In view of the available in each region network infrastructure... What bandwidth solution make the most sense (and why) for the design of network solutions to meet the needs of business voice/data?
It is a difficult question to answer, in view of the challenges faced by each region. The reality may be that there is no easy answer. There is no "one size fits all the" which covers all of these regions at a time. So that everyone must be treated separately and distinctly to have any chance of success.
Some of the factors to be considered likely considered important would include business (e.g., type of business, number of locations in the network) technology (e.g., copper, fibre, terrestrial wireless link) economic (financing, King of implementation, budget), political (e.g. a stable government)(services nationalized, free market encourages entrepreneurship) and regulatory (e.g. the Government restrictions, limitations of international connectivity internal).
For example [...] is a viable based DS3 solution for multisite WAN network in Nigeria? T1 for a single to the Brazil location? Ethernet for campus LAN in Bahrain?
These regions of the world are also commonly called "developing countries", which is generally true of their infrastructure and included communications infrastructure.
Emirates of the Persian Gulf... and to some extent to the Brazil (in the large metro areas) are.... well developed, and you can expect the same telecom services to some extent as in the USA and Europe.
Moreover, the availability is rare and inconsistent.
For this reason for many developing countries are focusing on cellular communications with the intention of "jump" the wired infrastructure development completely. For example the based on direct satellite, such as VSAT service. There is of course the question of the time with this approach which will affect voice and high-l'interactivité, so if the delay is an important factor, you need to consider the use of most (not sure that what becomes of them) or of other satellites to low Earth orbit.
Before digging into the technical aspects for a Middle East or African network infrastructure one should consider the political situation. Most of these countries still have their local telephone companies owned Government. At best, they are a monopoly by the political powers and the local rich people. Once you get the right people, these countries are adopting it more leading and bleeding of advanced technologies. Customers in these areas are more prone to using the "later - & - greatest" essentially for reasons of novelty. Ultimately, it does not matter why clients subscribe as long as the business is!
In Africa, there had been some improvements in submarine terrestrial connectivity, but that doesn't help much to reach specific locations and providing return. In the same way VSAT was the traditional solution in Africa and in other remote regions, but the proliferation of WiMax generates increasing problems of interference. This is compounded by the unpredictable nature of the licences and controls. In my view, that Latin America was very much in General improved access provision but quality and cost is still difficult to predict and manage. Middle East , much investment was and unfolds.... but here the biggest obstacle tends to be regulatory and the absence of a market open for supply.
A true "response" is possible only by a detailed and prospects for telecom study and the availability of existing infrastructure in each region. For this purpose the following factors should be considered;
Technology...
This type of prosecution all depends on the types of services offered (as fixed voice or cellular, leased circuits for WAN, broadband, Triple Play, IPTV, etc.), users (e.g., number of users, individual or corporate, dispersed or concentrated), service coverage and infrastructure of the network backbone available (e.g., OFC network with PDHSDH)(, DWDM or MW via PDH, SDH)... then we might be able to forecast bandwidth backbone, evaluate existing available infrastructure improvement plan if necessary, select technology and estimate investment. In short, the answer is that T1, DS3 and OC3 bandwidth meaning if the infrastructure of the line is readily available for a tie in. Fiber is better logic (ethernet) if the grid is easily available and taken in charge. If any of these are reasonably available in quantities that VSATS will continue as the solution of choice with tie in minimum structure of hard line "nodes" where it is present.
Economic and business....
To prepare a model of business, the factors include need to spending, OPEX, van, and sorting, income based on the ARPU for a particular service, taxes, licence fees, the rate of Inflation, declining ARPU because of competition expectedlast connectivity mile for client corporatifet of contingencies in licenses and approvals and implementation of the project. This category seems to be the most self limiting on any challenge to the technology.
Regulatory / Administrative (political)...
The concerned administrative factors would be different for each region... as monopolistic regime and political situations in Africa and environment partially deregulated in most of the countries of the Middle East ... normally a licence is a delicate task in many countries.
For each of the listed regions (Africa, Middle East, Latin America).... based on your analysis by factors above.... you will find that a realistic solution may be that a hybrid of technologies would be necessary. For example, VSAT can offer a global network and be integrated in terrestrial networks (T1, DS3, OCx, fast ethernet) where feasible and available. Ultimately there is no single solution that corresponds to each scenario... you must be flexible and innovative to target the right solution for each situation on its own merits.
Michael is the owner of FreedomFire Communications... including ds3 - Bandwidth .com. Michael authors also broadband Nation where you are always welcome to decline and catch up on the latest broadband, advice, ideas and discussions for the masses.
No comments:
Post a Comment