Telecommunications Infrastructure Archives - Page 3 of 45

Last week, izzi, Mexico’s largest cable operator, announced that it was deploying Harmonic’s cOS virtualized broadband platform alongside its Pearl Remote Optical Line Termination (R-OLT) modules and Pearl outdoor node enclosures to extend its fiber network. The announcement is noteworthy because it is further evidence of the region’s cable operators continuing a wholesale shift away from DOCSIS and HFC to fiber. But it is also noteworthy in that it signals a shift towards more flexible R-OLT platforms as the fiber foundation for both cable operators and telcos in the region. Latin America is experiencing a fiber overbuild cycle that, in many markets, is more aggressive than anything North American cable operators have faced. Lower labor costs across the region have made greenfield fiber construction economically viable for a wide range of players — telcos, utilities, and new entrant ISPs — reshaping competitive dynamics almost city by city.

The specific benefits of R-OLTs are well matched to what izzi and other telco and cable operators in the region need to execute a large-scale fiber migration efficiently and competitively:

Reduced fiber feeder costs. Traditional centralized OLT deployments require operators to run long fiber feeder routes from a headend or hub site out to the access network. R-OLT platforms eliminate much of that feeder infrastructure by pushing the OLT function out to the node, dramatically shortening the fiber runs required to reach subscribers. In a market where izzi is deploying across a large and geographically diverse service territory, that reduction in feeder fiber translates directly into lower capital expenditure per home passed. Just as important as reduced capex is the faster time-to-market that an R-OLT architecture can provide.
Ability to leverage existing node infrastructure. One of the most underappreciated advantages of R-OLT platforms for cable operators is the ability to reuse what they already own. Izzi has an established outside plant with node locations distributed across its footprint — real estate, conduit, power feeds, and field infrastructure that took years and significant capital to build. Being able to drop into those existing locations rather than requiring new facility construction to keep overall deployment costs down and to get to market faster.
Right-sized port density and scalability. R-OLT modules are built for high PON port density within a compact form factor, which matters significantly when you’re trying to maximize the number of subscribers serviceable from a single field location. Higher port density means fewer node sites required to cover a given subscriber footprint, fewer truck rolls per unit of coverage, and a more scalable architecture as izzi expands its fiber deployment over time. It also provides a cleaner path to adding capacity incrementally as subscriber uptake grows, rather than requiring operators to over-provision upfront
Power and space savings. Traditional OLT cabinet deployments carry substantial power and space requirements — challenges that become acute when you’re trying to deploy at scale across a distributed field network rather than in a controlled headend environment. Optical node housings are designed for outdoor deployment with power consumption and thermal management designed for the field, not the headend. For izzi, those savings compound across hundreds of node sites over the course of a multi-year rollout, with meaningful implications for both capital and operating expenditures.

The Remote OLT Trend in Latin America

izzi’s decision is not happening in isolation. R-OLT as an architecture is gaining traction across Latin America largely because it aligns well with the region’s deployment realities. Unlike central office OLT deployments that require operators to run long fiber runs from a headend or hub site out to the field, a R-OLT pushes the OLT function closer to subscribers — reducing fiber costs, improving latency, and allowing operators to expand incrementally without massive upfront infrastructure investment.

The broader point is that Latin American cable operators looking at fiber migration are increasingly finding that R-OLTs strike a favorable balance of deployment cost, operational simplicity, and competitive positioning. The architecture doesn’t require operators to choose between upgrading their HFC plant and building fiber — it gives them a fiber-first path that can be executed in parallel with or as a replacement for legacy infrastructure, depending on the specific competitive and financial dynamics of a given market.

Harmonic certainly isn’t the only R-OLT supplier benefiting from this trend. Huawei and ZTE both have node-based OLT platforms they have been shipping into the CALA market for some time. Calix and Vecima have also found some traction for node-based OLT platforms in the region.

ONT Flexibility Just as Critical

One detail in the announcement that deserves more attention than it typically gets: izzi’s deployment integrates third-party ONTs through Harmonic’s Open ONT strategy. This is not a trivial design choice. CPE procurement is one of the larger ongoing cost variables in a multi-year fiber deployment, and vendor lock-in on ONTs has historically been a significant source of margin erosion for operators. By explicitly engineering an open ONT architecture into the deployment, izzi retains the flexibility to source CPE competitively as the deployment scales, rather than being captive to a single supplier’s pricing and roadmap.

For operators in Latin America where broadband ARPU is often significantly lower than in North American markets, total cost of ownership discipline in CPE is a necessity. It can be argued that ONT costs are a significant reason why Huawei, ZTE, Fiberhome, Humax, and Skyworth have found success in the region. Offering operators low-cost GPON ONTs has helped reduce the success-based capex budgets for operators in Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and Uruguay, among others. For izzi, being able to mix-and-match ONTs will give them pricing leverage as they look to expand their fiber homes passed and connected.

Whenever OpenVault releases its quarterly OVBI (OpenVault Broadband Insights), there is always a lot of fascinating data regarding broadband usage to digest. The Q4 report is no different. In fact, the most recent iteration is the first one to provide an apples-to-apples comparison of upstream data consumption on DOCSIS and FTTH networks, quantifying one of the biggest gaps the industry has understood for some time.

According to the report, which is a sampling of usage metrics from across a select number of ISPs, FTTH subscribers provisioned at symmetrical speeds averaging 677 Mbps consumed 93.0 GB of upstream bandwidth in Q4 2025. Their DOCSIS counterparts at the same operator — provisioned at a much lower 17.3 Mbps upstream on average — consumed just 56.0 GB. That’s a 66% difference in upstream consumption. That gap isn’t driven by different subscribers with different habits. It’s the same operator, serving roughly the same markets. The only meaningful variable is how much upstream capacity each subscriber was given.

The implication, of course, is twofold: The first is that, given additional upstream bandwidth, subscribers will definitely use it and likely appreciate it; the second is that mid-split, high-split, and spectrum expansion efforts for DOCSIS networks can’t come soon enough.

The vast majority of cable operators are already well underway with both mid- and high-split upgrades, pushing their available upstream spectrum from 5-42 MHz to 85-204 MHz, which translates into upstream speed tiers moving from an average of 20 Mbps to 100 Mbps-200 Mbps. This is certainly an improvement and gets them into the conversation with comparable FTTH speed tiers.

One factor to keep in mind when parsing this data is that the OVBI notes that most FTTH subscribers are provisioned at the mid-range tiers of either 200-400 Mbps or 500-900 Mbps, rather than at the 1 Gbps tier. Meanwhile, roughly 34% of DOCSIS subscribers are provisioned at the 1 Gbps tier. The difference is due to the fact that, since they are offered symmetric services, FTTH subscribers don’t have to move up to faster downstream packages in order to access higher upstream speeds. On the other hand, for DOCSIS customers to access improved upstream speeds, they must move to the 1 Gbps downstream tiers, which typically offer upstream speeds of 100-200 Mbps.

What ultimately makes the FTTH vs. DOCSIS comparison so consequential is the broader upstream growth trend it sits on top of. According to the report, full-year 2025 upstream usage averaged 55.86 GB across fiber and DOCSIS platforms — a 21.7% year-over-year increase, and a 16.4% jump just from Q3 to Q4 alone. To put that in perspective, the quarter-over-quarter jump in upstream usage is nearly as large as the annual gains from just a couple years ago.

This isn’t a new trend, by any stretch. It is more of a continuation of a trend that was first seen during the pandemic, when residential broadband consumption—both upstream and downstream—skyrocketed. As students have returned to school and employees have returned to the office, the average growth in downstream consumption has moderated and stayed relatively modest. Upstream consumption, however, has continued to surge, with average annual growth rates ranging from 17-22% since 2022.

For cable operators, specifically, this sustained growth in upstream traffic accelerates the timeline for band-split upgrades in the short-term, followed by overall spectrum expansion in the medium term. Most cable operators have been managing upstream utilization rates on the assumption that demand growth was going to moderate, just as it has on the downstream side. Compounding things is the fact that, when comparing with FTTH, the report suggests that opening up more upstream spectrum won’t result in a gradual increase in upstream utilization; it will instead result in a fairly quick acceleration as the latent subscriber demand demonstrates. This is already evidenced by the fact that upstream usage on DOCSIS 3.1 networks is easily double what it is on DOCSIS 3.0 networks. Once again, if the bandwidth is available, subscribers will find a way to maximize it.

For cable operators, many of which are now seeing consistent quarterly broadband subscriber losses, whether the asymmetric design of their DOCSIS networks has truly become a weakness has to be one of the many questions they are asking themselves. Of course, with a large percentage of subscribers leaving for lower-cost FWA services, asymmetry takes a back seat to more immediate concerns around service bundling and pricing.

But when their DOCSIS subscriber base generates 66% less upstream traffic than FTTH subscribers, there has to be genuine concern that upstream constraints are pushing subscribers into the arms of fiber overbuilders offering symmetric speeds.

5G Standalone network rollouts have reached a critical mass in market maturity with high population coverage in 40 countries, seeding the market for more subscribers to jump on the 5G Standalone networks, experiencing higher downlink and uplink speeds, and inherently lower latency provided by 5G SA, fueling the 5G MCN market.

The total MCN market low point in revenue was 2024, and the market is projected to reach a historic high in 2026, since the beginning of the 5G era in 2020. Besides more subscribers migrating to 5G SA networks, new applications are becoming more scalable with the advent of Common Network Programmable APIs. Enterprise applications are expected to rise, fueling demand for more MCN capacity, especially at the edge on enterprise premises.

Another factor that will boost growth is the growing use of agentic AI. As agents work in the background on behalf of subscribers 24/7, the demand for more MCN capacity will increase.

In addition, the Voice MCN market will reach new revenue highs in 2026. The low point for the Voice MCN market was 2023. Feeding the trend to higher revenues are more networks migrating from Circuit Switched Core to IMS Core. These are primarily located in countries where MNOs are modernizing their Voice Core in their 4G LTE networks. Recently, we have seen upgrades to 5G VoNR (Voice over New Radio), which utilize the IMS Core and a new generation of Cloud-Native IMS Cores, providing a more scalable and flexible network to support new services. Enhanced immersive and interactive voice calls are enabled in 5G VoNR networks, and the introduction of the IMS Data Channel will provide competitive features to over-the-top applications, utilizing the smartphone’s native dialer.

Even though the 4G MCN market will decline as more subscribers migrate to 5G SA, the rate of decline is decreasing, driven by subscriber growth in countries that do not yet have 5G SA. Some MNOs are sunsetting their 3G MCNs, which increases demand for 4G MCN capacity.

In summary, we expect continued revenue growth in MCNs in 2026 as more 5G SA networks come on line as more subscribers are added to existing 5G SA networks, the rise of more enterprise applications utilizing Common Network APIs, the growing use of Agentic AI, enhanced immersive and interactive calling for the Voice networks, and 4G network decline in growth rates are adding up to an all-time high in MCN revenues in 2026.

In the most recent 3Q25 market study, the Optical Transport market posted a 15% year-over-year (Y/Y) gain, moving us to raise our full-year outlook for 2025 and 2026.

It was more than just the market’s growth rate that led us to raise our forecast; it was the bandwidth. What I mean is that network capacity demand or bandwidth was back on the rise after two years of stalling. Here is a chart on DWDM Long Haul capacity shipment growth on a Y/Y basis for the past 3 years. As shown, new installations on backbone networks grew at a rate below the historical average of 25% to 30% for 9 quarters. This changed in the middle of 2025, and growth rates are now back above 25%.

Data center interconnect (DCI) accounted for most of the bandwidth growth over the past year, driven by large deployments from cloud providers. This trend is expected to continue through 2026 and remain a key market driver. However, it will now expand beyond traditional DCI. The new outlook suggests that the largest cloud providers are nearing a performance ceiling in some geographies due to power grid limitations. The good news is that a solution exists: scaling across multiple data centers to create a larger virtual AI factory.

Hence, we believe that, beginning in 2026, cloud providers will expand their AI data centers across multiple buildings about 100 km apart, requiring 800 ZR+ optics and optical line systems (OLSs) to tap into different electricity grids to run their power-hungry GPU compute clusters.

The optical equipment of choice for building new DCI networks, including for scale-across, will likely remain Disaggregated WDM, which accounted for nearly 40% of total Optical Transport market revenue during the first nine months of 2025 (the other 60% of revenue was mainly from large integrated systems). Also, as many of you know, the idea of disaggregating the WDM network originated with cloud providers.

For those unfamiliar with what we call Disaggregated WDM, here is a description: Disaggregated WDM is a product and architecture that promotes the independence of the main elements in a WDM network—transponders and optical line systems. As transponder technology continuously improved and reduced in size, the natural progression was to sell these subsystems as optical pluggable modules for use in WDM systems, routers, and switches. Additional factors that characterize Disaggregated WDM include open interfaces to eliminate vendor lock-in and small form-factor chassis to better align with a pay-as-you-grow model. We track the Disaggregated WDM market in the following major categories:

Transponder Units: Compact form factor that mainly houses the embedded or pluggable WDM transponders and is used in long-haul and metro deployments.
Optical Line Systems: Small chassis that mainly houses the amplifier (EDFA and/or RAMAN), optical add/drop multiplexer (OADM), and mux/demux.
IPoDWDM ZR/ZR+: In an IPoDWDM architecture, the pluggable WDM transceiver is placed in a router or Ethernet switch rather than a Transponder Unit. We account for the ZR/ZR+ optical plug portion in Disaggregated WDM.

Alongside DCI, we expect the positive trend among communication service providers (CSPs) to continue into 2026. In the third quarter of 2025, non-DCI revenue for DWDM Long Haul rose 14% Y/Y, indicating that demand for network backbone capacity goes beyond just cloud providers and AI expansions. We believe this non-DCI growth is particularly significant because it suggests that CSPs’ inventory correction is complete and their network bandwidth is starting to grow again. This likely means that CSPs will purchase even more optical transport equipment in 2026.

We have an optimistic outlook for 2026 and believe that the Optical Transport market will build on the positive momentum in 2025. We are eagerly looking forward to witnessing this continued growth and development unfold in the coming months and years.

Looking back on 2025, we got a few things wrong and a few things right. One thing we got right is that 2024 was indeed the year that the Router market resets itself to a new baseline for future market growth. The part we got wrong was the steepness of the decline in 2024 and the speed of the market’s rebound in 2025, especially for Core Routers.

We expected the customer inventory surplus to conclude by the first half of 2024, which it did, but we did not expect that it would take another two quarters for new orders to flow through into revenue for the system houses. So, the market dropped nearly 20% in 2024 (more than we were expecting). Both communication service providers (CSPs) and cloud providers pulled down purchases through 2024, adding to the pain. But then came AI.

Right at the bottom, at the reset point for the Router market, cloud providers were accelerating their investments in building AI data centers, and companies were beginning to push out Agentic AI, autonomous artificial intelligence systems that adapt and learn to take over tasks that require reasoning. The result was an accelerated investment cycle in all things AI. But, more importantly for the router market, the need to interconnect or transport data outside the confines of the data center wall was beginning. This was evident in the numbers we captured in the 3Q25 survey process: Core Router revenues grew over 40% year-over-year (Y/Y) in the first nine months of 2025. It is becoming a V-shaped recovery, driven by the need for more wide area network (WAN) capacity and data center interconnect (DCI). So, this brings us to 2026.

Our preliminary view for 2026 is that growth rates will remain high, and the market momentum from 2025 will continue.

Cloud providers will continue building new AI data centers and connecting them to the WAN or neighboring data centers.
Since electricity is a scarce resource, cloud providers will build data centers in new geographic regions. And in many cases, we believe that cloud providers will leverage CSPs to help build their new routes and networks, increasing future spending by network operators.
Enterprises, in preparation for deploying AI Agents, will build AI-ready infrastructure to improve access speeds to cloud data centers, including adding more connections between their on-premises storage sites and cloud-based AI compute resources.

Building on this momentum, we believe there is a good chance that the 2026 results will surpass our expectations. But it depends on the answers to these questions:

Scale-Across DCI: Cloud providers are interconnecting their AI GPU data centers with massive amounts of bandwidth to form large virtual data centers using data center switches and ZR+ optics. However, we are not sure whether all of these scale-across DCI builds will use data center switches or whether some will use routers. Hence, the question is, will routers with deep buffers and WAN protocols be chosen for scale-across DCI when span lengths are too long for data center switches?
AI-Ready Infrastructure: We believe the early adopters are upgrading their infrastructure to be ready for Agentic AI. Will this become mainstream in 2026 or 2027?
Fronthaul: Fronthaul with routers had many false starts in the past decade. Hence, we are still cautious about its prospects before 6G. However, recently, there has been increased activity around eCPRI (enhanced Common Public Radio Interface) for fronthaul. So, will router fronthaul build-outs occur before 6G?

Contact Us

The Remote OLT Trend in Latin America

ONT Flexibility Just as Critical