Contents

03. Authors

04. Summary

05. Introduction

06. Last-mile fiber as an efficient 5G enabler

09. Proposed planning solution

11. Use case: Converged backhaul & access planning

14. Conclusion

15. Appendices

16. Sources

17. Abouts

2
Authors

Jonas Verstuyft
Fiber Product Manager - Comsof

Yoann Corre
Head of wireless research - Siradel
Senior researcher in radio-wave propagation,
wireless network simulation and design

Aymen Jaziri
Research engineer - Siradel
PhD in radio communications and expert in the
design of 5G network physical infrastructure

3
 FTTH

FTT5G

Summary

Despite their investments in the 4G infrastructure, wireless operators are

struggling to generate revenues in order to achieve the necessary ROI.

With the introduction of 5G technology, additional infrastructure

investments are required and wireless operators need to streamline their
CAPEX.

Sharing infrastructure, such as between FTTH and 5G, is the perfect way to
reach this objective.

Combined within an automated planning solution to create optimized

and future proof networks, this White Paper gives the keys to generate
up to 22% cost savings, by sharing network infrastructure.

4
Introduction
5G, the fifth generation of mobile technology, will reshape the world. Its high speeds, low latency
and massive machine type communication capabilities will make services such as smart cities and
buildings, virtual reality, e-health, self-driving cars and many others a reality.

Enhanced Broadband (eMBB)

Gigabytes in a
second Highest critical
fronthaul requirements
3D Video
CCTV

Gaming

Smart Home
Augmented Reality

Automated
Smart City Industry

Self-driving
cars

Massive Machine Type Ultra-Reliable and Low-Latency

Communications (MTC) Communications (URLLC)

Fig. 1: 5G usage scenarios

However, deploying a 5G network can be very costly without the right roll-out strategy. In this
paper, we first discuss why fiber and 5G are the perfect match for being deployed simultaneously.
That is true from a cost perspective, in particular when sharing a same infrastructure for both fixed
and mobile services, but also from a technical angle.

Indeed the RAN (Radio Access Network) optimization is tightly linked to the achievable fiber
performance. Best 5G performance (higher throughputs, lower call drops, etc.) relies on a stronger
coordination between cells. It cannot be delivered without an appropriate designed last-mile fiber
transport, due to huge capacity, high speed, strong reliability, low latency and jitter that are required
between the remote radio heads (RRH) and centralized functionalities. The RAN architecture and
the last-mile transport must obviously be considered together.

In the second part of this paper, we dive into the details of our converged design solution, and
discuss a specific fiber-5G roll-out scenario.

5
 Last-mile fiber
as an efficient 5G enabler

A densified network A centralized network

A 5G network will process much more data than its
predecessor 4G, with data rates of up to 10 Gbps and
capacity up to 10 Tbps/km².
In order to boost speed and capacity, the 5G radio
access benefits from larger spectrum and increased
spectral efficiency. But also a significant cell site
densification will be needed, in particular with small
cells deployed at street level.
In a traditional radio access network (RAN), every cell
site has its own baseband unit (BBU), which processes
user and control data. However, providing every cell
site in a dense 5G network with its own BBU is costly,
inefficient and complex to manage.
This is why a centralized RAN architecture is proposed
for advanced 4G networks, and the flexible cloud
RAN (C-RAN) approach is introduced for 5G.

This densified network needs scalable, strong and
future-proof transport, able to handle growing
bandwidth for decades to come.
Fiber is the recommended solution
compared to microwave links to
address 5G aggressive targets,
thanks to its large capacity, low
latency, high reliability, long lifespan,
and sharing capability.
In the fully centralized case, all BBUs from the same
area are relocated from their individual cell site to a
central point, i.e. the BBU pool. They are separated
from the remote radio head (RRH), which is still at
cell site level. Such topology allows for better spectral
efficiency (due to inter-cell coordination), better
energy efficiency, tight coordination, better energy
efficiency, lower OPEX, and facilitated virtualization,
but at the price of stringent requirements for the
connection between RRH’s and the BBU pool
(fronthaul).

RRH
Fronthaul / CPRI

BBU pool
L3 Backhaul
L2 low L2 5G core
L1 L1

L3
L2 high
L2 low
L1

L2 low
L1

Fig. 2: Simplified Overview of the 5G Could-RAN architecture

6
Those requirements are relaxed with the 5G cloud
RAN architecture, where a subset of the Phy/Link/
Network-layer functionalities reside in the RRH
(“functional split”) [1] [2].
The “fronthaul“ must provide bandwidths up to
several 10’s of Gbps depending on the access
network topology, MIMO dimension, and decided
functional split.
To cope with these speeds, combined with low
latency requirements, a fiber optic connection
is recommended. The RRH and BBU devices
communicate using digital baseband interfaces such
as the Common Public Radio Interface (CPRI) protocol
or the enhanced CPRI (eCPRI) compliant with 5G
flexibility. The last specified CPRI data rate (Rate 10)
reaches 24.3 Gbps, and will likely grow in the future.
A low latency network
Edge computing is just about the opposite of
cloud computing. It is a technology which brings
computation, data storage and services closer to the
location where it is actually needed. This improves
response time and saves bandwidth. Edge computing
is one of the major upsides of 5G, and will allow
technologies such as Vehicle to Everything and
industrial automation. Needless to say lightspeed
broadband and low latency are crucial to make this
a reality.
A converged network
Based on these arguments, we can conclude that
fiber and 5G go hand in hand. And let us go even
one step further, not any fiber topology, but fiber-to-
the-home (FTTH) is the only real future-proof choice
to answer the highest 5G transport requirements,
due to its benefits in terms of speed, reliability,
security and economic development. In addition,
an FTTH has many similarities with a 5G network.
Still, many operators have a “traditional” workflow,
where fixed and mobile networks are being planned
and deployed separately. The authors (Comsof
and Siradel) encourage operators to combine their
efforts, towards a converged network, since we
believe there are many upsides to this strategy.
First and foremost, the total
CAPEX and OPEX of deploying and
maintaining this converged fixed
and mobile network is significantly
reduced.
7
Last year, Comsof and Siradel carried out a study that
was commissioned by the FTTH Council Europe.
After analyzing a variety of scenarios
(from dense urban to rural), we
found that if an FTT-5G network is
anticipated while planning for an
FTTH network, the range of cost
savings for the 5G fronthaul due to
convergence can reach between 65%
and 96%.
In other words, the extra investment on top of an
FTTH network to make it 5G ready is in a range of
3% to 7%. The main reason why extra costs are so
low, is that civil works such as trenching – which is
the major cost driver – just need to happen once. See
more details in [3] [4].
Planning challenges
This all looks promising. However combining several
technologies and requirements into one network
makes the planning stage much more complex. For
example, in a classic FTTH architecture, a GPON
topology is commonly used. In a converged network,
a P2P front- or backhaul will need to be integrated.
Also redundant connections (rings) will be crucial.
In addition, the many differences between areas
and their characteristics need to be considered.
Deployment in dense areas requires a different
approach than rural, or even suburban areas.
Infrastructure sharing is particularly important in the
latter as there are less dwellings and businesses to
connect, putting strain on the business case. On the
other hand, deployment in dense areas is challenging
since its underground might be saturated, and aerial
deployment should be considered.

In addition, saving on deployment costs means more

Let us present a software solution for converged
resources are disposable to enhance coverage in ar-
network planning in the remaining of the paper. As a
eas which might be less interesting to deploy, such
demonstration, a converged network in a mix dense-
as rural communities. This boosts penetration and
urban and in an urban brownfield area, is calculated
makes it more difficult for competition to enter your
and optimally designed.
market.

A converged network also goes much broader than

just fiber and 5G. It is about combining several tech-
nologies to offer as many services and clients as
possible (FTTH, FTTB, FTTA, Wi-Fi access points,
backhauling and fronthauling possibilities). This is the
added value of a fiber optic network, it serves many
purposes, while lasting for decades.

8
 Proposed planning solution
We can divide the classic procedure for the design At best, the RAN engineers do associate
of the access (antennas) and transport (backhaul/ different priorities or costs to respectively the
fronthaul) layers for a cellular network in two fiber-connected and the non-connected sites.
successive steps:
In this whitepaper, we reproduce the classic approach
1. Radio planning: selection and configuration of
by first letting the RAN team use the Siradel
the base stations (or antennas) to achieve the target
S_5GConnect tool to optimize the 5G antenna
access coverage, throughputs and capacity [5].
locations. Secondly the transport team uses
2. Definition of the optimal transport layer to connect the Comsof Fiber tool for fiber optic transport
the selected antennas and provide the required deployment. RAN outcomes, i.e. position and cost of
capacity. the antennas, are delivered to the transport team, but
without feedback loop.
Each segment of this network infrastructure is
designed by a specialized team (RAN vs. transport We compare this classic approach to the proposed
teams) and a devoted procedure and planning tool. “converged” solution, where teams are merged,
and the design procedure benefit from automated
The cost of each segment deployment is optimally interactions between the tools. The cost of the
minimized, but in two separate stages. In this overall infrastructure is calculated at every step of the
classic or sequential procedure, the radio-planning design optimization via a software interface between
cannot precisely consider the transport deployment S_5GConnect and Comsof Fiber.
constraints, opportunities and costs. It is therefore
impossible to decide the antenna positions that
would lead to an overall cost minimization.

9
A unique optimization process considers the targets,
costs and constraints of the wireless and fiber
segments. It iteratively relies on wireless and fiber
simulations, and concludes with a single report that
embeds all infrastructure details and costs.
The target is to achieve the required 5G millimeter-
wave coverage at street level, with minimal
investment.

Both methods are demonstrated and compared in the

next chapter, with RAN engineers (from Siradel) and
transport engineers (from Comsof) working, either
separately, or together as if they were belonging to a
converged 5G planning team.

Classic Converged

RAN S_5GConnect
S_5GConnect

VS.
Comsof Fiber
Transport Comsof Fiber

Fig. 3: Comparison between two approaches, classic and sequential vs. converged

10
 Use case: Converged backhaul
& access planning
In this fictional case, a mobile operator plans to deploy
a dense network for high-broadband connectivity in
the streets of downtown San Francisco. These are our
assumptions:
• The millimeter-wave small-cell antennas are
planned to be installed on lampposts at 10 meters
(33 feet) above the ground. They must provide
80% high data-rate coverage within the streets.
We are assuming a greenfield scenario, which
means there are no existing operational antennas
at the beginning of the presented design exercise.
Fig. 4: Deployment environment
• The fronthaul from the antennas to the local PoP
(fiber Point of Presence) will be pure optical fiber
infrastructure. The fiber deployment is considered
as brownfield, i.e. there is a pre-existing FTTH
service in the study area, which is not sufficient
to feed a dense and uniform small-cell network.
The study area has two different environments: dense
urban (1.6 km² or 0.6 sq mi) and medium urban (4.0
km² or 1.5 sq mi), as shown in Fig. 5. We identified
more than 4,000 lampposts, which are candidates for
installation of the 5G small-cell antennas.
Fig. 5: Antenna site candidates
(lampposts)
11
Main parameters of the wireless network and the
existing FTTH network are reported in respectively
Table 1 and Table 2 (see appendices). The bill of
materials for civil works, cables and antennas, as
given in Table 3 (see appendices), is used to evaluate
the infrastructure cost.
The network design objectives are as follows:
• To reach a target of 80% in-street coverage for
high data-rate connectivity (120 Mbps peak)
with margin given in Table 4 (see appendices).
We compare the output of the converged and the
classic network design procedure, based on a realistic
5G millimeter-wave small-cell scenario. After testing
different configurations, we are able to consolidate
the cost saving conclusion, and avoid being affected
by some particularities in the brownfield fiber
deployment (e.g. an existing FTTH network passing
far away from the most favorable antenna candidates,
or the opposite).

• To minimize the overall infrastructure cost.

Fiber access point

Central office

Selected antenna

FTTH
Exisng pipe
FTT5G

SNR
66dB

Fiber access point

Central office

FTTH
Exisng pipe 10dB

Fig. 6(a): Existing FTTH network in one the Fig. 6(b): Resulting FTTH and FTT-5G
tested configuration network coverage (SNR map)

Table 5: Results summary (k$)

Sequential Converged Gain

(76 antennas) (83 antennas)
Antennas
Antennas 380 415
Civil work
Civil work 348 170
Feeder
Feeder 291 249

TOTAL
TOTAL 1019k$ 834k$ 185k$ (22%)

12
We can see that the number of selected antennas About 185k$ is saved for the deployment of a small-
in the classic approach (76) is lower than in the cell network in a 5.6 km² (2.2 sq mi) urban area: 33k$/
converged approach (83). However, Table 5 details km² (86 k$/sq mi).
the bill of materials for all considered scenarios, and
interestingly reveals... This means that the installation of 9% of additional
antennas can be well compensated by the
determination of a cheaper cable infrastructure.
...an average cost saving of 22%
for the converged scenario (extra
antennas costs included).

13
Conclusion

After discussing the San Francisco case, we can conclude significant cost
savings will be made when a converged fiber-5G network is planned. In
the presented particular test scenario, We attained an average saving of
22% (from 19% to 26% in the various tested configurations).

As we presented, creating complex network designs such as the above,

is not an easy task. However it is the first essential step. Many factors
need to be taken into account to come up with an optimized plan, which
is buildable and can cope with future challenges.

Therefore we recommend using automated solutions for the network

planning, as manual designs will take too long, and are extremely error-
prone in this vital first stage.

14
 Appendices

Table 1: Wireless network parameters Table 3: Fiber and

wireless network costs
Carrier frequency 28 GHz
Bandwidth 100 MHz Trench 40 $/m, 12.2 $/ft

SC transmit power 30 dBm (1 Watt) Crossing 50 $/m, 15.2 $/ft

SC antenna Beamforming, 20 dBi Manhole 1000 $

SC antenna height 10 m, 32.8 ft Duct 2.75 $/m, 0.8 $/ft

UE antenna Beamforming, 9 dBi Small-cell 5000 $

UE height 1.5 m, 4.9 ft Feeder cable 12F 1.78 $/m, 0.5 $/ft

UE noise floor -94 dBm

UE Rx sensitivity -86 dBm
@1.91bps/Hz
Table 4: Wireless network simulation

Propagation model Volcano ray-tracing

Table 2: Existing FTTH fiber

Shadowing margin 10 dB (90% cell-edge probability
& 7 dB standard-deviation)

Total street length 227 km, 141 mi

Pipes 27.5 km, 17.1 mi
Cables 13.8 km, 8.6 mi
#Fiber access points 31
#Central offices 1

15
Sources
[1] Fujitsu & Heavy Reading, Evolving to an Open C-RAN architecture for 5G
Available at https://www.fujitsu.com/us/Images/FNC-Fujitsu-Evolving-to-an-Open-C-RAN-Architecture-for-5G-
White-Paper.pdf

[2] Beyond CPRI: Planning for 5G

By P. Sterling, available at https://www.lightreading.com/mobile/fronthaul-c-ran/beyond-cpri-planning-for-5g-
fronthaul/a/d-id/734002

[3] 5G and FTTH: the Value of Convergence

By R. Meersman (Comsof), European FTTH conference, Amsterdam, 2019, available at https://www.ftthcoun-
cil.eu/documents/COM-190313-FibreFor5G-ConvergenceStudy-Presentation-RafMeersman%20-%20v4%20
-%20publish.pdf

[4] Comsof and SIRADEL partner to facilitate 5G small cells deployments

Available at https://comsof.com/fiber/blog/comsof-and-siradel-partner-to-facilitate-5g-small-cells-deployments/

[5] Small-Cell Wireless Backhaul and Access Networks: Realistic Modeling and Holistic Analysis
By F. Letourneux (Siradel), EuCAP 2016, Davos, Switzerland, April 2016.

16
Abouts

With over 20 years of experience and development, Comsof Fiber is the reference in automated
FTTx planning and design solutions.
Automated software which can create buildable designs is the crucial differentiator for a
successful planning and design process of large scale fiber optic networks. Today Comsof Fiber
is used in over 80 countries by more than 200 clients.
Its success is based on its quality and flexibility, and ability to deliver constructible designs.

More: https://comsof.com/ - Linked in - Twitter

SIRADEL
Siradel provides advanced 3D geodata products and 3D simulation/planning software for the
design of any wireless network including 5G, FWA, small cell, mmWave, backhaul, LPWA and
WiFi networks.
Siradel, an Engie group subsidiary, has enabled operators and network planners to accurately
design and cost-effectively deploy wireless networks in more than 70 countries.
Siradel’s wireless solutions are available independently or as part of its Smart City Explorer
platform, a collaborative and secure big data platform with visualization/simulation capabilities
on 3D digital twins of cities for smarter network infrastructure/urban transformation projects
including wireless connectivity, public lighting, CCTV, risk management, energy performances,
traffic management and more.

More: https://www.siradel.com/ - Linked in - Twitter

17