& cplSiteName &

Debunking the Open Access Myths

Richard Jones
1/20/2016
100%
0%

"Open Access" is experiencing a return to prominence in fixed telecoms. Sadly, the term "open access" is increasingly and deliberately being distorted by some broadband operators that claim to provide it when in reality they do not. It's a bit like "fiber broadband," which can leave some customers scratching their heads when they look at the copper connection into their homes: There is no legal or industry standard definition of open access, and the term is therefore widely abused.

On the other side, I frequently see RFPs for town networks (yes, I'm looking at you, the US of A) that specify open access without the author really understanding what it is and how the business model should work.

So given it's all a bit confusing, this article will attempt to define what real Open Access is for FTTH networks and also define the questions that municipalities, smart cities, developers, campuses etc. should be asking any operator. It's based on my colleagues' hard-earned experience in creating and running 120+ open access networks across three continents over the years.

So what is Open Access in the last mile?
Firstly, when I talk about Open Access, I'm referring to the part of the network that delivers the service to residential and business customers, not the inter-city network or metro networks that transport services around/between towns and cities. This last connection to the customer, the "last mile" or the access network, is specifically what is being discussed here in terms of Open Access.

The Open Access concept
The European association of regulators, BEREC, states there is no agreed definition for Open Access, a situation that has enabled the use and misuse of the term.

The basic concept is clear, though -- an Open Access FTTH network is open to be used by multiple service providers simultaneously and on equal terms, providing a real choice for the end customer. This makes the network more attractive and delivers higher take-up, which is the number one value driver.

Open Access can drive greater take-up and revenues for both property and fiber owners but is normally outside their domain or experience. Choosing the right equipment, systems and especially the right configuration for a large complex network is a challenging task. It can be technically very difficult to get right and can be daunting for many fiber owners to take this step.

So Open Access is much better for the real estate fiber owner and is more popular with end-customers.

As is often the case, the devil is in the detail.

Communications operator roles (Source: Ventura Next)
Communications operator roles (Source: Ventura Next)

Unlike the traditional network shown on the left in the diagram above, Open Access network models (A, B and C) separate the management of the network from the supply of services by Retail Service Providers (RSPs). In Sweden, a long period of Darwinian market evolution has led to case B dominating with a firm acting as a Communications Operator to manage the network for the fiber owner and ensure multiple service providers can deliver a range of different services simultaneously to customers.

Open Access model B enables diversity and competition in all layers. With specialization (both in operations and also types of finance) the industry becomes more effective, more efficient and less risky.

More services mean greater take-up of fiber, making the fiber owners more money and bringing greater overall economic benefit to the area. From experience in Sweden, as well as from various studies, it is clear that Open Access is the way real estate owners make the most money from providing broadband infrastructure.

It can result in a 5% premium on home prices, while also maximizing the satisfaction of residents in the area, with both consumers and business users getting the best possible choice and prices for broadband services.

What Open Access should be
In a fiber access network, Open Access should mean the ability for an end customer to receive and choose from multiple types of services delivered by multiple different operators simultaneously. The customer should be able to buy broadband from one company and TV from another, as they wish.

Changing service provider should be easy, at the click of a mouse.

For service providers, the ability to add their services to the network should be completely open and on equivalent terms for all operators -- no advantages for one, no blocking of another. The essence is to have an open market on the network that makes that network much more attractive to the customer and hence better for the fiber owner.

A long definition is needed because of confusion among municipalities and developers and also a trend with operators trying to hijack the term Open Access for marketing purposes (in the same way that lots of customers connected to a copper or coax connection in the last mile are being told they have "fiber broadband").

What Open Access isn't
So if an operator is offering Open Access but you can only get their services on their network, then it isn't Open Access! One incumbent is claiming that this is actually open because you can switch to another provider, but the cost is so high that customers are essentially trapped with the incumbent. That is not truly open either.

If an operator is sharing its network using "bitstream" (a wholesale access capacity product) then that is not Open Access -- customers can't see a menu of services from which to choose. Yes, a customer could change to another provider but the pricing can be prohibitive for them and even if a customer does change, then they're stuck with a single provider for all services.

Who is trying to play in the Open Access space?
There are four generic types of organization that try to offer Open Access.

Experience shows that the following three are typically long on promises but are not capable of delivering Open Access:

  • IT companies, Open Access novices and local ISPs that want to reinvent the wheel at your expense. You can expect badly delayed and buggy software that may add a few customers to a small system but one that is not scalable, not robust long term and from a supplier with doubtful long-term commitment. You can also expect to keep paying for even the simplest changes.

  • Hardware vendors similarly may be very keen to sell you some equipment but can then walk away as they don't care that integrating hardware, software etc. and then operating a 24x7 service is not their business. But they have your money by that point, so at least they're happy!

  • The big established telco operator that claims they can "do everything." They are likely to use your infrastructure for their own benefit, not yours, and after signing will simply not care about you or any awkward details agreed in a rush of enthusiasm by their sales people.

    The only type of organization that can deliver is a committed, experienced and specialized Open Access operator that lives and breathes this business. This type of operation will be proven at delivering at scale (so they can attract brand name service providers) and will have many happy successful projects behind them.

    So let's get to the fundamentals and figure out how you can sort out the good from the bad.

    Practical questions for potential Open Access providers
    Here are some simple questions that municipalities, property and fiber owners can put to any potential Open Access provider to understand their offering more fully and avoid potential errors in selection. I've added comments after some of the questions to explain why the answers are important.

    1. Can multiple different service providers deliver services at the same time over the network?

    2. Can end users see these services and select freely from them?

    3. Can service providers create new services and easily add them to the offers presented in the online services supermarket to end users without the need for assistance? (In an Open Access network, an ISP should be able to create and add a new service, such as a 100Mbit/s package, to their list of offers and this be presented to end users automatically without software development or help from any third party.)

    4. Can the real estate developer add their own IP-based services to the system, such as CCTV cameras? This is important, as some operators just want to put their own services on and not help the developer with security, access control and other applications. True Open Access makes adding these things easy.

    5. Is the supporting software already developed, stable and proven at scale? If not, this opens up the risk of the classic IT problem in telecoms of long delays, high costs and lots of problems. That won't make a Residents Association very happy.

    6. Is it possible to see a demonstration of an existing commercial deployment with multiple service providers and services? A simple request and it's much better to see a live demonstration of a working system than mere promises in a proposal.

    7. Is it possible to talk to some existing customers? A good Open Access partner will be happy to let you talk to customers.

    8. Do different service providers pay the same price for accessing the network? It is all too easy for a big telco to cross-subsidize services to disadvantage competitors. For example, an incumbent could charge a rental for the fiber to other operators that is 90% of the retail price, making it impossible for any other operator to compete.

    9. Can your provider explain what hardware choices they have made and how these help deliver high performance and uptimes? Some components last 75 years between failures while 50% of some components will fail in three years. It is better to know that your provider has thought of this and is choosing wisely.

    10. Is the network equipment based on a truly interchangeable technology? If not, the risk is the network may be tied to one hardware vendor -- such lock-in can lead to higher prices over time or lead to problems if the vendor experiences difficulties.

    11. Will the system be capable in the future of offering delivering multiple HD (and one day UHD) TV services to end users? Be careful as this can be a trap. If the technology selected is GPON then quite simply the system will not be capable of delivering such services in the future. In Sweden, the home of Open Access, there is not one Open Access operator using GPON -- they all use Active Ethernet.

    12. How will the network be maintained?

    13. Does the business model mean the provider is committed to the development in the long term or can they run away early (for instance, if you paid for everything up front)?

    14. What track record does the provider have? It's better to work with someone that has seen and done it all before.

    If the provider can't deliver against the above, then you're risking having lower penetration and unhappy customers that don't have the control or range of services they desire.

    Richard Jones, Chief Commercial Officer, Ventura Next

    (36)  | 
    Comment  | 
    Print  | 
  • Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View        ADD A COMMENT
    Page 1 / 4   >   >>
    ITProjec39942
    50%
    50%
    ITProjec39942,
    User Rank: Lightning
    10/8/2016 | 3:48:16 AM
    Internet has turned whole industries upside down
    It's true that the Internet has turned whole industries upside down - telecoms hasn't been spared.

    But to get to the "Internet service", you need Internet connectivity. Open access FTTX networks help bring true high speed broadband connectivity to areas that would otherwise won't have it. 

    1. In an open access model, fibre optic network (FON) is a utility. The owner of the FON has invested wisatasia in a "real estate" that will give job indo him +25 useful life and he operates it as a utility for the benefit of the tenants/residents/population.

    2. Multiple service providers access and service the captive market via the FON network. This leads sma to competition at the services level. Even if kerjabumn it's purely for Internet access to be able to use your OTT services, this competition reduces enduser prices and improves take-up rates.  

    As to whether to use GPON or active ethernet (P2P), ultimately it's a combination of engineering and business choices on the owner's part. We cpns went with AE because it suited our roadmap smk in terms of plug & play; ease of capacity upgrade; and we wanted to offer users with mission critical applications a rumahseminimalis dedicated link with associated SLAs. And we weren't confident of achieving this over a GPON architecture.
    Richard Jones
    50%
    50%
    Richard Jones,
    User Rank: Blogger
    6/2/2016 | 1:18:40 PM
    Re: Agree/disagree?
    Thanks for your comment.

    It is absolutely in place now in Sweden and South Africa and is true in 125 networks we have managed/grown/created.

    Sometimes you may need to wait until the end of the month to swap over but you can select and have a new service up and running in 20 seconds.  The future is here :)
    atif007
    0%
    100%
    atif007,
    User Rank: Light Beer
    6/2/2016 | 1:15:52 PM
    amazon
    Hey dude,amazon is best site for shoping if you want to purchesing to get amazon gift card and card codes is available here to get amazon gift card code its really awesome site ..
    Mpere
    100%
    0%
    Mpere,
    User Rank: Light Beer
    3/3/2016 | 8:07:50 AM
    To get the "Internet service", you need connectivity
    It's true that the Internet has turned whole industries upside down - telecoms hasn't been spared.

    But to get to the "Internet service", you need Internet connectivity. Open access FTTX networks help bring true high speed broadband connectivity to areas that would otherwise won't have it. 

    1. In an open access model, fibre optic network (FON) is a utility. The owner of the FON has invested in a "real estate" that will give him +25 useful life and he operates it as a utility for the benefit of the tenants/residents/population.

    2. Multiple service providers access and service the captive market via the FON network. This leads to competition at the services level. Even if it's purely for Internet access to be able to use your OTT services, this competition reduces enduser prices and improves take-up rates.  

    3. Because the FON is used by multiple service providers, you get better utilisation of the network. Further driving the cost to service each end user down. 

    As to whether to use GPON or active ethernet (P2P), ultimately it's a combination of engineering and business choices on the owner's part. We went with AE because it suited our roadmap in terms of plug & play; ease of capacity upgrade; and we wanted to offer users with mission critical applications a dedicated link with associated SLAs. And we weren't confident of achieving this over a GPON architecture.
    gregw33
    50%
    50%
    gregw33,
    User Rank: Lightning
    2/8/2016 | 11:22:43 AM
    Re: Agree/disagree?
    @kq4ym  In this scenario you are not changing "access providers" you are changing service provider.
    kq4ym
    50%
    50%
    kq4ym,
    User Rank: Light Sabre
    1/30/2016 | 3:53:48 PM
    Re: Agree/disagree?
    And I wait for the time when this basic rule becomes common: "Changing service provider should be easy, at the click of a mouse." But, I'm not going to hold my breath for that to be seem everywhere. As pointed out there lots of hitches in that becoming real for some time to come.

     
    Joe Stanganelli
    50%
    50%
    Joe Stanganelli,
    User Rank: Light Sabre
    1/26/2016 | 11:57:03 AM
    Re: Agree/disagree?
    I would take issue with the point that there is fundamentally no difference between primary networks and local, competing networks.  The difference may not be much from a technical standpoint, but -- for instance -- local mesh-based systems can offer enhanced privacy and fewer restrictions (albeit for other tradeoffs).

    It fundamentally comes down to what you want and what's more important.
    Joe Stanganelli
    50%
    50%
    Joe Stanganelli,
    User Rank: Light Sabre
    1/26/2016 | 11:51:40 AM
    Re: Agree/disagree?
    Ah, you're talking to someone who only ever used pre-loaded ringtones.  ;)
    brooks7
    0%
    100%
    brooks7,
    User Rank: Light Sabre
    1/25/2016 | 7:39:38 PM
    Re: Agree/disagree?
    Duh!,

    Couple of things.  

    1 - There is NO access going forward (in the long term) except Internet Access.

    2 - Due to cost of development versus time to commoditization, there is not differentiation in hardware.  That means that costs for access are essentially the same for everyone. All these differentiated models assume you can build a competitive company differently.  

    3 - Which I would argue do not exist - or if they do exist they exist in competition with Internet based solutions.  Which means you can develop a solution for a single city or one for the entire world.  The specific city ones will die quickly as has been shown.

    Which means that the only way to build effective competition is to build new networks.  Not to rent space on existing ones.  If cities want to do that and then sell it to other people so be it.  But it will have essentially no advantages over the competition.  It will lower prices and that is about it.  So, is our problem with Internet Service price per bit per second?  If we are going to lower it, how are we going to encourage investment.  You know that metro and long haul cost changes are pennies compared to the dollars that individual access costs.  See the problem?  I think we need to admit its a monopoly - regulate it as one - and move on to bigger issues.  Trying to create fake competition wastes everybody's time and a lot of people's money.

    seven

     
    Richard Jones
    50%
    50%
    Richard Jones,
    User Rank: Blogger
    1/25/2016 | 1:39:26 PM
    Re: Agree/disagree?
    Horses for courses :)

     

    Thanks for the comments.
    Page 1 / 4   >   >>
    More Blogs from Column
    The definition of voice services is widening beyond phone calls, even into IoT. That calls for a more open approach to product development, Ian Maclean of Metaswitch argues.
    The shift to cloud is turning unified communications into the next hot service for enterprises as the UCaaS market continues to expand.
    Pay-TV providers should focus on four key areas to bring employees and customers along for the ride.
    The shift to cloud computing is changing the way business is done. Now, the CFOs and their finance teams are seeing a benefit in cloud as well.
    As enterprises spread applications across multiple clouds, they need ways to maintain visibility and control, Ixia's Jeff Harris argues.
    Featured Video
    From The Founder
    Light Reading is spending much of this year digging into the details of how automation technology will impact the comms market, but let's take a moment to also look at how automation is set to overturn the current world order by the middle of the century.
    Flash Poll
    Upcoming Live Events
    November 1, 2017, The Royal Garden Hotel
    November 1, 2017, The Montcalm Marble Arch
    November 2, 2017, 8 Northumberland Avenue, London, UK
    November 2, 2017, 8 Northumberland Avenue London
    November 10, 2017, The Westin Times Square, New York, NY
    November 16, 2017, ExCel Centre, London
    November 30, 2017, The Westin Times Square
    May 14-17, 2018, Austin Convention Center
    All Upcoming Live Events
    Infographics
    With the mobile ecosystem becoming increasingly vulnerable to security threats, AdaptiveMobile has laid out some of the key considerations for the wireless community.
    Hot Topics
    Muni Policies Stymie Edge Computing
    Carol Wilson, Editor-at-large, 10/17/2017
    'Brutal' Automation & the Looming Workforce Cull
    Iain Morris, News Editor, 10/18/2017
    Is US Lurching Back to Monopoly Status?
    Carol Wilson, Editor-at-large, 10/16/2017
    Pai's FCC Raises Alarms at Competitive Carriers
    Carol Wilson, Editor-at-large, 10/16/2017
    Worried About Bandwidth for 4K? Here Comes 8K!
    Aditya Kishore, Practice Leader, Video Transformation, Telco Transformation, 10/17/2017
    Animals with Phones
    Selfie Game Strong Click Here
    Latest Comment
    Live Digital Audio

    Understanding the full experience of women in technology requires starting at the collegiate level (or sooner) and studying the technologies women are involved with, company cultures they're part of and personal experiences of individuals.

    During this WiC radio show, we will talk with Nicole Engelbert, the director of Research & Analysis for Ovum Technology and a 23-year telecom industry veteran, about her experiences and perspectives on women in tech. Engelbert covers infrastructure, applications and industries for Ovum, but she is also involved in the research firm's higher education team and has helped colleges and universities globally leverage technology as a strategy for improving recruitment, retention and graduation performance.

    She will share her unique insight into the collegiate level, where women pursuing engineering and STEM-related degrees is dwindling. Engelbert will also reveal new, original Ovum research on the topics of artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, security and augmented reality, as well as discuss what each of those technologies might mean for women in our field. As always, we'll also leave plenty of time to answer all your questions live on the air and chat board.

    Like Us on Facebook
    Twitter Feed
    Partner Perspectives - content from our sponsors
    The Mobile Broadband Road Ahead
    By Kevin Taylor, for Huawei
    All Partner Perspectives