FTTH No Slam Dunk for Cable

DENVER -- Cable Next-Gen Technologies & Strategies -- "Fiber deep" is becoming more common as a cable operator strategy in the gigabit era, but as a panel of experts noted here this week, that doesn't mean massive fiber-to-the-home deployments now, or possibly ever. And one surprising reason for that is the lack of technicians trained to install fiber.

Speaking on a panel dubbed "Fattening Up on Fiber," representatives of four vendors plus one operator agreed that it's hard to scale up a work force which for years has been installing coaxial cable into homes. That reality, in addition to multiple business case challenges, will likely prevent fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) from becoming a predominant approach.

In fact, the rise of 5G wireless may make FTTH much less likely in the long-run, according to some of the panel discussion. But going "fiber deep" and doing FTTH where competitors are building their own all-fiber networks is definitely part of the cable playbook, the panelists agreed. And that's where the near-term challenge is the work force and its lack of familiarity with fiber.

"We have to reduce skill requirements to enable deployment, given current level of manpower," said Kevin Bourg, optical network architect at Corning Inc. (NYSE: GLW). Companies such as Corning have been working for years to make splicing fiber in the field easier and also to improve how connectors are used and make fiber less fragile. There still are decisions to be made and training to be done around connectorization, Bourg added.

Panelist Kevin Noll, senior director, systems architecture, for Tibit Communications , recalled an early FTTH deployment at his former employer, Time-Warner Cable, that failed because the installer -- working at his own home -- kinked the fiber, and was forced to pull out everything he had just trenched in.

"Scale is a big problem," he said. "You look at the installation labor force today -- the bulk of cable industry is trained for coax installation. If you want to scale fiber, those coax techs need to be trained to do fiber."

Boost your understanding of gigabit trends -- join us in Austin at the fourth-annual Big Communications Event. The event is free for communications service providers!

TWC worked with Society of Cable Telecommunications Engineers (SCTE) at that time to develop training programs to speed up its workforce familiarity with fiber, he said. Noll advocated more work by cable operators to look at their installation procedures and adapt them for a fiber future -- the risk of failing to do that could be getting overbuilt by a more nimble player, he said.

"The question is, how do you change them so they align with your workforce and make it simpler for everyone to do it [fiber installs] faster," Noll commented. Today those installs take too long and there are too many opportunities for failure, he noted.

Stephane Chabot, director of the optical business unit at EXFO (Nasdaq: EXFO; Toronto: EXF), urged greater efforts to invest in automation of processes, including testing, where possible. "Otherwise you are at the mercy of your workforce," he said.

David Ririe, director of access engineering for Cox Communications Inc. and the lone current operator on the panel, said his company had faced the typical problems of delivering FTTH when it deployed a passive optical network strategy two years ago, as a competitive response to Google Fiber and other threats. Those included work force issues, but also cabinet sourcing and placement and connecting to legacy OSS/BSS systems. (See Cox's Finkelstein: Lots of Fiber, No Regrets!)

Those were all among the factors that led Cox to conclude, "like everyone else, that we can't do PON to everyone," Ririe said. "Coax has a very long lifespan."

Instead, Cox is deploying remote PHY devices (RPDs) and taking every opportunity to make a "non-regrettable spend" to push fiber closer to the customer and reduce the size of service nodes.

Ririe was one of several panelists to reference "Cloonan's Curve," a bandwidth prediction model developed by Dr. Thomas Cloonan, CTO of Arris, that is apparently beginning to displace Nielsen's Law of Internet Bandwidth, which set annual bandwidth demand growth at 50%, based on historical trends. Cloonan's Curve tracks a slower pace of bandwidth demand as node sizes and thus service group sizes are reduced.

"Everything we are doing should pull fiber close to the home, whether it is a remote PHY node or fiber-to-the-curb," he said. "Every time you do a node split, we need to pull more fiber closer to the customer."

But he also admitted that Cox will have to continue to respond to competitive threats, so wherever a rival builds FTTH, that will likely happen for Cox as well. "The reality is that once you lose those customers, it's very hard to get them back," Ririe said. "So Cox has to be ready to respond."

Panel moderator Alan Breznick, who heads the cable/video practice at Heavy Reading, noted that at least one cable operator -- Altice -- was committing to an all-fiber strategy. There wasn't much agreement among panelists as to whether its efforts might impact the broader cable industry. Ririe said that was likely "only if they become a competitor" to Cox, but Corning's Bourg said he wouldn't bet against Altice, with its track record, being successful and potentially bringing other cable operators into the FTTH fold.

The next big leap forward may come as 5G wireless begins to roll out, and there is greater need to "densify" cells to support the millimeter wavelengths it is expected to deploy. Fiber backhaul will likely be required to support all those additional smaller cell sites and cable could be well-positioned to deliver those services. In fact, as Glenn Calafati, global director, media and content industry consulting at Ciena Corp. (NYSE: CIEN) noted, if the combined demands for bandwidth for mobile backhaul, business services and residential broadband were combined today, there would be even stronger organic business case for pushing fiber deeper into neighborhoods than already exists.

But as Ririe admitted, cable isn't yet tackling access network planning issues in that broad a fashion, being constrained -- like many in the telecom sector -- by internal siloes.

The advent of 5G could alleviate the need to take fiber all the way home, by providing that last little bit of access, Noll noted. If so, it could solve a lot of problems for those cable operators that have pushed fiber deep, but not all the way home.

— Carol Wilson, Editor-at-Large, Light Reading

tmc8080 3/25/2017 | 5:56:53 PM
Altice Altice is going to build FTTP off existing deep fiber docsis. Their estimate is 5 years, but it will probably take substantially longer. Maybe not for strictly workforce issues, but strategic ones, such as milking legacy docsis equipment they just bought from the Dolans (that still has 1/2 downstream of what FIOS offers today in limited availablity).

brooks7 3/24/2017 | 3:55:32 PM
Re: Legacy Fiber in Rural Areas  


I know Dave hates the RBOCs...he and I have known each other for almost 20 years.  But the mom and pops get as much as 80% of their revenue fromt the FedGov and then get free loans and grants to build their networks.  The RBOCs get money...but nothing...and I mean nothing like that.  So that is why the small carriers panic when they talk about the end of USF.  Hey I love the IOCs....selling them stuff was like being the profitable part of the Federal Government. 

And just so we are clear.  Nobody subsidized FiOS.  They built more FTTH than all other carriers in the US combined.  You might want to consider that for a minute.


KBode 3/24/2017 | 3:16:04 PM
Re: Legacy Fiber in Rural Areas "Large (like AT&T or Verizon) or Small (like East Otter Trail Telephone or Copper Mountain Telephone).  You will find a significant percentage of FTTH laid down by that latter group because they are subsidized."

The former group is no stranger to massive subsidies and tax breaks (sometimes, if you ask PA, NJ and NY Verizon customers) without actually delivering what they promised.
Carol Wilson 3/24/2017 | 1:50:06 PM
Re: Legacy Fiber in Rural Areas So it's possible but so difficult as to be not worth the effort. 
brooks7 3/24/2017 | 12:37:59 PM
Re: Legacy Fiber in Rural Areas Carol,

Single Mode Fiber is Single Mode Fiber...but in this guys case it is owned by someone - Verizon (after they bought by GTE).  You theoretically could use strands that are out there unused for the job, but it would require agreement and a lot of coordination.  For example, you would have to cut the fiber, connectorize it and locate the unused strands out of the bundle.  Having the fiber out of service would be a problem while this was being done, but depending on the situation its technologically feasible - as long as the strand is unused.  Terrible idea, but not impossible.


Carol Wilson 3/24/2017 | 11:20:59 AM
Re: Legacy Fiber in Rural Areas It was my understanding - and I'm a journalist, so everything I "understand" was told to me by someone smarter - is that you can't just tap into a long-haul fiber to deliver local service. So while fiber may exist along some rural highways, it isn't that accessible for local service delivery. 

But maybe that's what's meant by "money issue" - you can do that if you spend enough money. IN which case, it falls into the basket of things that won't happen in rural networks because the payback on those deployments just isn't there for the big carriers. 
brooks7 3/24/2017 | 9:14:53 AM
Re: Legacy Fiber in Rural Areas 610Alpha,

There are 2 kinds of incumbent carriers that server rural communitites:  Large (like AT&T or Verizon) or Small (like East Otter Trail Telephone or Copper Mountain Telephone).  You will find a significant percentage of FTTH laid down by that latter group because they are subsidized.  In the former group, they simply have better ways to spend money.

It is not a technology issue.  It never has been.  Its a money issue.  If you had a dollar to spend, why would you spend it on the worst ROI in your network - which is rural, residential networks?



610Alpha 3/24/2017 | 8:32:32 AM
Legacy Fiber in Rural Areas I enjoy reading about Fiber deployments and the advances in Fiber.  Here are some things that I have been wondering about:

Why aren't companies deploying FTTH from the buried long haul fiber along county roads?

I am guessing that there is a technical constraint of some kind that is prohibiting this.  On my road I see Fiber poles with 'GTE' on them.  Why can't we use that existing fiber to connect to homes?  I see a lot of these poles right next to electric poles so I think splitters could be powered if that was the issue.

I would love to hear the explanation on this.

With regards to 5G I am unable to find any information on the range of a 5G tower.  I am concerned that Rural areas would again be left with no real speed due to the smaller coverage area of 5G.  I think that you would end up with a lot of backhaul fiber to get enough coverage that you might as well deploy FTTH, I could be wrong but again without any information I don't know.

Why don't telephone and electric co-op's create joint ventures to deploy Rural FTTH?  Couldn't they use CAF II funds along with their own contributions there by reducing the amount needed from CAF II and both companies reaping benefits as well as customers.  It seems like a win-win-win.  Co-op's have captive customers and almost no competition so taking the long term approach seems obvious.  Co-op's could take a page out of the Missouri Co-op's playbook and ask for an initial down payment of $100 for the hookup.
Sign In