Interesting path cisco is taking. It is true that LTE is an all-IP play and the surrounding network, whether mobile backhaul, infrastructure between mobile elements like eNodeB and the Serving and PDN gateways, the backend systems, etc., or the EPC elements. That in itself is probably a $4B market.
But not having a RAN means you give up quite a bit, doesn't it? Some more traditional RFPs have some of the EPC in the RAN side, especially where it is a migration strategy that spans 2G and EDGE. Saying it isn't important is downplaying their weakness.
Ericsson has a good end-to-end story which makes it more compelling. The disadvantage for cisco is that they are late, and the RAN is somewhat commoditized, so getting into the game now is definitely not good business sense. cisco just has to play the cards they have, and make it sound like it was the plan all along.
Funny about Navini. They had good phased-antenna technology, similar to WiMAX and LTE. And after Cisco bought it, they were never heard from again. A real shame.
re: Cisco Still Doesn't Want a RANNavini was/is a bunch of BS. The cisco people who evaluated just did not have the skillset. So Navini, albeit the overall investment in the company was very high, were very fortunate to get the price they did. 6 months later...well. If you had evaluated thier technology you would know that it was 95% bull. Good thing though that cisco has a bunch of those folks still working there. :-)
Ha
Whatever did happen to Navini and Cisco's WiMax effort? Worth a follow-up?
I think they're just running away from the reality.
"And I RAN, I RAN so far away" soon to be one of those catchy lightreading headlines?
1. RAN != just Radio.
2. There are different types of radios. Femto, Pico, Macro. Is Cisco staying away from all of them?
3. What about Cisco investment in IP.access - a RAN player?
Interesting path cisco is taking. It is true that LTE is an all-IP play and the surrounding network, whether mobile backhaul, infrastructure between mobile elements like eNodeB and the Serving and PDN gateways, the backend systems, etc., or the EPC elements. That in itself is probably a $4B market.
But not having a RAN means you give up quite a bit, doesn't it? Some more traditional RFPs have some of the EPC in the RAN side, especially where it is a migration strategy that spans 2G and EDGE. Saying it isn't important is downplaying their weakness.
Ericsson has a good end-to-end story which makes it more compelling. The disadvantage for cisco is that they are late, and the RAN is somewhat commoditized, so getting into the game now is definitely not good business sense. cisco just has to play the cards they have, and make it sound like it was the plan all along.
-desi
Funny about Navini. They had good phased-antenna technology, similar to WiMAX and LTE. And after Cisco bought it, they were never heard from again. A real shame.