HSPA, EVDO, WiMax then LTE but what about the mobile backhaul??

With HSPA, EVDO maturing, WiMax getting deployed and LTE getting ready to buzz around, it is soon changing the way mobile phones will access the networks. The bandwidth hungry new services, applications and the non-stop touch clicks on your smart handhelds are eventually going to obsolete these mature 3G networks. Whereas, the 4G access networks are definitely envisioned to control this ever-increasing wireless broadband traffic but what bout the evolution of backhaul?? Is it ready? or is it going to be a major bottleneck analogous to the traffic jams seen if only one lane was operating out of a four lane expressway.

So, let’s have a closer look on how the mobile backhaul network is currently positioned.

The trend below depicts the exponential growth in asynchronous data demand for next 5 years.

Mobile Traffic Projections for the next 5 years

Mobile Traffic Projections for the next 5 years

Over the next few years, “user experience” will still continue to rely on 3G (and in some regions on 2G) technology.But for the mobile operator, LTE/WiMax is already part of the game plan. Operators have to learn the technology, and its impact on their networks, applications and service offering. Though, service providers are seeking revenue and profit growth through new differentiated packet-based services. Many of these services, such as mobile Internet and mobile TV, require high bandwidth—and the current backhaul infrastructure is not optimized for handling such traffic. Hence, providers have to add backhaul capacity while keeping operational costs under control, a situation that is forcing carriers to migrate their access and core networks to the new 3G and 4G infrastructure.

There are three main transport technologies in the backhaul arena – fiber, copper and wireless point-to-point microwave.

The costs of backhaul form a significant part of service providers’ revenue accounting for three quarters of mobile transport costs and 25-30% of total operating expenses. The 2G infrastructure carried voice traffic through switched TDM (T1/E1 or SDH/SONET) or ATM. As with 3G/4G services, already  the bandwidth requirements have shot exponentially and to transport voice and data efficiently has been the need of the hour.

Basic requirements for a 4G Backhaul network:

1. Capacity: A single tail site should be scalable to 100Mbps+ capacities to avoid bottlenecks

2. Latency: A solution that supports 10msec or less end-to-end latency

3. All IP: Support IP traffic from head to tail.

Current migrating strategy is transporting Ethernet packets over point-to-point Microwave. Over 50% of all mobile backhaul deployments worldwide (and nearly 70% outside the U.S.A.), point-to-point microwave systems offer simple and cost efficient backhauling for voice and high-speed data services. That’s because point-to-point microwave supports higher data rates than traditional copper T1/E1 lines, it delivers between 25% and 60% more bits compared with similar TDM based systems, and easily overcomes the high cost and limited availability associated with fiber. Thus, operators can connect the TDM ports today, and gradually shift traffic to the Ethernet ports in the future. This shift can be done from remote, so no additional CAPEX or OPEX are needed. The industry has already established that the end game of next generation mobile backhaul networks is all-IP/Ethernet. Ethernet is not only more scalable, it also offers huge cost savings across the entire network value chain.

E1 vs Ethernet costs

Ethernet cost savings per 1 Million subscribers

Also migrating to high capacity and lower latency Ethernet/All IP network, the systems should also support QoS aware Adaptive Coding and Modulation and Statistical Multiplexing. The former helps optimizing network for spectrum efficiency, increasing the radio capacity and  thus reducing cost/bit and latter in optimizing traffic management over the network reducing congestion and improving efficiency. An IP over Ethernet infrastructure has the advantage of the bandwidth growth curve of Ethernet moving from 10 Megabits per second (Mbps) to 10 Gigabits per second (Gbps) today and 100 Gbps in future. This coupled with the decreasing cost of Ethernet ports provides growth opportunities with increasing economies of scale.

Ethernet microwave Vs. TDM microwave equipment cost comparison

Ethernet microwave Vs. TDM microwave equipment cost comparison

Thus, of the three backhaul technology options operators can choose from, wireless point-to-point microwave can deliver the best cost-performance features, bringing faster ROI and driving forward the proliferation of advanced mobile services in the LTE/WiMax era. But in the longer run a hybrid  solution of microwave, optical or IP/MPLS core might be seen as a balanced solution that might reduce the OPEX with improved scalability, higher bandwidth, lower latency and better efficiency. So operators pull up the socks and get ready for the great migration.

Also, a point to note with CISCO’s recent acquisition of Starnet Networks which makes it now one of the most dominant player in mobile backhaul solutions market.

From the recent news releases:

Verizon has committed to deploying fiber to 90% of the cell sites in its territory by 2013, closely following VZW’s LTE rollout schedule

Qwest plans to run fiber 7,500 to 17,000 cell sites in its territory

- Neil Shah

References:

“ATM to ALL IP”  Cost effective Network Convergence – Tellabs ’2009.

“LTE Backhaul Solutions”- Ceragon June 2009

Cable Backhaul: A towering OpportunityWebinar Harris Stratex Networks Nov’2009

Share

9 Responses to HSPA, EVDO, WiMax then LTE but what about the mobile backhaul??

  1. Neil,

    Good post. The clear case for backhaul is demonstrated by the simple diseconomy function: as traffic rates increase, the revenue remains flat. Yes, carriers are pursuing new business models, including tiered services and premium service schemes…however relief is required in the opex structure to reduce the cost per bit. The cell site costs are dominated by leased line tarriffs, and is the low hanging fruit of the industry.

    The core issues with ethernet transport involve 1) time, frequency and phase distribution and 2) OAM. While LTE may not prescribe frequency or phase alignment, video broadcast and AFLT precision for location (eg FCC phase 2 requirments) will precipitate a need for TDM timing replacement – in addition the legacy 2G systems will need to be served with equivalent frequency sources to substitute the E1 and T1 synchronization. IEEE1588v2 and ITU SyncE provide hope for solutions, but are relatively unproven.

    As it relates to OAM, the simple tooling required for fault detection, isolation and troubleshooting needs to be built into Carrier Ethernet. Again, the tail we are chasing is PDH parity for AIS, RDI, CFM and error pegs such as BER, ES and SES. Again 802.3ah and ITU Y.1731 and various MEF IAs have established a standard to aim for, but again the UNI is still very much “emergent” and NNI required for true global connectivity has not passed the finish line.

    While it is inevitable Ethernet will have its day, and the industry consumption has its collective foot on the gas, we are still a few years off from getting to mass market Ethernet adoption in the backhaul.

    Still the banshee of cost reduction relative to PDH/SONET may yet cause the industry to leapfrog the prove-in, although the question will be what the true tarriffing will resemble when we turn on Ethernet QOS, OAM and engineer performance for sync – and what is the net savings as a result….

    • Ajay Sahai says:

      Good discussion here, in addition to the points already made, I think that the trend towards RAN network sharing will accelerate move towards an all-IP backhaul. – Ajay

  2. technowizz says:

    Vish,
    Awesome Comment !!

    Your post sums up very much the fact the Ethernet/All IP will be the way to go. I guess as you said it might take some time and realization for the carriers to adopt a full fledged migration strategy. AT&T has started realizing with iPhone/Smartphones sucking up the max bandwidth and breaking the back of backhaul network. I am still not sure on what AT&T’s backhaul comprised of..Might be a mix of E1/T1 in rural markets to microwave links in Suburban and fiber in urban…But I guess Fiber is the ideal solution to leap to 100 Gigs and eliminate the bottleneck with temporary solution as discussed microwave …but cost/bit is always the hanging sword !!

  3. Amar Mandhyan says:

    The comparison of capex is valid for greenfield operator but may not apply to an existing operator who has a legacy TDM MW Backhaul, particularly in emerging markets where the response to 3G data services is still unknown. A more capex friendly approach for such markets could be to continue to use existing investments in TDM transport till the time the data market shows signs of picking up. The operators can first convert their end points (2G and 3G BTS) to IP and then focus on slowly transforming the backhaul to IP while using a Hybrid approach in the interim.

    • technowizz says:

      Amar,

      Good point !! Yes I kept in mind only North American operators and some UK operators with maturing data markets. Yes there will be a slight change in approach in timeline with adoption of hybrid backhaul in developing countries compared to North American operators.

  4. [...] the speeds is the primary concern  as I mentioned in my previous post for operators choosing the right backhaul solution considering the capex/opex. The $5 billion investment gap could expand to $7 billion because of the [...]

  5. [...] the speeds is the primary concern  as I mentioned in my previous post for operators choosing the right backhaul solution considering the capex/opex. The $5 billion investment gap could expand to $7 billion because of the [...]

  6. Douglas Jarrett says:

    Wireless backhaul appears to be a major objective of ClearWire based on applications filed with the FCC in recent months. Licensed fixed wireless spectrum is not in abundant supply in major metropolitan areas. Thus, there may be a ceiling in place regarding the extent of license fixed wireless spectrum suitable for high capacity IP backhaul.

    • Joe Wargo says:

      ClearWire and others are using a lot of point to point licensed microwave for backhaul. As the article noted it is far more efficient and cost effective. ClearWire has gone out to acquire a lot of licensed paths based on their site acquisition model. Under FCC guidelines they have 18Months to actually use (perform construction completion and activate) the path they applied for the license on. If the path (frequency coordination goes back into the available pool.

      As a wireless integrator that does 70% licensed microwave we rarely run into a situation where we cannot obtain a license for a client’s path. We’ve run into more issues at County tower sites than we do because of the carriers.

      Most of the carriers (like ClearWire) have their backhaul locations relatively close together. They have use a lot of Millimeter Wave (such as BridgeWave 80GHz). They have also bought a lot of DragonWave licensed for their longer shots. Mostly 23GHz and 18GHz.

      The FCC will need to address the growth of licensed microwave backhaul by opening up more frequency bands that are under utilized.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.