All roads lead to FTTP, but which one should the telcos take?

Cost, coverage and bandwidth must all be balanced by telephone companies choosing how to build their IPTV networks. And while competition from cablecos in the voice market has forced the telcos into television, they still have to decide which considerations initially warrant the most weight. When it comes to deploying IP-based television networks, the two options are fibre to the node (FTTN) and fibre to the premise (FTTP). The advantages of FTTP, especially from a consumer standpoint, are obvious. It is the final deployment: fibre optic cable runs to and throughout the home and delivers speeds of 100 Mbps, accommodating high-definition television and the full capabilities of TV over IP. FTTN, on the other hand, extends fibre only to the last kilometre, with signals traveling over copper to reach the individual homes. Copper bonding and VDSL2 are needed to address longer loops and increase bandwidth, which maxes out around 50 Mbps. But FTTN is cheaper and reaches more subscribers quicker, making it extremely attractive to telcos. Bell Canada is using a 20-25 year hybrid path to full FTTP, capitalizing on the mass coverage and cost savings of FTTN over the first five years and gradually implementing FTTP as the services demand more bandwidth. "We’re leveraging this hybrid approach to match the speed of demand with the speed of deployment, so we don’t miss opportunities," said Jean Huppé, director of access network technology for Bell, at VON Canada, a recent digital telephony conference. These missed opportunities result from focusing an FTTP rollout on one neighbourhood at a time, leaving some subscribers exposed to competition for possibly decades. By rolling out fibre to the node Bell will be able to add television to its bundle in all of its territories three to five times faster than with straight FTTP. "We cannot wait for churn, for natural attrition of subscribers, to fibre-ize neighbourhoods," said Huppé. He added that not only does FTTP leave some customers un-serviced for decades potentially, but those who are first to receive fibre will in effect be over capacity for years while options slowly catch up with bandwidth. The potential evolution path to full FTTP that Huppé presented featured data delivery speeds of 25 Mbps during the five-year FTTN phase, 50 Mbps through VDSL2 and FTTP installations for the 10 years following that, and 100 Mbps once all of the copper has been replaced. While the first deployments of IPTV will essentially mirror cable, the one area that could present problems is high-definition television (HDTV). HDTV currently carries a minimum compression rate of more than 9 Mbps, so the hybrid network deployment could result in some subscriber losses because of initial bandwidth issues. Higher penetration of HDTV in the United States could be one reason why FTTP seems to be the network deployment of choice south of the border. Verizon Communications Inc. has already run fibre to over three million homes and plans to reach 3 million more by the end of this year. Delivering its full-speed Fios service from the outset, however, will cost Verizon an estimated US$22 billion. Saving money is always a very compelling argument and according to Huppé stopping fibre at the node is five to ten times cheaper than rolling it to homes. FTTP costs are also expected to drop over the next two to three years, increasing the margins on a hybrid approach. And while there are two alternatives, they don’t represent two competing technologies with the possibility of one becoming obsolete. "Fibre to the premise is the endgame," said Huppé, and Bell is just taking a different road to the same destination.

All roads lead to FTTP, but which one should the telcos take?

News | 04/27/2006 4:00 am EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us