Sunday, June 16, 2019

5G Will Affect Network Architectures

Before the advent of mobile communications, networking architectures all were simple. Public networks (telcos) supplied wide area communications to a premises, while inside buildings customers created their own internal distribution networks.


Architectures are less clear now that new platforms such as Citizens Broadband Radio Service and spectrum sharing and aggregation are emerging. One might argue that “mobile” architectures might, in many cases, take the older fixed network form.


The classic example is the consumer in-home network or any business local area network, with a clear physical and logical point of demarcation between the WAN and the LAN.


The WAN consists of assets owned by the service provider and the LAN facilities are owned by the consumer, tenant or building owner.




That became more complicated with the advent of mobile networks, which theoretically provide direct connection to the end user device, no matter where it is located. In practice it sometimes is more complicated.


A smartphone can be used as a Wi-Fi hotspot, which then creates a private network within a premises or any other local area. In that case, the public network (WAN) terminates at the device acting as the hotspot, all other potential devices connected to the hotspot then constituting the LAN.


In other cases a multi-radio Wi-Fi network with repeaters also creates a more-substantial LAN.


Indoor coverage, always an issue since 3G, is going to become a bigger challenge in the 5G era, when higher frequencies in the mid-band and millimeter wave region will be employed. And that is going to recreate the space within which LANs make sense.


Signal propagation is the reason: many 5G signals, while adequate outdoors, will have signal strength issues indoors. One way to illustrate this, shown below, is that signal propagation through walls, from the public network (cell towers), decreases with an increase in frequency.




Another illustration illustrates the principle that cell site signal loss increases with frequency, while coverage decreases.




All of that means there is potential new terrain for 5G and subsequent mobile networks to use the WAN-LAN framework, where private networks might assume greater roles inside buildings. That, in turn, means there might be new roles created for connectivity providers.


As Boingo and others have specialized in creating private Wi-Fi networks for venues, so it might happen that entities also provide 5G mobile coverage indoors. Whether that is the mobile operators, neutral-host providers or enterprises and consumers themselves remains to be seen.


CBRS, for example, can provide indoor coverage or traditional access to premises for 4G mobility services. The former use case is most likely with enterprise venues; the latter will be most common in consumer settings. CBRS can be used to create indoor private 4G networks. CBRS also might be used to support small cell or wireless fixed access networks.


Indoor 5G coverage methods already are available. In some cases service providers with licensed spectrum will deploy the systems. In other cases, third parties might use unlicensed spectrum to create their own indoor networks.




The point is that from both a business model and technology standpoint, heterogeneous mobile networks are coming. In some cases, service providers directly will deploy indoor infrastructure in the form of small cells.


In other cases they may partner with third parties to install and operate such infrastructure. In yet other cases enterprises or consumers might create their own LANs.

Saturday, June 15, 2019

AT&T View of Fixed Wireless for Internet Access

Friday, June 14, 2019

U.S. Fixed Network Internet Access Market Could be 5% Away from Full Adoption

Consumers sometimes make surprising choices. Consider that 60 percent of people surveyed by the Pew Research Center who do not buy a fixed network internet access service say they never have had high-speed internet service at home in the past.

Some 33 percent say they have had fixed network internet in the past.

But the most-surprising finding is that “most non-adopters are unenthusiastic about the prospect” of buying fixed network access. “Fully 80 percent of non-broadband users say they would not be interested in having broadband at home,” the researchers note.

It is not that they cannot buy it, because the service is not available, nor necessarily because the service is too expensive. Rather, many consumers simply feel their smartphones do everything they need, where it comes to internet apps and services.


That implies that 100-percent fixed network broadband adoption is about 78 percent (present buyers and 20 percent of the non-buyers). Adoption at the moment is 73 percent, suggesting there is about five percent more adoption before the market is fully saturated, and every potential buyer already is a customer.

That is important when assessing the state of internet access adoption in the U.S. market. The percentage of survey respondents who say they have broadband service at home grew from 65 percent in 2018 to 73 percent in 2019.

Some 27 percent of survey respondents do not buy the product, say researchers at Pew Research Center. “And growing shares of these non-adopters cite their mobile phone as a reason for not subscribing to these services.”


Even in advance of 5G, which will in many cases become a full substitute for fixed network internet access, 17 percent of survey respondents say they already are “mobile only” for internet access.

As has been true in the past, income and education play key roles in propensity to purchase fixed network internet access. Some  92 percent of adults from households earning $75,000 or more a year say they have broadband internet at home, but that share falls to 56 percent among those whose annual household income falls below $30,000, according to the Pew Research Center.


Tuesday, June 11, 2019

China Now Accounts for 21% of Global Internet Users

China now accounts for 21 percent of global internet users; India 12 percent; the United States eight percent, according to Bondcap analyst Mary Meeker. Based on population, China and India eventually will represent even more share.


U.S. Households Might Spend 1.2% to 2.8% of Household Income on Voice Services

According to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data, households headed by an occupant who did not graduate from high school spend a bit less than three percent of household income (2.8 percent) on phone service.

Households headed by an occupant with a graduate degree tend to spend about 1.2 percent of household income on phone service.

The differences seem to flow from household income, which BLS data shows varies directly with educational level.

It is not clear how spending on video services and internet access varies with educational level and income, as those services seem not to be directly tracked by BLS.

Household Spending, Homes Headed by Occupant with Less than High School Education, $28,245 in spending (98.5% of total income), 2.2 people (0.7 income earners, 0.6 children, and 0.5 seniors)

Household Spending, Homes Headed by Occupant with a High School diploma, $35,036 in spending (87.3% of total income), 2.3 people (1.0 income earners, 0.6 children, and 0.4 seniors)

Households headed by high school graduates, with income of $40,147 and 2.3 occupants spend about the same--2.7 percent of income--on phone services.

Households headed by an occupant with a bachelor’s degree, with $92,409 in income, spend about 1.7 percent of income on phone services.

Household Spending, Homes Headed by Occupant with a Bachelor’s Degree, $63,373 in spending,  2.5 people (1.5 income earners, 0.6 children, and 0.4 seniors)

Households headed by an occupant with a graduate degree spend about 1.2 percent of income on phone services.

Household Spending, Homes Headed by Occupant with a Graduate Degree, $83,593 in spending (62.9% of total income), average of 2.6 people (1.5 income earners, 0.6 children, and 0.4 seniors)


Most Firms are "Average" for Customer Experience

The Forrester Research 2019 “U.S. Customer Experience Index,” a study of customer experience for 260 brands in 16 industries, looks like a classic “Bell curve,” or standard distribution or standard deviation, where 50 percent of the distribution lies to the left of the mean and 50 percent lies to the right of the mean.

Simply put, the Forrester data suggests most firms are close to “average” in customer-reported experience. Roughly two thirds of firms are rated “okay.” About 16 percent get “good” or “poor” ratings. A very-small percentage get “excellent” or “very poor” ratings.

No executive or employee probably enjoys being “average.” Most firms tend to say their customer service, or customer satisfaction is good or excellent or at least better than most of its competitors and peers. The Forrester Research tends to confirm that customers do not see matters that way.



Monday, June 10, 2019

U.S. ISP Capex Rose $3 Billion in 2018

U.S. service provider capital investment increased by approximately $3 billion in 2018, according to US Telecom.

USTelecom estimates that U.S. internet service providers  invested $75 billion in 2018, up from $72 billion the prior year, and up $6 billion from the 2016 low US Telecom says was the result of common carrier regulation.

Preliminary Data Show Continued Upward Momentum for Broadband Investment

“The decline in capital investment starting in 2015 and the recovery that started in 2017 suggest the likelihood of a negative regulatory impact from the 2015 utility classification of broadband providers and, conversely, a positive impact from a return to a more forward-looking policy environment in 2017,” US Telecom says.

The caveat is that “many factors affect company investment decisions, such as macroeconomic conditions, technological developments, capital costs, taxes, competitive upgrade cycles, and regulation,” US Telecom also says.

Directv-Dish Merger Fails

Directv’’s termination of its deal to merge with EchoStar, apparently because EchoStar bondholders did not approve, means EchoStar continue...