Download Regulatory framework and state of play of fibre optic networks in

Broadband Workshop
Facilitating Broadband Investment
French regulatory framework
Bertrand Vandeputte
ARCEP
European Commission – DG INFSO
March 23rd, 2011
General approach on Broadband regulation
 Objectives of regulation



promotion of investments
maintain effective and durable competition
planning
 ARCEP has so far promoted facility-based competition



in accord with the ladder of investments
on Broadband, with the regulation of Local Loop Unbundling…
… and now on NGA
 Regulation framework through obligations applying to operators


either in a asymmetrical way (regulation of the existing copper network)…
… or a symmetrical way (regulation of the rolls out of the new FttH networks)
 Regulation aims to reduce investment costs :



especially when roll out of a new network
access to existing infrastructures so as not to replicate
promote sharing of investments / risks
Investment of public sector : intervention of local authorities
 France has a five-year long experience of public intervention in the electronic
communications market.
 Since mid-2004, local authorities have been given a new and optional
competence to intervene in the electronic communications market as a local
public service.
 In respect of equality and of free competition on EC market, local authorities
can on their territories :




roll out passive infrastructures / networks
roll out and operate EC networks
become wholesale market players
operate on the retail market when there is a local lack of « adequate private initiatives to
meet the need of final users »
 So far, on the 85 biggest projects of local authorities notified to ARCEP :


more than 2,7 billions Euros, of which 60% of public fund
essentially on broadband : backhaul networks and areas without DSL access
Implementation of regulation : 3 case studies
 Local loop unbundling
 Roll out of FttH network
 Access to subloop
1st example : regulation of Local loop unbundling (1/2)
 Unbundled access to the copper local loop of France Télécom



passive offer
enables innovation & differentiation by alternative operators (TV on DSL / triple play)
grants sustainable competition on broadband
 Regulatory framework put in place by ARCEP : promotion of LLU


obligations imposed to France Télécom
bitstream (activated wholesale offer) as a transitory complement
 Investment needed for LLU : optical fiber backhaul


so as alternative operators can connect their equipments installed in unbundled MDF to
their own backbone networks
importance of alternative backhaul networks : for broadband today… and for NGA in the
future
1st example : regulation of Local loop unbundling (2/2)
 Action of local authorities has been determinant for LLU :


public investment, through optical backhaul networks rolled out by local authorities
40% of MDF / Local Exchanges made available to LLU (more than 2M households +
acceleration of private investment)
 Measures are taken to facilitate the action of local authorities :


Possibility for local authorities to gather data on existing networks…
… so that they can invest where it is needed, without replicating existing infrastructures
via FT’s FO offer
via public initiative networks
Extension of LLU coverage
2nd example : regulation of NGA (1/2)
 FttH = fiber to the home



Roll out of a new local loop
New round of important investments (25 to 30 billions Euros)
Initiated by alternative operators in very dense areas
 Two complementary tools
 Access to France Telecom’s civil engineering (asymmetric regulation)


limit the costs of FttH rolls out
level-playing fields for the access to ducts and poles
 Access and co-investment on the terminal part (symmetric regulation)





facilitate the deployment in private domains ;
reduce the risk of a local monopoly through sharing the terminal part ;
lower deployment costs through mutualisation and co-investment schemes ;
improve competition in very dense areas through multi-fibre deployments ;
ensure consistent coverage in less dense areas.
2nd example : regulation of NGA (2/2)
 Objective of NGA regulatory
framework implemented by ARCEP:


to provide an incentive to investment
and fibre deployments…
…. and at the same time to protect
and improve competition.
 alternative operators are using
France Telecom’s ducts offer, with
noticeable rollouts in over fifty cities
 Local authorities will take part in
this new round of investments :


measures taken by the government to
promote fiber rolls out and enable
public investments (Plan National
THD)
tools at the disposal of local
authorities : to collect data
8
3rd : Access to subloop (1/2)
 Genera demand for more bandwidth


by end users, local authorities
current DSL technologies : limited by the length of the copper pair
 FttH is the sustainable solution for more bandwidth (100M symmetrical)

…but fiber rolls won’t occur everywhere at short- or mid-term
 Access to the copper subloop = interesting solution

shorten the length of the copper pair => bandwidth till 20M or even 40M (VDSL2)
 Implementation of access to the subloop suppose to modify the topology of
the local loop…

when it is implemented, all DSL access have to be activated at the level of the street
cabinet
 … which could jeopardize investments made by alternative operators for LLU at
the level of the MDF
3rd : Access to subloop (2/2)
 Planning must not been done to the detriment of competition :

only LLU can locally grant effective competition
 ARCEP’s approach :


enable local authorities to ask for the implementation of access to the subloop
grant that this implementation has no effect on LLU
 Framework under public consultation :


through market analysis decision : obligations imposed to France Télécom
should be adopted at the end of Spring
Conclusion
 ARCEP has implemented a framework on Broadband :


that promotes competition…
… letting local authorities planning rolls out on their territories
 Articulation between backhaul and access :


Backhaul is necessary to enable competition in remote areas
Access through either LLU, FttH or access to the subloop
 Local authorities are given the tools to have a coherent approach on their
territories :


data gathering
public investments where needed