Mobile Data Growth Boosting Backhaul Demand

19 thoughts on “Mobile Data Growth Boosting Backhaul Demand”

  1. I wish I had a dime for every metro WAN startup that came knocking on the cell companies doors for the last 10 years, and got turned away, “..what the hell we need 100MBPS for, go away!”. Many of the smaller regional and competitive alternative metro and tertiary RF data companies came and went and failed. They were too early.

    Now, new players and some of the established incumbents will be pulling SONET to the tower.

  2. Not entirely sure that the G1 is a superphone 😉 but it certainly does have one of the nicer browsers in the industry. Might be closer to being a superphone with baked in exchange support and more cpu….

  3. For those who are unfamiliar:

    Many cell sites atop towers or buildings are owned by companies other than the cell carriers. Many of these sites operated by American Tower and others have had metro WAN switches with multiple competitive carriers offering all types of backhaul at many speeds and proces – often premium prices.

    Just because AT&T may be choked in this our era of 3G, does not mean that at every metropolitan cell site they did not have choices. In some cases, they chose not use 3rd party metro WANs, terrestrial microwave, or what have you, for their more ILEC friendly and cheaper T_carrier systems – synchronous and inflexible point to point links.

    Price drives the wagon in the remote data carriage business. This is why some of the off-brand carriers seem to have better lower latency 3g connections; they had no incumbent T Carrier and had to avail themselves of the more expensive and lower latency Metropolitan WAN providers.

  4. It seems like using microwave backhaul for this sort of thing is quite a waste of spectrum, particularly in urban environments. It is certainly not the highest, best use of that precious resource.

    1. Most (as in “almost all”) microwave for backhaul uses point-to-point licenses, which allow for a tremendous amount of spectrum reuse, and operate at frequencies which require line of sight and really aren’t suitable for other uses. So it’s not really a scarce resource.

    2. What would be a better use? As DG Lewis points out, this is PTP appropriate spectrum; backhual is its intended purpose. This stuff cannot be repurposed as air interface for your mobile device, unless you want a meter-long antenna on your iPhone. Meanwhile, since these are highly directional PTP links, they are not interferring with the same spectrum being reused many times over for other applications, including in-building cable replacement use (which doesn’t really even exist yet).

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.