China’s 5 Year Optical Component Plan to aid domestic parts makers

In December 2017, China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) released a five-year plan outlining a road map for commercial and technological progress in a broad set of optical technologies.

China has optical component makers, but they have generally produce lower-speed devices that lag U.S. companies by a product generation.  China’s efforts to develop a domestic optical industry aims to support optical network equipment makers,  such as Huawei and ZTE, according to Jefferies analyst Rex Wu.

The 63-page MIIT document is written in Chinese (Mandarin), but Cignal AI commissioned a professional English translation which summarizes the section of the plan about the Chinese optical components industry.

Cignal AI reports:

The goals and objectives outlined in the plan are exceptionally ambitious and should gravely concern incumbent component vendors. This document outlines strategic rather than rational economic objectives to catalyze market progress in Chinese component companies. Our interpretation is that this will increase the number of non-rational economic actors participating in the component market.

If executed, this plan will greatly increase the level of competition in an already fractured industry.  It will also reduce or in some cases eliminate access for western component vendors to the largest market for optical communications components in the world – China.


NeoPhotonics, Oclaro, Acacia, Lumentum, and Finisar sell the most optical components to China, says a UBS report. Those optical parts makers took a hit in 2017 as demand weakened from China’s telecom service providers. Analysts have been expecting a rebound in 2018 spurred by spending on fiber-optic networks, 5G wireless backhaul and data centers designed for cloud computing services.

China’s domestic optical component makers include O-Net, Accelink and Innolight.

“The government aims to have two to three Chinese optics companies in global top 10 in 2020, and one company in global top 3 in 2022,” Mr. Wu wrote in a Jefferies report to clients. “The market share of Chinese optics companies will reach over 30% worldwide in 2022,” according to the government’s plan, he added.





2017 Top Telecom Stories and Well Deserved Tribute to Nikola Tesla

One unpublicized 2017 telecom story was that the U.S. telecom industry didn’t grow.  Revenues were flat (despite continued exponential traffic growth), profits, CAPEX and stock prices were all down.  Indeed, telecom was the worst performing S&P 500 sector in 2017 with a -6% loss (vs +37% gain for Information Technology sector).   The most obvious top story of the year was the FCC’s vote to end neutrality, which we chronicled in this blog post.

Instead of a review of other telecom stories for 2017, we offer a tribute to radio and wireless transmission pioneer Nikola Tesla.  Readers are invited to review the IEEE ComSoc Techblog archives and/or contact this author if you’d like to discuss the past year’s top telecom news and mega trends.

Tesla, whose name Elon Musk chose for his electric car company, was on the cover of Time magazine in 1931 for his achievements.  Unfortunately, he died a poor man in 1943 after years devoted to projects that did not receive adequate financing.  Although the main Tesla lab building on Long Island, New York is being restored by a nonprofit foundation — the Tesla Science Center at Wardenclyffe — the World System broadcast tower he built there was torn down for scrap to pay his hotel bill at the Waldorf Astoria in 1917. Yet Tesla’s most significant inventions resonate today.

Tesla’s ambitions outstripped his financing. He didn’t focus on radio as a stand-alone technology. Instead, he conceived of entire wireless transmission systems, even if they were decades ahead of the time and not financially feasible.  Tesla envisioned a system that could transmit not only radio but also electricity across the globe. After successful experiments in Colorado Springs in 1899, Tesla began building what he called a global “World System” near Shoreham on Long Island, hoping to power vehicles, boats and aircraft wirelessly. Ultimately, he expected that anything that needed electricity would get it from the air much as we receive transmitted data, sound and images on smartphones. But he ran out of money, and J. P. Morgan Jr., who had provided financing, turned off the spigot.

“He proved that you could send power a short distance (without wires),” said Jane Alcorn, president of the Tesla Center. “But sending power a long distance is still proving to be a hurdle. It would be monumental if it could be done.”

Tesla’s wireless house lighting scheme was the first step towards a practical wireless transmission of energy system. The most striking result obtained was two vacuum tubes lighted in an alternating electrostatic field while held in the hand of the experimenter. The wireless energy transmission effect involved the creation of an electric field between two metal plates, each being connected to one terminal of the induction coil’s secondary winding.  A light-producing device was used as a means of detecting the presence of the transmitted energy.

Ideal way of Lighting a Room - A. Dynamo ; B. Induction Coil ; C. Condenser ; T T. Illuminated Tubes without Wires

Ideal way of Lighting a Room – A. Dynamo ; B. Induction Coil ; C. Condenser ; T T. Illuminated Tubes without Wires
Tesla’s wireless house lighting scheme involved:
  • Two high voltage AC plates fill the room with a fairly uniform electric field.
  • The bulbs are vertically oriented to align with the electric field.

Tesla recognized that electrical energy could be projected outward into space and detected by a receiving instrument in the general vicinity of the source without a requirement for any interconnecting wires. He went on to develop two theories related to these observations

1.  By using two type-one sources positioned at distant points on the earth’s surface, it is possible to induce a flow of electrical current between them.

2. By incorporating a portion of the earth as part of a powerful type-two oscillator the disturbance can be impressed upon the earth and detected “at great distance, or even all over the surface of the globe.”

Tesla also made an assumption that Earth is a charged body floating in space.

“A point of great importance would be first to know what is the capacity of the earth? and what charge does it contain if electrified? Though we have no positive evidence of a charged body existing in space without other oppositely electrified bodies being near, there is a fair probability that the earth is such a body, for by whatever process it was separated from other bodies—and this is the accepted view of its origin—it must have retained a charge, as occurs in all processes of mechanical separation.”

Tesla was familiar with demonstrations that involved the charging of Leiden jar capacitors and isolated metal spheres with electrostatic influence machines. By bringing these elements into close proximity with each other, and also by making direct contact followed by their separation the charge can be manipulated. He surely had this in mind in the creation of his mental image, not being able to know that the model of Earth’s origin was inaccurate. The presently accepted model of planetary origin is one of accretion and collision.

“If it be a charged body insulated in space its capacity should be extremely small, less than one-thousandth of a farad.”

We now know that the earth is, in fact, a charged body, made so by processes—at least in part—related to an interaction of the continuous stream of charged particles called the solar wind that flows outward from the center of our solar system and Earth’s magnetosphere.

“But the upper strata of the air are conducting, and so, perhaps, is the medium in free space beyond the atmosphere, and these may contain an opposite charge. Then the capacity might be incomparably greater”.

We also know one of the upper strata of Earth’s atmosphere, the ionosphere, is conducting.

“In any case it is of the greatest importance to get an idea of what quantity of electricity the earth contains”.

An additional condition of which we are now aware is that the earth possesses a naturally existing negative charge with respect to the conducting region of the atmosphere beginning at an elevation of about 50 Km. The potential difference between the earth and this region is on the order of 400,000 volts. Near the earth’s surface there is a ubiquitous downward directed E-field of about 100 V/m. Tesla referred to this charge as the “electric niveau” or electric level (As noted by James Corum, et al in the paper “Concerning Cavity Q,” PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1988 INTERNATIONAL TESLA SYMPOSIUM, and others).

“It is difficult to say whether we shall ever acquire this necessary knowledge, but there is hope that we may, and that is, by means of electrical resonance. If ever we can ascertain at what period the earth’s charge, when disturbed, oscillates with respect to an oppositely electrified system or known circuit, we shall know a fact possibly of the greatest importance to the welfare of the human race. I propose to seek for the period by means of an electrical oscillator, or a source of alternating electric currents”.


Another Tesla invention combined radio with a remote-control device. We’d now call it a robotic drone. Shortly after filing a patent application in 1897 for radio circuitry, Tesla built and demonstrated a wireless, robotic boat at the old Madison Square Garden in 1898 and, again, in Chicago at the Auditorium Theater the next year. These were the first public demonstrations of a remote-controlled drone.

An innovation in the boat’s circuitry — his “logic gate” — became an essential steppingstone to semiconductors.  Tesla’s tub-shaped, radio-controlled craft heralded the birth of what he called a “teleautomaton”; later, the world would settle on the word robot. We can see his influence in devices ranging from “smart” speakers like Amazon’s Echo to missile-firing drone aircraft.


Tesla’s achievements were awesome but incomplete. He created the A.C. energy system and the basics of radio communication and robotics but wasn’t able to bring them all to fruition. His life shows that even for a brilliant inventor, innovation doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It requires a broad spectrum of talents, skills and lots of investment capital.


IHS Markit: Telecom Revenue +1.1%; CAPEX -1.8% in 2017

Despite unabated exponential growth in network usage, global telecom revenue is on track to grow just 1.1 percent in 2017 over the prior year, according to a new report [1] by business information provider IHS Markit.

Global economic growth prospects, meanwhile, are looking up. IHS Markit macroeconomic indicators point to moderate global economic growth of 3.2 percent for 2017, up from 2.5 percent in 2016, and world real gross domestic product (GDP) is projected to increase 3.2 percent in 2018 and 3.1 percent in 2019.

“Although the telecom sector has been resilient, revenue growth in developed and developing economies has slowed dramatically due to saturation and fierce competition,” said Stéphane Téral, executive director of research and analysis and advisor at IHS Markit. “At this point, every region is showing revenue growth in the low single digits when not declining, and there is no direct positive correlation between slow economic expansion and anemic telecom revenue growth or decline as seen year after year in Europe, for instance.”

China alone is tamping down global telecom capex in 2017:

IHS Markit forecasts a 1.8 percent year-over-year decline in global telecom capital expenditures (capex) in 2017, mainly a result of a 13 percent year-over-year falloff in Chinese telecom capex. Asia Pacific outspends every other region in the world on telecom equipment.

“Call it precision investment, strategically focused investment or tactical investment, but all three of China’s service providers — China Mobile, China Unicom and China Telecom — scaled back their 2017 spending plans, and the end result is another double-digit drop in China’s telecom capex bucket, with mobile infrastructure hit the hardest,” Téral said. “Bringing down capital intensity to reasonable levels of 15 to 20 percent is the chief goal of these operators.”

The virtualization trend:

A transformation is underway in service provider networks, epitomized by software-defined networking (SDN) and network functions virtualization (NFV), which involve the automation of processes such as customer interaction, as well as the addition of more telemetry and analytics with feedback loops into network operations, operations and business support systems, and service assurance.

“Many service providers have deployed new architectural options — including content delivery networks, distributed broadband network gateways, distributed mini data centers in smart central offices, and video optimization,” said Michael Howard, executive director of research and analysis for carrier networks at IHS Markit. “Nearly all operators are madly learning how to use SDN and NFV, and the growing deployments today bring us to declare 2017 as The Year of SDN and NFV.”

Data is the new oil, and AI is the engine:

Big data is becoming more manageable, and operators are leveraging subscriber and network intelligence to support the automation and optimization of their networks using SDN, NFV and initial forays into using analytics, including artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML).

“Forward-thinking operators are experimenting with how to use anonymized subscriber data and analytics to create targeted services and broker this information to third parties such as retailers and internet content providers like Google,” Téral said. “No matter their size, market or current level of digitization, service providers need to rethink their roles in the new age of information and reset the strategies needed to capitalize on this opportunity.”


Note 1.  The Telecom Trends & Drivers Market Report is published twice annually by IHS-Markit to provide analysis of global and regional market trends and conditions affecting service providers, subscribers, and the global economy. These roughly 40- page reports assess the state of the telecom industry, telling the story of what’s going on now and what we expect in the near and long term, illustrated with charts, graphs, tables, and written analysis. These critical analysis reports are a foundation piece for all market forecasts.

The reports include top takeaways on the economic health of the global telecom/datacom space; regional and global trends, drivers, and analysis for the service provider network sector in the context of the overall economy; financial analysis of the world’s top 10 service providers (revenue growth, capital intensities, free cash flow, debt level); regional enterprise and carrier spending trends; top-level service provider and subscriber forecasts; macroeconomic drivers; and key economic statistics (e.g., unemployment, OECD indicators, GDP growth). The reports are informed by all of IHS Technology research, from market share and forecasts to surveys with telecom service providers and small, medium, and large businesses.


The chart below from Bharti Airtel (India’s largest telecom company) shows that telecom industry revenue has declined in 2017 Q2, Q3, and Q4 with only Q1 showing positive growth.

Image result for pic of telecom revenue in 2017


Optical Network Equipment Vendors:

In a service provider survey report on Optical Networking and equipment vendors, IHS-Markit found Ciena, Huawei and Nokia as the three most popular optical networking equipment vendors. The report also highlighted Data Center Interconnection (DCI) is a huge growth opportunity.

IHS-Markit predicts DCI will be a significant driver for the optical equipment market, surging from 19 percent of overall equipment sales at mid-2017 to nearly 30 percent by 2021.

Ciena was deemed the top DCI vendor by 39 percent of those surveyed by IHS-Markit. Cisco, Coriant, and Infinera each garnered 36 percent of the votes.Last year Ciena reportedly won a DCI deal from rival ADVA Optical, which had a negative impact on ADVA’s operational results.

Ciena also topped the list of top (optical) transport software-defined networking (SDN) vendors, with 46 percent of those surveyed citing the company as a leader in the segment. Adams noted that while this market was still in its early days, Ciena’s continued integration of its Blue Planet software platform with its optical equipment products was driving differentiation in the market.

Cisco attracted the second most votes in terms of transport SDN leadership, followed by Nokia and Infinera.



FCC Votes to Reverse Net Neutrality & No Longer Regulate Broadband Internet Services


By a 3 to 2 vote along party lines, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted on Thursday to dismantle landmark rules regulating the businesses that connect consumers to the internet, granting broadband ISPs the power to potentially reshape Americans’ online experiences.  The agency scrapped the so-called net neutrality regulations that prohibited broadband providers from blocking websites or charging for higher-quality service or certain content. The federal government will also no longer regulate high-speed internet delivery as if it were a utility, like phone service.  The upshot is that the “Restoring Internet Freedom” order passed today, removes the FCC as a regulator of the broadband industry and relegates rules that prevented blocking and throttling content to the honor system.

That means a consumer or business is helpless if they have a complaint against an ISP or broadband service provider although there’s lip service saying that “the FCC and FTC will securely share consumer complaints pertaining to the subject matter of the Internet Freedom Order’s requirements to the extent feasible…….”  FTC enforcement action is mentioned, but from our experience the FTC does nothing when it receives a complaint!  They don’t even contact the business you’re complaining about (like the BBB does).

From the FCC’s Memorandum of Understanding (bold font added– see other references below):

(1) Pursuant to the FCC’s authority under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, on December 14, 2017, the FCC adopted a Declaratory Ruling, Report and Order, and Order in the proceeding Restoring Internet Freedom, WC Docket No. 17-108, Declaratory Ruling, Report and Order, Order, FCC 17-166 (Dec. 14, 2017) (“Internet Freedom Order”), which, in principal part, restores broadband Internet access service to its Title I information service classification,reinstates the private mobile service classification of mobile broadband Internet access service, and returns to the Transparency Rule the FCC adopted in 2010 with certain limited modifications to promote additional transparency. As authority for the Transparency Rule, the FCC relies on Section 257 of the Communications Act, among other provisions, which requires the FCC to identify and eliminate market entry barriers for entrepreneurs and other small businesses in the provision and ownership of telecommunications services and information services and to report to Congress on how such marketplace barriers have been addressed by regulation or could be addressed by recommended statutory changes; and

(2) Congress has directed the FTC to, among other things, prevent unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45, and has charged the FTC with enforcing a number of other specific rules and statutes.

Therefore, it is agreed that:

1. Consistent with its jurisdiction and to fulfill its duties under Section 257 of the Communications Act, among other provisions, the FCC will monitor the broadband market and identify market entry barriers by, among other activities, reviewing informal complaints filed by consumers, and will investigate and take enforcement action as appropriate with respect to failures by an Internet service provider to comply, in whole or in part, with the Internet Freedom Order’s requirements to file with the FCC or display on a publicly available, easily accessible website the specified subjects of disclosure.
2. Consistent with its jurisdiction, the FTC will investigate and take enforcement action as appropriate against Internet service providers for unfair, deceptive, or otherwise unlawful acts or practices, including but not limited to, actions pertaining to the accuracy of the disclosures such providers make pursuant to the Internet Freedom Order’s requirements, as well as their marketing, advertising, and promotional activities.
3. Consistent with each agency’s jurisdiction and to maximize the resources of each agency, at the regular coordination meeting established by the Agencies’ 2015 Memorandum of Understanding, the Agencies will discuss potential investigations against Internet Service Providers that could arise under each agency’s jurisdiction, and coordinate such activities to promote consistency in law enforcement and to prevent duplicate or conflicting actions, to the extent appropriate and consistent with law.
4. To further support coordination and cooperation on these matters, the Agencies will continue to work together to protect consumers, including through:
• Consultation on investigations or enforcement actions that implicate the jurisdiction of the other agency;
• Sharing of relevant investigative techniques and tools, intelligence, technical and legal expertise, and best practices in response to reasonable requests for such  assistance from either Agency; and
• Collaboration on consumer and industry outreach and education efforts, as appropriate.
5. The FCC and FTC will securely share consumer complaints pertaining to the subject matter of the Internet Freedom Order’s requirements to the extent feasible and subject to the Agencies’ requirements and policies governing, among other things, the protection of confidential, personally identifiable, or nonpublic information.
6. The Agencies may coordinate and cooperate to develop guidance to assist consumers’ understanding of Internet service provider practices.
7. In seeking to encourage and facilitate the enforcement of applicable law, the Agencies recognize that decisions by one agency to take or withhold action are not, except by operation of law, binding on or intended to restrict action by the other agency.
8. To ensure the effective exchange of information between the Agencies, the persons signing below and their successors shall be deemed Designated Liaison Officers to serve as the primary sources of contact for each agency. Formal meetings between appropriate senior officials of both Agencies to exchange views on matters of common interest and responsibility shall be held from time to time, as determined to be necessary by such liaison officers…..blah, blah, blah!



The action reversed the agency’s 2015 decision, during the Obama administration, to better protect Americans as they have migrated to the internet for most communications. It will take a couple of weeks for the changes go into effect, but groups opposed to the action have already announced plans to sue the agency to restore the net neutrality regulations. Those suits could take many months to be resolved.

FCC chairman Ajit Pai said the rollback of the rules would eventually help consumers because broadband providers like AT&T and Comcast could offer people a wider variety of service options. We are helping consumers and promoting competition,” Mr. Pai said in a speech before the vote. “Broadband providers will have more incentive to build networks, especially to under-served areas.”   We think that’s disingenuous nonsense!

The discarding of net neutrality regulations is the most significant and controversial action by the F.C.C. under Mr. Pai. In his first 11 months as chairman, he has lifted media ownership limitseased caps on how much broadband providers can charge business customers and cut back on a low-income broadband program that was slated to be expanded to nationwide carriers.

His plan for the net neutrality rules, first outlined early this year, set off a flurry of opposition. Critics of the changes say that consumers may have more difficulty finding content online and that start-ups will have to pay to reach consumers. In the past week, there have been hundreds of protests across the country, and many websites have encouraged users to speak up against the repeal. After the vote, numerous groups said they planned to file a lawsuit challenging the change.

As expected, the five FCC commissioners were fiercely divided along party lines. In front of a room packed with reporters and television cameras from the major TV networks, the two Democratic commissioners warned of consumer harms to come from the changes.

Mignon Clyburn, one of the Democratic commissioners, presented two accordion folders full of letters in protest to the changes, and accused the three Republican commissioners of defying the wishes of millions of Americans.  “I dissent, because I am among the millions outraged,” said Ms. Clyburn. “Outraged, because the F.C.C. pulls its own teeth, abdicating responsibility to protect the nation’s broadband consumers.”

“I dissent from this rash decision to roll back net neutrality rules,” said FCC Commissioner Rosenworcel. “I dissent from the corrupt process that has brought us to this point. And I dissent from the contempt this agency has shown our citizens in pursuing this path today. This decision puts the Federal Communications Commission on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of the law, and the wrong side of the American public.”

On the other hand, Brendan Carr, a Republican FCC commissioner, said it was a “great day” and dismissed “apocalyptic” warnings. “I’m proud to end this two-year experiment with heavy-handed regulation,” Mr. Carr added.

During Mr. Pai’s speech before the vote, security guards entered the meeting room at the F.C.C. headquarters and told everyone to evacuate. Commissioners were ushered out a back door. The hearing restarted a short time later.  That shows you how unpopular the repeal of Internet Neutrality really is!

Despite all the uproar, it is unclear how much will change for internet users. The rules were essentially a protective measure, largely meant to prevent telecom companies from favoring some sites over others. And major telecom companies have promised consumers that their experiences online would not change.

Mr. Pai and his Republican colleagues have echoed the comments of telecom companies, who have told regulators that they weren’t expanding and upgrading their networks as quickly as they wanted to since the creation of the rules in 2015.

“There is a lot of misinformation that this is the ‘end of the world as we know it’ for the internet,” Comcast’s senior executive vice president, David Cohen, wrote in a blog post this week. “Our internet service is not going to change.”  We certainly hope so!

But with the F.C.C. making clear that it will no longer oversee the behavior of broadband providers, telecom experts say, the companies could feel freer to come up with new offerings, such as faster tiers of service for business partners such as HBO’s streaming service or Fox News. Such prioritization could stifle certain political voices or give the telecom conglomerates with media assets an edge over rivals.

Is this net neutrality repeal set in stone? Not necessarily. The repeal could be overturned in court or by Congress. A Democratic senator is already working on legislation. Net neutrality advocates are also saying they’ll push ahead with both options to fight the repeal. In order for the repeal to go into effect, it must be approved by the Office of Management and Budget — a process that could take several months.

Other Voices:

Consumer groups, start-ups and many small businesses say there are examples of net neutrality violations by companies, such as when AT&T blocked FaceTime on iPhones using its network.

These critics of Mr. Pai, who was nominated by President Trump, say there isn’t enough competition in the broadband market to trust that the companies will try to offer the best services for customers. The providers have the incentive to begin charging websites to reach consumers, a strong business model when there are few places for consumers to turn when they don’t like those practices.

“Let’s remember why we have these rules in the first place,” said Michael Beckerman, president of the Internet Association, a trade group that represents big tech firms such as Google and Facebook. “There is little competition in the broadband service market.”

Mr. Beckerman said his group was weighing legal action against the commission. Public interest groups including Public Knowledge and the National Hispanic Media Coalition said they planned to challenge Mr. Pai’s order in court. Eric T. Schneiderman, the New York attorney general, also said he would file a lawsuit.

Dozens of Democratic lawmakers, and some Republicans, have pushed for Congress to pass a law on the issue, if only to prevent it from flaring up every couple of years at the F.C.C. — and then leading to a court challenge.

One Republican commissioner, Mike O’Reilly, said he supported a federal law created by Congress for net neutrality. But he said any law should protect the ability of companies to charge for faster lanes, a practice known as “paid prioritization.”  Any legislation action appears to be far off, however, and numerous online companies warned that the changes approved on Thursday should be taken seriously.

“If we don’t have net neutrality protections that enforce tenets of fairness online, you give internet service providers the ability to choose winners and losers,” Steve Huffman, chief executive of Reddit, said in an interview. “This is not hyperbole.”

Netflix, which has been relatively quiet in recent weeks about its opposition to the change, said that the decision “is the beginning of a longer legal battle.”  Netflix via Twitter (tweet) at 10:26 AM – Dec 14, 2017:

“We’re disappointed in the decision to gut  protections that ushered in an unprecedented era of innovation, creativity & civic engagement. This is the beginning of a longer legal battle. Netflix stands w/ innovators, large & small, to oppose this misguided FCC order.”

This author totally agrees with Netflix!  Let us know how you feel by leaving a comment in the box below this post. It can be anonymous if you like and your email address won’t be published!  Thanks, Alan



FCC Acts To Restore Internet Freedom (from website):
Reverses Title II Framework, Increases Transparency to Protect Consumers, Spur Investment, Innovation, and Competition
Word : DOC-348261A1.docx  DOC-348261A2.docx  DOC-348261A3.docx  DOC-348261A4.docx  DOC-348261A5.docx  DOC-348261A6.docx
PDF : DOC-348261A1.pdf  DOC-348261A2.pdf  DOC-348261A3.pdf  DOC-348261A4.pdf  DOC-348261A5.pdf  DOC-348261A6.pdf
Text : DOC-348261A1.txt  DOC-348261A2.txt  DOC-348261A3.txt  DOC-348261A4.txt  DOC-348261A5.txt  DOC-348261A6.txt
Restoring Internet Freedom FCC-FTC Memorandum Of Understanding
PDF : DOC-348275A1.pdf
Text : DOC-348275A1.txt

Greg Wyler- OneWeb Satellite-Internet CEO- Telecom Man of the Year + $500M more from Softbank

Greg Wyler, the entrepreneur and CEO of satellite internet company OneWeb, has won the Fierce Wireless “Most Powerful Person In Telecom” tournament for 2017, just edging past T-Mobile CEO John Legere during this weekend’s final matchup and beating other industry notables like Ericsson’s Borje Ekholm, Apple’s Tim Cook and Verizon’s Lowell McAdam.

This past  Sunday afternoon, Legere urged his almost 5 million Twitter followers to vote for OneWeb’s Wyler instead of himself:

Join me in voting for Greg as the Most Powerful Person in Wireless! We have until tomorrow morning to put Greg_Wyler (and his mission) on top, where he belongs! 

“This has been an amazing public statement about the need for global connectivity. Our mission is to enable affordable access for the world’s unconnected. While we still have a lot of work to do, with the support of partners, friends, governments, and customers, I know we will get there,” Wyler said in a statement issued shortly before voting ended on Tuesday morning.

OneWeb appears to have recently received another vote of confidence from Japan’s SoftBank. According to a Wall Street Journal report, SoftBank has increased its investment in OneWeb by another $500 million, bringing its total to $1.5 billion.

Wyler also told the WSJ that the company’s initial fleet of more than 700 low-altitude satellites is “generally on schedule” for launches beginning in 2018. The company plans to start offering service in Alaska by 2019 and expanding worldwide by the end of 2020, Wyler told the Journal. Further, he said that OneWeb plans to deploy 900 second-generation, higher-orbiting satellites by the mid-2020s, which he said would allow the company to offer speeds of 2.5 Gbps.

Mr. Wyler’s project has final approval from the Federal Communications Commission to turn on domestic service within two years, barring major technical or manufacturing problems. The approval also is contingent on other conditions.

According to Mr. Wyler, his team also is “trying to lead the charge” in reducing orbital debris stemming from potential satellite collisions or failures. OneWeb’s satellites, weighing hundreds of pounds and expected to cost less than $1 million apiece, are designed to be “as high or higher in quality and reliability” than much larger models costing $150 million or more, he said.

An early financial backer of some of the largest internet companies on both sides of the Pacific, SoftBank continues to seek synergies with mobile-phone businesses and the portfolio of assorted technology companies it has assembled over the years. SoftBank also has created the world’s biggest tech investment fund, worth nearly $100 billion. The Vision Fund has been roiling the venture community with its sheer scale, lifting valuations and helping entrepreneurs bypass usual fundraising rounds.

Since its official launch in May with the backing of investors such as Saudi Arabia’s sovereign-wealth fund, the fund has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in companies that SoftBank founder Masayoshi Son believes will corner key technologies in a future of smarter, interconnected, and automated devices. OneWeb’s satellites are geared to help serve as the backbone for those applications, Mr. Son has said.

SoftBank, which has a 40% stake in OneWeb based on a prior investmentwalked away from merger talks between its U.S. wireless carrierSprint Corp. and rival T-Mobile US Inc., unwilling to relinquish control as the top shareholder of a spectrum Mr. Son believes will be valuable as everyday objects from cars to refrigerators increasingly communicate with one another.

Mr. Wyler, for his part, has long advocated the advantages of combining satellites circling the earth at different altitudes, arguing such synergies dramatically increase capacity and efficiencies. But unlike Mr. Musk’s concept, he doesn’t favor laser links between satellites on the grounds that such add-ons unduly increase weight and complexity.



According to Fierce’s readership, Wyler is not only the industry’s top rising starfor 2017, he’s also the industry’s most powerful person. And that comes after Softbank reportedly  invested another $500M in One Web- his satellite Internet start-up company!

Gartner Analysis & Predictions: Enterprise Network Infrastructure and Services

by Bjarne Munch | To Chee Eng | Greg Young | Danellie Young | Vivek Bhalla | Andrew Lerner |Danilo Ciscato of Gartner Group


This new Gartner Group report is on the key impacts of digital business, cloud and orchestration strategies. In particular, IT leaders must continue to focus on meeting enterprise needs for expanded WAN connectivity, application performance and improved network agility, without compromising performance.

Key Findings:

  • As enterprises increasingly rely on the internet for WAN connectivity, they are challenged by the unpredictable nature of internet services.
  • Enterprises seeking more agile WAN services continue to be blocked by network service providers’ terms and conditions.
  • Enterprises seeking more agile network solutions continue to be hampered by manual processes and cultural resistance.
  • Enterprise’s moving applications to public cloud services frequently struggle with application performance issues.


IT leaders responsible for infrastructure agility should:

  • Reduce the business impact of internet downtime by deploying redundant WAN connectivity such as hybrid WAN for business-critical activities.
  • Improve WAN service agility by negotiating total contractual spend instead of monthly or annual spend.
  • Improve agility of internal network solutions by introducing automation of all operations using a step-wise approach.
  • Ensure the performance of cloud-based applications by using carriers’ cloud connect services instead of unpredictable internet services.
  • Improve alignment between business objectives and network solutions by selectively deploying intent-based network solutions.

Strategic Planning Assumptions:

Within the next five years, there will be a major internet outage that impacts more than 100 million users for longer than 24 hours.

  • By 2021, 25% of enterprise telecom contracts will evolve to allow for greater flexibility such as canceling services or introducing new services within the contract period, up from less than 5% today.
  • By 2021, productized network automation (NA) tools will be utilized by 55% of organizations, up from less than 15% today.
  • By YE20, more than 30% of organizations will connect to cloud providers using alternatives to the public internet, which is a major increase from 5% in 3Q17.
  • By 2020, more than 1,000 large enterprises will use intent-based networking systems in production, up from less than 15 today.


Gartner Group has five predictions that represent fundamental changes that are emerging in key network domains, from internal networking to cloud services and WAN services.

two key aspects that the majority of Gartner clients struggle with:

  1. The increased interest in utilizing the internet for WAN connectivity continues to raise concerns about the performance of public internet services and performance of applications deployed in public cloud services. We discuss the risk that enterprises encounter due to the unpredictable nature of the internet, and we discuss how an enterprise can use MPLS to connect directly to public cloud services instead of using the internet.
  2. Enterprises continue to need new business solutions deployed faster, but remain hampered by the inability of network solutions and network services to respond fast enough and rectify performance issues fast enough. We discuss three options to improve network operations as well as network services.
Figure 1. Five Predicts to Create a Better Enterprise Network

Enlarge Image

Source: Gartner (December 2017)

Strategic Planning Assumptions

Strategic Planning Assumption: Within the next five years, there will be a major internet outage that impacts more than 100 million users for longer than 24 hours.

Analysis by: Andrew Lerner, Greg Young

Key Findings:

  • We are increasingly seeing organizations use the internet as a WAN, and estimate that approximately 20% of Gartner clients in many geographic regions have at least some critical branch locations entirely connected via the internet.
  • Most IT teams don’t have a detailed understanding of the multitude of applications and services that are being used on the public internet and/or their criticality. This is because of years of line of business (LOB)-centric buying and the proliferation of SaaS.
  • While the internet is highly resilient, there are specific infrastructure and technology hot spots that, if compromised, could threaten the internet as a whole or large portions of it. This could be the result of natural disasters, man-made accidents or intentional acts.
  • Natural disasters and man-made acts that could impact large portions of the internet include earthquakes, solar flares, electronic pulses, meteors, tsunamis, hurricanes, major cable cuts and network operator errors.
  • Intentional acts include hacktivism, terrorism toward critical infrastructure, and/or coordinated distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks, attacks against carrier- and ISP-specific components, and protocols (e.g., SS7).

While the probability of each of these events individually is small, the likelihood that at least some of them will occur over an extended period of time is actually surprisingly high. For example, even if there is only a 1% chance that any of the 11 examples identified above results in an outage within a year, there is a statistical likelihood of over 45% that at least one of them will occur over a five-year period. Further, to date, there have been indications that the internet is vulnerable to sizable outages:

  • In 2008, millions of users and large portions of the Middle East and India were impacted by a cable cut. 1
  • In 2016, a large DDOS attack resulted in many large e-commerce sites going down, including Twitter, Netflix, Reddit and CNN. 2
  • In 2015, Telekom Malaysia created a routing problem that rendered much of the Level 3 network unavailable. 3
  • It has been widely reported that 70% of all internet traffic goes thru Northern Virginia 4 and, while this might be an overstated, there’s no doubt that there are several major chokepoints in the internet infrastructure.

Market Implications:

At a minimum, an extended and widespread internet outage would cause dramatic revenue loss for enterprises, and could even create life-threating situations depending on what business the organizations is in. Initially, many organizations often brush this off by saying, “Well there’s not much we can do about it anyway” or “If there is a large internet outage due to a natural disaster, then personal safety is the priority and the enterprise connectivity is the least of our concerns.” However, there are very specific and actionable items that infrastructure and operations (I&O) leaders should take to mitigate the impact of a large outage.

Strategic Planning Assumption: By 2021, 25% of enterprise telecom contracts will evolve to allow for greater flexibility such as canceling services or introducing new services within the contract period, up from less than 5% today.

Analysis by: Danellie Young

Key Findings:

  • Enterprise telecom contracts are typically fixed in both term duration and for the services required for procurement.
  • Most larger revenue contracts ($1 million annually) require the enterprise to agree to minimum revenue commitments on an annual basis.
  • Major WAN decisions are made by 31% to 47% of enterprises each year, including equipment refresh or carrier renegotiations (assuming the refresh cycle on routers is six years, and the average enterprise WAN service contract is three years).
  • A large majority of enterprises are struggling with the cost, performance and flexibility of their traditional WAN contracts, further exacerbated by the proliferation of public cloud applications.

Market Implications:

Enterprise telecom contracts remain rigid and fixed, with specified services required to ensure compliance. Typically such contracts penalize customers when services are disconnected midterm. Enterprise telecom contracts are typically negotiated on 36-month cycles, based on either full-term or revenue commitments. Revenue commitments are set based on monthly spend, annual spend or total contract spending. Upon meeting the contract’s revenue commitment, the enterprise can then renegotiate or consider alternative services or providers since their financial obligation has been met. Terminating contracts early for convenience will typically levy penalties on the enterprise. These penalties range from 100% of the monthly recurring charges (MRCs) to a percentage of the MRCs to a declining portion through the remainder of the term (i.e., 100% in the first 12 months, 75% in months 13 to 24 and 50% through the end of the term).

Currently, contracts are split between term and revenue commit contracts, whereby most of the revenue commitments are made on an annualized basis. Alternatively, a small number (5%) are offered or negotiated with total contract values tied to them. Total contract revenue commitments enable the enterprise to meet the obligation earlier in their contract and provide the opportunity to negotiate new lower rates and a new contract, and to solicit competitive proposals before the full 36-month cycle terminates.

In addition to traditional voice and data services, many networking vendors now offer SD-WAN functionality products, while carriers and managed service providers (MSPs) are beginning to launch and roll out managed SD-WAN services as an alternative to managed routers. Contract flexibility will be needed to allow the enterprise the flexibility to migrate to new solutions, without financial risk or paying early termination fees on services. Thus, while we anticipate rapid adoption of SD-WAN and virtualized customer premises equipment (vCPE) solutions in the enterprise, SD-WAN by itself will not improve contractual conditions.



US Ignite adds 5 New Communities to Smart Gigabit Communities Program

U.S. Ignite’s smart cities project, called the Smart Gigabit Communities program, is a National Science Foundation (NSF) funded program that provides assistance to areas looking to advance gigabit technologies. The nonprofit group’s five new participants are Red Wing, Minn.; Eugene-Springfield, Ore.; Lexington, Ky.; Lincoln, Neb.; and the San Francisco Bay area.

Image result for pic of US Ignite smart city



U.S. Ignite stimulates the creation of next-generation applications and services that leverage advanced networking technologies to build the foundation for smart communities, including cities, rural areas, regions, and states. The nonprofit organization helps to accelerate new wired and wireless networking advances from research to prototype to full-scale smart community and interconnected national deployments.


U.S. Ignite said in a press release that each of the communities will begin participating by using their new SGC support to find answers to civic challenges through gigabit enabled apps, tools and other solutions. At the same time, they will also be expected to contribute their insights and technologies with fellow SGC communities. The sharing is designed to create a network for smart city collaboration, a group that now includes 25 national and international communities.

Representing leaders in the San Francisco Bay Area, executive director of the City Innovate Foundation, Kamran Saddique, said that the Bay Area’s participation represents significant support for local cities in developing advanced infrastructure and solving common social problems.

“Smart communities and the Internet of Things are a set of modern digital technologies, civic innovations and social changes that have come together to create the opportunity to drive fundamental changes in government, business and society,” Saddique said in a statement. “Our participation in the US Ignite SGC network will help us to leverage these technologies to enhance the quality of life for the San Francisco Bay Area.”

The City Innovate Foundation is responsible for a number of civic tech and smart city programs that involve the cities San Francisco, Oakland, San Leandro and West Sacramento. Two of its major initiatives include SuperPublic, a Bay Area smart city innovation lab, and the national Startup in Residence program that coordinates partnerships between cities and tech startups.

An SGC requirement is that all cities that join the program must be investing in gigabit connectivity. San Francisco is preparing for a $1.3 billion citywide municipal internet network that will spread high-speed connectivity throughout the city.

Like San Francisco, the other four recently added communities expressed a similar eagerness and optimism to receive SGC’s support. Lexington Mayor Jim Gray said he was “ecstatic” to join the network and looks forward to “unparalleled innovations in the coming months and years,” while in Eugene, Oregon, Mayor Lucy Vinis said she was “thrilled” and expected gigabit connectivity in the community to drive education, healthcare, transportation and advanced manufacturing.

In Lincoln, Nebraksa, Mayor Chris Beutler is counting on the smart city support to bolster its own gigabit internet service that is coming to the city by 2019. A partnership with the internet service provider Allo is expected to connect gigabit fiber to more than 105,000 residences and 20,000 businesses and government offices.

“This public-private partnership creates the digital infrastructure that gives our entrepreneurs and students high-speed internet, supercomputer access to researchers and other innovators across the nation to build next-generation technology,” Beutler said in a statement.



IHS Markit: VMware acquires top SD-WAN vendor VeloCloud; 3Q17 SD-WAN revenue reaches $116M


SD-WAN (appliance + control and management software) revenue reached $116M in 3Q17, up 18% quarter-over-quarter (QoQ) and up 2.8x year-over-year (YoY). VeloCloud led the SD-WAN market with 22% share of 3Q17 revenue, Aryaka was in second place with 18%.  Silver Peak rounded out the top 3 with 12%, according to the DC Network Equipment market tracker early edition from IHS Markit.

“The majority of SD-WAN solutions at first focused on virtualizing the WAN connection problem bringing automation, reliability, and agility to the enterprise WAN using overlays. Current use cases include direct connect for branch offices to the Internet and increased reliability through automated fail-over for a better user experience,” said Cliff Grossner, Ph.D., Senior Research Director and Advisor for the Cloud and Data Center Research Practice at IHS Markit.

Worldwide SD-WAN revenue (US$M)-3Q-2017:





Silver Peak


























Total SD-WAN


Source: IHS-Markit

“With the WAN connectivity problem well understood and solutions ramping in deployments, SD-WAN vendors are beginning to offer additional services such as WAN optimization and virtual firewall. The next important challenge for SD-WAN vendors to solve is providing connectivity with SLAs and security for the multi-cloud,” said Cliff Grossner.

More Market Highlights:

·         3Q17 ADC revenue increased 5% from 2Q17 and decreased 5% from 3Q16

·         Virtual ADC appliances stood at 28% of 3Q17 ADC revenue

·         F5 garnered 45% ADC market share in 3Q17 with revenue down 4% YoY. Citrix had the #2 spot with 29% of revenue, and A10 (8%) rounded out the top 3 market share spots.

Data Center Network Equipment Report Synopsis:

The IHS Markit Data Center Network Equipment market tracker is part of the Data Center Networks Intelligence Service and provides quarterly worldwide and regional market size, vendor market share, forecasts through 2021, analysis and trends for (1) data center Ethernet switches by category [purpose built, bare metal, blade and general purpose], port speed [1/10/25/40/50/100/200/400GE] and market segment [enterprise, telco and cloud service provider], (2) application delivery controllers by category [hardware-based appliance, virtual appliance],  and (3) software-defined WAN (SD-WAN) [appliances and control and management software]. Vendors tracked include A10, ALE, Arista, Array Networks, Aryaka, Barracuda, Cisco, Citrix, CloudGenix, Dell, F5, FatPipe, HPE, Huawei, InfoVista, Juniper, KEMP, Radware, Riverbed, Silver Peak, Talari, TELoIP, VeloCloud, Viptela, ZTE and others.


From a Nov 15, 2017 press release:

According to the IHS Markit Data Center and Enterprise SDN Hardware and Software Biannual Market Tracker, SD-WAN is currently a small market, totaling just $137 million worldwide in the first half of 2017 (H1 2017). However, global SD-WAN hardware and software revenue is forecast to reach $3.3 billion by 2021 as service providers partner with SD-WAN vendors to deploy overlay solutions — and as virtual network function (VNF)–based solutions become more closely integrated with carrier operations support systems (OSS) and business support systems (BSS).

“Currently, the majority of SD-WAN revenue is from appliances, with early deployments focused on rolling out devices at branch offices,” Grossner said. “Moving forward, we expect a larger portion of SD-WAN revenue to come from control and management software as users increasingly adopt application visibility and analytics services.”

More highlights from the IHS Markit data center and enterprise SDN report:

  • Globally, data center and enterprise software-defined networking (SDN) revenue for in-use SDN-capable Ethernet switches, SDN controllers and SD-WAN increased 5.4 percent in H1 2017 from H2 2016, to $1.93 billion
  • Based on in-use SDN revenue, Cisco was the number-one market share leader in the SDN market in H1 2017, followed by Arista, White Box, VMware and Hewlett Packard Enterprise
  • Looking at the individual SDN categories in H1 2017, White Box was the frontrunner in bare metal switch revenue, VMware led the SDN controller market segment, Dell held 45 percent of branded bare metal switch revenue and Hewlett Packard Enterprise had the largest share of total SDN-capable (in-use and not-in-use) branded Ethernet switch ports


Editor’s Notes:

We’ve repeatedly pounded the table that there are no standards for SD-WANs, despite efforts by MEF [1].   That implies single vendor SD WAN with vendor lock-in and no interoperability between SD-WANs from different vendors.

Note 1.  MEF says it will standardize the managed services that SD-WAN network operators deliver, by developing open APIs, along with common terminology and components. This effort builds on MEF’s Lifecycle Service Orchestration effort.  Please refer to this MEF document.

Note 2.  Gartner’s definition of SD-WAN

Image result for pic of SD WAN

More from Gartner on SD-WANs:

Enterprise network leaders face enormous challenges adapting and changing their managed WAN services to meet constantly changing business needs for new applications, new offices, more users, cloud services and digital business. Based on hundreds of client inquiries and recent Research Circle surveys, a key obstacle is that traditional network services are too slow in meeting these needs, and network leaders need alternative solutions that can meet their evolving needs faster. Compared to traditional WAN services, managed SD-WAN services (including various WAN connectivity services) are emerging with promises of greater agility, flexibility, control and cost-efficiency.

Gartner recommends that network leaders seeking managed WAN services use end-to-end managed SD-WAN and connectivity services to create agile and cost-effective managed WAN services. However, they must avoid buying into overinflated expectations created by the market hype that ignores the limitations of current services. To avoid the inevitable disappointment that follows unfulfilled expectations, network leaders should outline their service requirements, and use these to define evaluation criteria for a balanced analysis of service benefits and limitations.’

Figure 1. Identify an Acceptable Balance Between the Benefits and Limitations of Managed SD-WAN

Enlarge Image

Source: Gartner (December 2017)

Enterprise network leaders face enormous challenges adapting and changing their managed WAN services to meet constantly changing business needs for new applications, new offices, more users, cloud services and digital business. Based on hundreds of client inquiries and recent Research Circle surveys, a key obstacle is that traditional network services are too slow in meeting these needs, and network leaders need alternative solutions that can meet their evolving needs faster. Compared to traditional WAN services, managed SD-WAN services (including various WAN connectivity services) are emerging with promises of greater agility, flexibility, control and cost-efficiency.

Gartner recommends that network leaders seeking managed WAN services use end-to-end managed SD-WAN and connectivity services to create agile and cost-effective managed WAN services. However, they must avoid buying into overinflated expectations created by the market hype that ignores the limitations of current services. To avoid the inevitable disappointment that follows unfulfilled expectations, network leaders should outline their service requirements, and use these to define evaluation criteria for a balanced analysis of service benefits and limitations.’

Figure 1. Identify an Acceptable Balance Between the Benefits and Limitations of Managed SD-WAN

Enlarge Image

Source: Gartner (December 2017)

Current WAN services take too long to roll out and are too difficult to relocate or terminate, and network leaders are looking for ways to improve this. Network leaders see SD-WAN as a new opportunity to create more agile branch office connectivity due to appliances’ support of “zero-touch-configuration.” Vendors are fueling these expectations with reports of very fast site rollout with reports of 20 to 30 sites deployed overnight, compared to six to 10 sites per week for a traditional managed router service. However, SD-WAN does not change fundamental limitations of connectivity services, for example:

  • Fast site deployments are only available for 4G/LTE access services or in cases where the provider already has a wired access service to the building (although in many cases these still require one to two weeks to provision).
  • Network leaders who need new wired access services still need to plan for 14 to 90 days (or longer) from order to provisioning.
  • All wired branch office connections, private or public, still require network leaders to sign a contract of fixed duration, making it a problem for network leaders to move or terminate a site without financial penalties.

Network leaders who need new WAN sites deployed with short notice should request managed SD-WAN with embedded LTE services. While many providers do not yet offer this service, there are providers in select countries that courier SD-WAN appliances with LTE embedded to customer sites instead of sending a technician. The best-case scenario is only six hours from order placement to on-site delivery of the appliance. Combined with self-service, where the enterprise plugs in the SD-WAN appliance to the LAN and powers up the device, the site can be operational within a day in the best case. However, network leaders who do not want their office staff to plug in the appliance need to plan for up to a week for a technician to be on-site, depending on location.

However, besides expense, the performance limitations of 4G/LTE include lower bandwidth than fiber, lack of geographic coverage and lack of QoS. Also, most of these services are based on using the internet as backhaul to the provider’s internet gateway. This means that, for larger sites and critical applications, network leaders should only employ 4G/LTE connectivity as an interim primary connection until a fiber connection has been deployed.


Because of the performance issues that still plague the internet in most parts of the world, the majority of enterprises are not replacing MPLS with internet services. Instead, based on client inquiries, Gartner estimates that around 60% of global WANs use both internet and MPLS in concert in a hybrid WAN that sends critical application traffic over the MPLS and everything else over the internet.

Enterprise experience has shown that for a global managed hybrid WAN, network planners can obtain at least 30% expense savings compared to traditional managed WAN (see “Cloud Adoption Is Driving Hybrid WAN Architectures” ). Network planners that want to replace their global MPLS with internet should progress selectively, and choose a few sites in areas where the internet is most likely to be of good quality. For these sites, demand a two- to four-month pilot as a condition of signing a new WAN contract. Remember that all internet providers and services are not the same. Use only a select few and do not disaggregate internet providers, as WAN and application performance will suffer.



ITU-R WP5D: Guidelines for evaluation of radio interface technologies for IMT-2020

ITU-R Working Party 5D: draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.EVAL]

“Guidelines for evaluation of radio interface technologies for IMT-2020”


Among other work items, the October 2017 ITU-R WP5D meeting discussed proposals to correct minor errors and insert editorial improvements in draft new Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.EVAL]. Proposals to introduce some corrections including range of working distance in Indoor Hotspot channel models were agreed and reflected in the new version of the document.

Selected sections of this EVAL draft report follow (see NOTE at the end of the post and Comment in the box below it)…….


Resolution ITU-R 56 defines a new term “IMT-2020” applicable to those systems, system components, and related aspects that provide far more enhanced capabilities than those described in Recommendation ITU-R M.1645.

In this regard, International Mobile Telecommunications-2020 (IMT-2020) systems are mobile systems that include the new capabilities of IMT that go beyond those of IMT-Advanced.

Recommendation ITU-R M.2083 “IMT Vision – Framework and overall objectives of the future development of IMT for 2020 and beyond” identifies capabilities for IMT‑2020 which would make IMT-2020 more efficient, fast, flexible, and reliable when providing diverse services in the intended usage scenarios.

The usage scenario of IMT-2020 will extend to enhanced mobile broadband (eMBB), massive machine type communications (mMTC) and ultra-reliable and low latency communications (URLLC).

IMT-2020 systems support low to high mobility applications and much enhanced data rates in accordance with user and service demands in multiple user environments. IMT‑2020 also has capabilities for enabling massive connections for a wide range of services, and guarantee ultra‑reliable and low latency communications for future deployed services even in critical environments.

The capabilities of IMT-2020 include:

–                 very high peak data rate;

–                 very high and guaranteed user experienced data rate;

–                 quite low air interface latency;

–                 quite high mobility while providing satisfactory quality of service;

–                 enabling massive connection in very high density scenario;

–                 very high energy efficiency for network and device side;

–                 greatly enhanced spectral efficiency;

–                 significantly larger area traffic capacity;

–                 high spectrum and bandwidth flexibility;

–                 ultra high reliability and good resilience capability;

–                 enhanced security and privacy.

2.  Scope:

These features enable IMT-2020 to address evolving user and industry needs.

The capabilities of IMT-2020 systems are being continuously enhanced in line with user and industry trends, and consistent with technology developments.

This Report provides guidelines for the procedure, the methodology and the criteria (technical, spectrum and service) to be used in evaluating the candidate IMT-2020 radio interface technologies (RITs) or Set of RITs (SRITs) for a number of test environments. These test environments are chosen to simulate closely the more stringent radio operating environments. The evaluation procedure is designed in such a way that the overall performance of the candidate RITs/SRITs may be fairly and equally assessed on a technical basis. It ensures that the overall IMT‑2020 objectives are met.

This Report provides, for proponents, developers of candidate RITs/SRITs and independent evaluation groups, the common evaluation methodology and evaluation configurations to evaluate the candidate RITs/SRITs and system aspects impacting the radio performance.

This Report allows a degree of freedom to encompass new technologies. The actual selection of the candidate RITs/SRITs for IMT-2020 is outside the scope of this Report.

The candidate RITs/SRITs will be assessed based on those evaluation guidelines. If necessary, additional evaluation methodologies may be developed by each independent evaluation group to complement the evaluation guidelines. Any such additional methodology should be shared between independent evaluation groups and sent to the Radiocommunication Bureau as information in the consideration of the evaluation results by ITU-R and for posting under additional information relevant to the independent evaluation group section of the ITU-R IMT-2020 web page (

Evaluation guidelines:

IMT-2020 can be considered from multiple perspectives: users, manufacturers, application developers, network operators, service and content providers, and, finally, the usage scenarios – which are extensive. Therefore, candidate RITs/SRITs for IMT-2020 must be capable of being applied in a much broader variety of usage scenarios and supporting a much broader range of environments, significantly more diverse service capabilities as well as technology options. Consideration of every variation to encompass all situations is, however, not possible; nonetheless the work of the ITU-R has been to determine a representative view of IMT‑2020 consistent with the process defined in Resolution ITU-R 65, Principles for the process of future development of IMT‑2020 and beyond, and the key technical performance requirements defined in Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ] – Minimum requirements related to technical performance for IMT-2020 radio interface(s).

The parameters presented in this Report are for the purpose of consistent definition, specification, and evaluation of the candidate RITs/SRITs for IMT-2020 in ITU-R in conjunction with the development of Recommendations and Reports such as the framework, key characteristics and the detailed specifications of IMT-2020. These parameters have been chosen to be representative of a global view of IMT-2020 but are not intended to be specific to any particular implementation of an IMT-2020 technology. They should not be considered as the values that must be used in any deployment of any IMT-2020 system nor should they be taken as the default values for any other or subsequent study in ITU or elsewhere.

Further consideration has been given in the choice of parameters to balancing the assessment of the technology with the complexity of the simulations while respecting the workload of an evaluator or a technology proponent.

This procedure deals only with evaluating radio interface aspects. It is not intended for evaluating system aspects (including those for satellite system aspects).

The following principles are to be followed when evaluating radio interface technologies for IMT‑2020:

−                 Evaluations of proposals can be through simulation, analytical and inspection procedures.

−                 The evaluation shall be performed based on the submitted technology proposals, and should follow the evaluation guidelines, using the evaluation methodology and the evaluation configurations defined in this Report.

−                 Evaluations through simulations contain both system-level and link-level simulations. Independent evaluation groups may use their own simulation tools for the evaluation.

−                 In case of evaluation through analysis, the evaluation is to be based on calculations which use the technical information provided by the proponent.

−                 In case of evaluation through inspection the evaluation is to be based on statements in the proposal.

The following options are foreseen for proponents and independent external evaluation groups doing the evaluations.

−                 Self-evaluation must be a complete evaluation (to provide a fully complete compliance template) of the technology proposal.

−                 An external evaluation group may perform complete or partial evaluation of one or several technology proposals to assess the compliance of the technologies with the minimum requirements of IMT-2020.

−                 Evaluations covering several technology proposals are encouraged.

Overview of characteristics for evaluation:

The characteristics chosen for evaluation are explained in detail in § 3 of Report ITU-R M.[IMT‑2020.SUBMISSION −Requirements, evaluation criteria and submission templates for the development of IMT‑2020] including service aspect requirements, spectrum aspect requirements, and technical performance requirements, the last of which are based on Report ITU‑R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ]. These are summarized in Table 6-1, together with their high level assessment method:

−                 Simulation (including system-level and link-level simulations, according to the principles of the simulation procedure given in § 7.1 below).

−                 Analytical (via calculation or mathematical analysis).

−                 Inspection (by reviewing the functionality and parameterization of the proposal).


TABLE 6-1 Summary of evaluation methodologies:

Characteristic for evaluation High-level assessment method Evaluation methodology in this Report Related section of Reports
Peak data rate Analytical § 7.2.2 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.1
Peak spectral efficiency Analytical § 7.2.1 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.2
User experienced data rate Analytical for single band and single layer;

Simulation for multi-layer

§ 7.2.3 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.3
5th percentile user spectral efficiency Simulation § 7.1.2 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.4
Average spectral efficiency Simulation § 7.1.1 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.5
Area traffic capacity Analytical § 7.2.4 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.6
User plane latency Analytical § 7.2.6 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.7.1
Control plane latency Analytical § 7.2.5 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.7.2
Connection density Simulation § 7.1.3 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.8
Energy efficiency Inspection § 7.3.2 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.9
Reliability Simulation § 7.1.5 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.10
Mobility Simulation § 7.1.4 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.11
Mobility interruption time Analytical § 7.2.7 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.12
Bandwidth Inspection § 7.3.1 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.TECH PERF REQ], § 4.13
Support of wide range of services Inspection § 7.3.3 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION], § 3.1
Supported spectrum band(s)/range(s) Inspection § 7.3.4 Report ITU-R M.[IMT-2020.SUBMISSION], § 3.2

Section 7 defines the evaluation methodology for assessing each of these criteria.


IMPORTANT NOTE:  The excerpts shown above are not final and subject to change at future ITU-R WP 5D meetings.  The remainder of this draft report is much too detailed for any tech blog.  Note that development of the detailed specs for the RIT/SRIT chosen won’t start till early 2020!




For a glimpse at what ITU-T and 3GPP are doing to standardize the network aspects/core network for IMT 2020 please refer to this post:

New ITU-T Standards for IMT 2020 (5G) + 3GPP Core Network Systems Architecture

Also note that 3GPP’s New Radio spec (3GPP release 15) is ONLY 1 candidate for the IMT 2020 Radio access Interface Technology (RIT).  There are expected to be several others.


Ericsson Files 5G Patent; Teams up with Bharti Airtel on 5G Evolution & Massive MIMO

1.  Ericsson Files End-to-End “5G” Patent Application:

Ericsson has filed what it is calling a “landmark” end-to-end “5G” patent application incorporating numerous inventions from the vendor.

The patent application combines the work of 130 Ericsson inventors and contains the vendor’s complementary suite of 5G innovations.

“[The application] contains everything you need to build a complete 5G network – from devices, the overall network architecture, the nodes in the network, methods and algorithms, but also shows how to connect all this together into one fully functioning network,” Ericsson principal researcher Dr Stefan Parkvall said.

“The inventions in this application will have a huge impact on industry and society: they will provide low latency with high performance and capacity. This will enable new use cases like the Internet of Things, connected factories and self-driving cars,” he added.

Ericsson has filed a worldwide patent with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and a U.S. patent with the U.S. Patents and Trademarks Office (USPTO).



2.  Ericsson & Bharti Airtel “5G” Partnership:

“Ericsson will work with Bharti Airtel on creating a strategic roadmap for evolution of the (wireless) network to the next-gen 5G technology,” Ericsson Senior Vice President and Head of Market Area South East Asia, Oceania and India, Nunzio Mirtillo told reporters in New Delhi, India, according to the Economic Times (see references below).

On Friday November 17th, Ericsson showcased the first live “5G” end-to-end demonstration here using its 5G test bed and 5G New Radio (“NR” specified by 3GPP).

The company already has 36 such MoUs with global telecom operators. Under these agreements, Ericsson is trialing 5G technology and other solutions across verticals with these telcos.

Ericsson had earlier said that timely deployment plan for 3.3-3.6GHz band is crucial for the 5G network rollout in India. The band has already been identified as the primary band for the introduction of 5G services in the country before 2020.

Ericsson India Country Manager Nitin Bansal said, ” Besides telcos, startups, enterprises and academia have to come together to develop 5G use cases in India.”

Mr. Bansal said that Ericsson through its partnership with IIT-Delhi is evaluating 5G use cases around Healthcare, automotive and education verticals.

Earlier this year, Bharti Airtel had inked a similar pact with telecom gear maker Nokia to expand their partnership to areas like 5G technology standard and management of connected devices.  Hence, it remains to be seen if both wireless network equipment vendors will be supplying base stations to Bharti Airtel.

India plans to roll out 5G services for consumers by 2020 and to achieve that objective, the government has this week set up a high-level forum that will evaluate and approve road maps and action plans to bring in the latest technology in the country.


 Operators around the globe gearing up for 5G: Ericsson survey


Recent Posts