Can You Haul Me Now? Bart Filipiak Market Development Manager 18 March 2009 Piedmont SCTE

Can You Haul Me Now? Bart Filipiak Market Development Manager 18 March 2009 Piedmont SCTE

What is Cellular? 2

Wireless Evolution 2G Digital communications aka PCS GSM (TDMA- AT&T, T-Mobile) CDMA One iden (Nextel) 2.5G Packet switching for 2G nets GPRS and EDGE for GSM operators (AT&T, T-Mobile) Better than 2G, but not even close to 3G 3G Packet Switching Layered Services UMTS (AT&T, T-Mobile) EV-DO (Verizon, Sprint) 2Mbps maximum per user download speed 4G LTE WiMax Better utilization of 3G infrastructure Up to 100Mbps download speed per user 3

Wireless Evolution and Network Density GSM Voice Coverage Coverage at 64 kbps 2G Voice Only Coverage at 384 kbps 2.5G Voice & Data 3G Voice & Data 4

Cell Site Proliferation Growth of Cell Sites in US 3G and Continued 2.5G Number of Sites in Thousands 250 200 150 100 50 0 2G and 2.5G PCS 1800MHz What growth will 4G LTE and WiMAX bring us? 1G Analog 800MHz, 900MHz What kicked growth into high gear? 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 Source: CTIA Year 5

Mobile Internet Moore s Law (computing power) Processing ability doubles every 18 months (60% growth curve) To realize improved capabilities, a consumer need only buy the component and install it Instant gratification Nielsen s Law (bandwidth growth) Internet user connections increases in speed at about 50% annually To realize improved capabilities, a consumer must purchase the necessary equipment and the provider must also upgrade their equipment and/or infrastructure 6

How Much Is Enough? Backhaul Capacity Has to Be Expanded Business District (Capital City) Nationwide Average Rural Area 60 Mbit/s of Cpacity per Cell Site 50 40 30 20 10 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Source: Heavy Reading 7

Traditional Cellular Backhaul Does Not Scale Well Source: Heavy Reading 8

An ounce of prevention.. What steps should be taken today to ensure infrastructure is prepared to scale with tomorrow s expectations? 3G only about 50% built TDM (T1/E1, DS3, SONET) backhaul requirement Still a voice system capable of transmitting data 4G build will begin in earnest in 2009 Minimum 100Mbps per sector at the cell site Normally three sectors per BTS Most backhaul providers are already provisioning for 4G Circuit emulation is a work-in-progress T1-over-Ethernet, etc Technology developing, carriers familiar with TDM for reliable clock Latency problems; not your regular ethernet QOS May not scale well in ten years» Particularly if part of a PON 9

Cell Site Basics and Commonality One to eight wireless operators lease space at the site Legacy equipment will require T-1 interface at the BTS Within fence is a controlled access area Some service providers terminate service outside the fence Cellular redundancy with adjacent cells Diverse path is beneficial Remain as passive as possible Low latency, jitter, and differential latency are critical factors This is why Ethernet backhaul is not yet standardized Turn-up time averaging several months today Less than one month within three years 10

Cellular Backhaul Solutions Overview 1) Straight Fiber 2) PON 3) WDM Best suited to backhaul providers utilizing SONET, or other Wide Area protocol Simplest solution to install and maintain Sectored demarcation box protects feeder cables Backhaul provider terminates service in a locking demarcation box, each wireless operator connects at this point Similar to existing backhaul infrastructure, familiar to wireless operators SONET gear can be co-located at cell site, or in Headend / Hub some distance away Provides most flexibility for future upgrades or bandwidth requirements 11

Home Run / Straight Fiber Solution Diagram 12

Cellular Backhaul Solutions Overview 1) Straight Fiber 2) PON 3) WDM Virtually identical to FTTH networks being deployed in North America Can be convenient to connect a wireless operator as a subscriber to existing PON 4G (LTE/WiMAX) requires 100M per carrier sector at the BTS 300M per wireless operator nominal Backhaul through PON architecture could reduce OLT utilization GPON designed for 1:32 split ratio cannot deliver 100M unless ratio is reduced to accommodate towers Data-only content may extend range beyond video limitations Depends on OLT/ONT vendor and video transmission method In general, an entire OLT port should be provisioned per site 1x8 splitter at the fence provisions 125Mbps per leg (1G 8 = 125M) For network resilience, operators would not allow multiple towers on a single point of failure (OLT Card) Circuit emulation is a serious concern; latency and jitter; carrier dependant GSM clocking derived from TDM Circuit CDMA clocking synchronized by GPS receiver GPON networks utilize fixed 8KHz clock, providing possible synchronization source 13

GPON Solution Diagram 14

Cellular Backhaul Solutions Overview 1) Straight Fiber 2) PON 3) WDM Ideal solution for utilizing existing infrastructure with insufficient dark (unused) fiber WDM components may be less expensive than complete system overbuild Optimal solution for MSOs as they already deploy and operate WDM technology Solution is conceptually very similar to PON except that instead of using a 1x8 split, the customer would use one or two wavelengths for each customer One wavelength Tx, One Rx 2F or ring solution would allow Tx and Rx on same wavelength Using CWDM technology, up to four carriers per fiber (eight for 2F and/or ring) Many more possible with DWDM First customer build includes bulk of infrastructure, additional customers may be added with additional WDM modules on each end CWDM most convenient in 4-ch modules DWDM allows greater utility DWDM and CWDM can coexist provided 1530 and 1550 skipped in CWDM BTS equipment may not utilize colored SFPs, so translation equipment may be required 15

WDM Solution Diagram 1 32 λ λ 1 9 λ 8 16 λ 17 24 λ 25 32 16

Comparison of CWDM & DWDM CWDM Advantages Uses lower cost, lower power, uncooled lasers Due to large wavelength spacing can tolerate 6 8 nm of thermal drift (outside plant temperature ranges) 13 nm passband ideal for linear AM applications Limited to 8-10 channels with standard 1310nm (Non LWP fiber) ITU-T G.695 Specifies Interoperability of CWDM Equipment DWDM Advantages 100+ channel counts: 100+ Amplifications allow for greater distances Allows for a transparent metro/access DWDM network Uses single filter device for MUXing mutliple channels simultaneously ITU-T G.694.2 CWDM Channel Plan (approved June 2002) 1590 nm 1580 nm 1600 nm 13nm λ DRIFT 1270 1290 1310 1330 1350 1370 1390 1410 1430 1450 1470 1490 1510 1530 1550 1570 1590 1610 O - Band E - Band S - Band C-Band L - Band 1280 1320 1360 1400 1440 1480 1520 1560 1600 1640 17

CWDM Mux/Demux with DWDM Upgrade Operator deploys a CWDM (up to 8 channel) system today and then overlays a DWDM (40+ channel) system in the future! 32 nm gap = 40+ DWDM CH in C-band (0.8 nm spacing) O-band Apps Water Peak 1430 1450 1470 1490 1510 1530 1570 1590 1610 O - Band E - Band S - Band C-Band L - Band 1280 1320 1360 1400 1440 1480 1520 1560 1600 1640 18

Summary Wireless business will remain strong despite economic downturn Optimum coverage areas shrinking due to capacity concerns Bandwidth demand grows at nearly 50% annually Exponential Traditional Time Division Multiplexed circuits don t scale well 4G and beyond will be a packet-based protocol Home-running fiber from HE / Hub provides best insurance your network will accommodate future demands Passive Optical Splitters and GPON can be used for backhaul, with some limitations WDM can extend the life of your existing infrastructure CWDM, DWDM, CWDM / DWDM overlay 19