Upload
igors-cardoso
View
79
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Illustration of FTTH in-house access
For the purpose of the present analysis, “in-house FTTH access” refers to the network portion from the Distribution Point (DP) to the Optical Telecommunications Outlet (OTO).
© D
etec
on
FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
– 2 –
MPoP
Core network
Concen tration
network
Feeder segment Drop segment
Drop fiber cable
Limit of private property
Distribution Point(DP)
Accessnetwork
IP Ethernet (ATM) FTTH architecture (P2P or P2MP )
OTO
OTO
OTOFD
BEP
In-house segment
Home cablingIn-house cablingDrop
cabling
Vertical drop
Home installation BEP: Building Entry Point
FD: Floor Distributor
MPoP: Metropolitan Point of Presence
OTO: Optical Telecoms Outlet
= FTTH in-house access
The regulatory train for FTTH in-house access is in motion worldwide
In-house wiring is one of the key bottlenecks restricting FTTH deployment. Thus NRAs increasingly regulate sharing of in-house infrastructure to promote competition.
© D
etec
on
– 3 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Australien
Neuseeland
ARCEP
2009-2010 Multi-fiber Mandatory Symmetry Decree-
Law
2009 Multi-fiber Mandatory Symmetry
CMT
2009 Single or multi Mandatory Symmetry
House market
1999 BCP Program Voluntary Multi-fiber
TKG
2011 Symmetry Power for NRA Unspecified
ACM
2010 decision Unbundled fiber Mandatory Asymmetry
Swiss-com
2008 Multi-fiber Voluntary Symmetry
HAKOM
2009 Unbundled fiber Mandated Asymmetry
Main regulatory fields of action towards FTTH in-house deployment
In order to facilitate FTTH in-house deployment, regulatory measures essentially address estate/building owners and network operators.
© D
etec
on
– 4 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Main regulatory fields of action for
improved FTTH in-house deployment
Access to network operators Balance of rights between owner and tenant
Access of competitor to already existing infrastructure of network operator
Access of competitor to newly deployed infrastructure of network operator
Access of operator to private estate and building
Access of operator to existing infrastructure
Access of operator to newly created infrastructure
Mandatory standards for ducting systems via building laws
Cross-cutting fields of action4
Owner vs. tenant of building1
Network Operator vs. Competitor
2
Owner vs. Network Operator
3
Mandatory standards for cables via building laws
Key challenges related to in-house FTTH access
Essential regulatory area of concern regarding FTTH access is to mitigate investment risks without disturbing the level of competition on the market.
© D
etec
on
– 5 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Prerequisites for FTTH access Key challenges
Increases delay and costs of deployment
Increases delay and costs of deployment
Required consent of estate and building owner
Civil engineering is a key barrier to replicability
Unclear property right over building or estate
Imposed conditions by estate and building owner
Existing exclusivity requirements on owners
Delay or delay of deployment and lack of
investment security
Delay or delay of deployment and lack of
investment security
Product portfolio and marketing affected
Product portfolio and marketing affected
No connection of tenants willing to connect
No connection of tenants willing to connect
Higher retail prices complicate successHigher retail prices complicate success
Concerns on economic viability of FTTH accessConcerns on economic viability of FTTH access
In-house cabling ≈ 43% of total NGA CAPEX
Risk of de facto monopoly by “first moving operator”Risk of de facto monopoly by “first moving operator”
Access to buildings and in-house wiring
Drop segment deployment on private estate
House introduction of drop cabling
Use of existing in-house cabling or new deployment
Strategic options for regulating in-house FTTH access
Multi-fiber approach, single fiber unbundling and bitstream access are three prominent and complementary strategic options for competitive in-house FTTH access.
© D
etec
on
– 6 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Single fiber FTTH approach(“unbundled access”)
Single fiber FTTH approach(“unbundled access”)
One single fiber line is deployed from the Distribution Point to each end-user
premises
(access-based competition)
Multiple fiber FTTH approach
Multiple fiber FTTH approach
Several fibers are deployed from the Distribution Point to each end-user
premises
(infrastructure-based competition)
Complicates cooperation models
Only one operator can reach the end-user’s home
High sunk investments required Higher barrier to entry Increased penetration risks for non
SMP operators Only up to 4 operators reach users
Bitstream accessBitstream access
Access to customers via active electronic interfaces at all nodes of the
concentration/core network
(service-based competition)
Proven long track record in Europe
Lower market entry risk and CAPEX
Number of competitors is determined by the market
Can be implemented wherever fiber rollout is economically viable
Fiber replicability at lower costs
Facilitates a cooperation model
Secures freedom of choice for user
Several operators reach the end-user’s home in parallel
Deepest level of end-to-end control
Lowest market entry risk and CAPEX
Access at all network nodes of the concentration and core network
DSLAM, Ethernet or IP Bitstream
No infrastructure control by access seeker
Limited product and price innovation and differentiation
Wholesale operator manages connections
The 3 options are not mutually exclusive, but rather complementary
Description
Pros
Cons
Key success factors for in-house FTTH access
Regulatory measures must target owners of real estate and buildings as well as “first moving operators” in order to secure speedy and cost effective in-house FTTH access.
© D
etec
on
– 7 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Obligation towards operators Obligation towards competitors
Tolerate drop segment deployment on private estate
Provide access to drop cabling lines and infrastructures
Tolerate house introduction of drop cabling
FTTH accessindependent from
private owner’s consent
Shared use of FTTH access infrastructure mitigates
bottlenecks towards effective competition
Tolerate use of existing in-house cabling or new deployment
Provisions on financials:
Who bears costs of FTTH infrastructure deployment and
what can be included in the access pricing?
Provisions on financials:
Who bears costs of FTTH infrastructure deployment and
what can be included in the access pricing?
Provide access to existing physical infrastructure
Provide Information on all buildings connected
Provide information to existing physical infrastructure
Implement network topology that enables infrastructure sharing
Obligation towards building owner
Agreement on modalities for FTTH access deployment
Regulatory options chosen by countries: The example of “multi-fiber approaches”
Albeit slightly different, the multi-fiber approaches implemented in France, Switzerland and by the EU Commission are the most prominent cases for multi-fiber FTTH access.
© D
etec
on
– 8 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Multi-fiber options for in-house
FTTH access
Owner Main features of the approachNature of the approach
Mandatory approach (symmetry)
Mandatory approach (symmetry)
Voluntary approach of private sector (facilitated by NRA)
Voluntary approach of private sector (facilitated by NRA)
Voluntary approach, possible mandatory for SMP in the drop cable segment
(asymmetry)
Voluntary approach, possible mandatory for SMP in the drop cable segment
(asymmetry)
Source
NGA recommendation
(2010)
Legislation andDecisions
(2009-2010)
„Fibre suisse” model(2008)
Agreement between operator and owner In-house network up to Distribution Point No financial compensation to owner Operator installs up to 4 fiber lines per
building and bears costs of installation Access by other operators upon demand Access point outside private properties
Mutual agreement between competitors Invest installs 4 fibers per home Access point is outside private properties Option for sharing also feeder segment Swisscom responsible for drop segment Owner is responsible for in-house wiring
Applies only with regard to SMP operators Mandated access to the drop segment Voluntary deployment of multiple fiber
lines in the access network (+ in-house) Where legally possible under national law,
mandatory deployment of multiple fibers NRA sets location of distribution point
Single fiber option for in-house FTTH
access
Owner Main features of the approachNature of the approach
Mandatory approach“unbundled fiber”
(asymmetry)
Mandatory approach“unbundled fiber”
(asymmetry)
Source
SMP regulation in market n°4
(2010)
First moving operator and competitor share FTTH access infrastructure
Infrastructure use on an unbundled basis Asymmetric SMP regulation with
Reggefiber as SMP for FTTH access Mandated open access to passive fiber Access point is at the Optical Distribution
Frame (ODF) “ODF access” Collocation services and backhaul access Price caps on unbundling rates Transparency obligation (Reference Offer) Operational and functional separation of
passive infrastructure provider “Reggefiber FTTH” from active operator and service provider “KPN”
Mandatory approach“unbundled fiber”
(asymmetry)
Mandatory approach“unbundled fiber”
(asymmetry)
Obligation for incumbent Access to fiber-based local loop (P2P) Reference offer for unbundled access to
LL and related facilities Publish conditions, time limits and prices
SMP regulation in market n°4
Regulatory options chosen by countries: The “single-fiber approach” in the Netherlands
The unbundled fiber approaches in the Netherlands and Croatia are based on asymmetric regulation by NRA as a result of analysis of market n°4.
© D
etec
on
– 9 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Why Detecon
Having Detecon as partner means securing compliance of FTTH access deployment with regulatory conditions while avoiding mistakes made by other players.
© D
etec
on
– 10 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Client BenefitDetecon Leverage
HolisticTeam of expertsfrom all disciplines
PracticalReal-world solutions instead of “theory”
ImpactSolutions with lasting value
CustomizedInternational experience adapted
A dedicated project team brings together all regulatory, technical, commercial and financial expertise and experience related to FTTH access deployment in accordance with Client’s business strategy
Based on sound regulatory strategy, Detecon’s solutions have been implemented in practice for many Clients worldwide
Tangible solutions ready for implementation
Integration of in-house FTTH access within Client’s overall FTTH rollout strategy
Understanding of FTTH access challenges from NRA’s and operator’s perspective and staff involvement
Full understanding of Client’s reality of business and local market challenges
Project team knows Client’s business environment
Presence with a local office in Client’s region of operation
Regulatory bottlenecks of FTTH access are mitigated in the light of Client’s operational FTTH business imperatives
Benefit from hands-on strategic expertise while avoiding mistakes made by other operators worldwide
Coherence of regulatory approach to FTTH access with overall strategy
Ownership of Client’s staff over regulatory solution
Regulatory solutions designed for FTTH access are relevant to Client’s actual business needs
Selected References
The Client leverages Detecon’s lessons learned from similar assignments in regulatory strategy for FTTH in-house access, thus avoiding mistakes made in other countries.
© D
etec
on
– 11 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Client Reference Case
UAE
Germany
UAE
Slovak Republic
Turkey
NGA Bitstream strategyEtisalat has been imposed regulatory remedies for the provision of bitstream access based on fiber infrastructure. Detecon developed the BSA strategy and optimized the technical infrastructure setup.
Development of FTTX cooperation modelsDetecon defined complimentary FTTx rollout strategies and developed regulation friendly cooperation models with competitors to facilitate CAPEX efficient rollout.
NGA BSA, ULL, dark fiber reference offerDetecon developed a successful, optimal and sustainable access regime that enabled the operator (“du) to grow its customer base while protecting its current revenues.
Development of Reference Bitstream Access OfferDefined wholesale reference broadband access portfolio and setup a regulatory negotiation strategy based on state of the art costing and pricing strategies
BSA, LLU regulatory scenarios for Turk TelekomBenchmarking of tariff regulation regime and regulatory decisions in selected EU member states. Recommendations for Turk Telecom on rebalancing and retail tariff regulation. In-house cabling strategy
Your Contact Persons
© D
etec
on
– 12 –FTTH
AC
CES
S R
EGU
LATI
ON
.PPT
X
Pic
Dr. iur. Albert Njoume Ekango
Phone: +49 221 91611536Mobile: +49 160 475 80 58Fax: +49 221 91614824
e-Mail: [email protected]
Pic
Dr. Arnulf Heuermann
Phone: +49 221 91611550Mobile: +49 171 225 42 17Fax: +49 221 91614630
e-Mail: [email protected]