric, has been using fiber-optics for internal use since 1985, but only began offering services to some customers in the mid 2000's. In 2007, they began deploying the FTTH. In 2005, their services kept an employer in town with a $7 million payroll.

Posted June 23, 2010 by Christopher Mitchell

Cedar Falls, Iowa, is the latest of a number of publicly owned cable networks that are upgrading to FTTH. Cedar Falls has been planning this for some time, squirreling away net income over the years as it ran surpluses to help afford the costly upgrade. A story in the WCF Courier notes it will cost $17 million and is expected to be completed in 2012. The bonds used to finance the project will be repaid over 10 years.

When I last spoke to folks in Cedar Falls, they had massive take rates - bolstered by local service that Mediacom could not compete with. Cedar Falls Utilities (CFU) had already been offering fiber services to local businesses and will be expanding that to the entire area. According to an article in the Cedar Falls Times, the utility had already been installing FTTH capability into greenfield developments, so they have certainly planned for this transition.

Motivation for the upgrade seems to be the faster broadband speeds and more capacity for HD channels. The Utility also noted that needed bandwidth has been doubling every year -- a likely reason they opted for FTTH rather than a cheaper DOCSIS3 upgrade that would not offer the same scalability as FTTH (and DOCSIS3 is much more constrained in upstream capacity).

The Cedar Falls Times article explains the benefits of FTTH over HFC:

An HFC plant uses thousands of active devices (such as amplifiers) to keep data flowing between the customer and the service provider. Any one of these devices can fail, interrupting service. In contrast, the all-fiber plant will be a passive optical network, with no active components between the distribution center and the end user. Fewer “moving parts” means fewer points of failure and a more reliable system.

CFU puts community needs first:

“We know from experience that economic growth comes to cities that keep their infrastructure up to date, whether it’s roads, water, electricity or broadband,” said Krieg [CFU General Manager]. “CFU is going to do what it takes to make sure Cedar Falls has leading-edge communications technology, and maintain economical rates for internet and video services.”

The network was launched in 1996, one of the first...

Read more
Posted April 19, 2010 by Christopher Mitchell

Herman Wagter has published an informative article about the last-mile economics of fiber networks on Ars Technica.

A Utility Infrastructure Law commonly quoted by engineers says, "The closer you get to the home, the more investment is needed, averaged per home connected." This law applies to all parts of the physical network, like water pipes, sewage pipes, and electricity cables. What are the applicable numbers for telecom cables?

The large expense of building fiber networks has little to do with the technology:

In dense cities, the bill of materials is as low as 20 percent. The cost of labor per meter exceeds by far the cost of a fiber cable or a coaxial cable per meter. Deploying fiber or coax or copper wires would not make much of a difference. The phrase “it’s the backhoe, stupid” even applies in areas like Uganda.

This is why incumbents have such tremendous advantages and why policies predicated on encouraging facilities-based (as in, everyone builds their own network) have failed (and will continue to).

Given the fact that almost all costs in the access network are sunk, it is hard to envision two or more new fiber access networks being deployed in parallel to each home, leading to a stable competitive environment over time. (Unless the ISP’s or network's owners are allowed to divide the market and raise prices to compensate for the underutilization of the networks). If the medium is no longer limited and the access network is the expensive part of the investment, why duplicate the cables? We not do duplicate cables for electricity or other utilities either, for the same reasons.

As we tend toward a single fiber line (wireless is a complement for wired, not a substitute), who owns that line is tremendously important. Private companies want to monopolize the line to maximize their profits -- that is their job. Public ownership offers democratic accountability and a much greater potential for open access, creating robust competition in a sector almost entirely lacking it.

The second page of the article offers more in-depth analysis of various FTTH technologies that communities would be wise to understand before picking what model they want for their community.

Pages

Subscribe to technical