As the global network infrastructure is tasked with maintaining pace with voracious bandwidth demands that continue to rise exponentially, fiber optic wireline networks are often looked at as the silver bullet that can keep up with ever-changing end-user behavior. These thin strands of glass, which are thinner than a tenth of a single strand human hair, have proven to have essentially no capacity limit, and as the President of The Fiber Optic Association put it, have become “the backbone of communications networks such as telecom, the internet, local area networks, cable television and more.”
Given the forecast tolerance benefit that seems almost too good to be true, combined with other characteristics such as powerful security and the lowest cost per bit when compared to other communications media, it would seem logical that fiber would be a go-to communication channel in every case. The truth is, in some situations, optical fiber is not the best choice for the job – or simply not an option at all.
Why fiber is not always a slam dunk
One hinderance to the widespread adoption of fiber is the cost of new infrastructure requirements, which is a huge capital expenditure that makes many stakeholders look for viable alternatives. It can be hard to convince those with purchasing power that fiber is a feasible choice, particularly when customers are still being served by network infrastructures already in place.
Wireless is also necessary for scenarios where demanding landscapes – whether it’s physical limitations in the form of unobtainable rights of way, obstacles like mountain ranges or dense urban centers or political obstacles such as regulatory requirements – challenge the many benefits of fiber. Wireless can be the best option in some of these cases, as it transfers data through RF/microwave signals, thereby negating the need to physically install fibers and conduits in busy, dense metropolitan centers. This does come at a bandwidth cost, however, as wireless simply cannot scale to fiber optic network capacities.
Fiber where you can, wireless where you must
We’ve all heard the promises of 5G networks – up to 10x lower latency, 100x more connected devices and 100x higher user data rates. 5G networks will not only mean you can download your favorite movie faster, but will lead to advances in a range of industries – from robotics in the healthcare space to self-driving cars taking over transportation.
This does not mean, however, that 4G networks will be abandoned. The transition will take a long time; consumers who pay attention to the 2G, 3G, and 4G network indicator icon on their smartphone know that mobile networks of varying generations are still in use today in most parts of the world based on the geographic coverage of your carrier. As explained by Jason Compton of CenturyLink, “You might not have to choose one technology over the other. Fiber networks will increasingly be used as backhaul for 5G to communicate among wireless base sites. The expansion of high-speed fixed and wireless networks could be a rising tide that benefits everyone with a stake in the digital business world.”
Two methods are better than one
When Compton talks about backhauls, he is referring to the process of connecting cell site air interfaces to wireline networks, which are subsequently connected to data centers that host content and applications accessed by mobile users—both human and machine. As mobile end-user bandwidth demands continue to increase, so will the need to scale the packet-optical wireline networks connecting cell sites to each other and to data centers. 5G is far more than a wireless upgrade; operators know this fact and are already planning accordingly.
Being flexible is an absolute must as fiber will not always be an option. The decision to use fiber optic or wireless technology for a given network segment will ultimately come down to rights of way, required capacity, and of course, cost.
