Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or

is the enterprise changing wireless?

A conversation between Chris Nicoll, Principal, Nicoll Associates and Monica Paolini,
Principal, Senza Fili
Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the
enterprise changing wireless?
A conversation between Chris Nicoll, Principal, Nicoll Associates and Monica Paolini, Principal, Senza Fili

Our first Sparring Partners webinar from As we'll see later, real estate is a really important real estate. If you're a building owner, improving
October 2018 is now available for you to term when you talk about the enterprise. wireless coverage inside adds somewhere around
watch and to read. Chris Nicoll and Monica 30% to 35% to the value of the square footage.
Paolini debated the question of whether the Chris, how do we define wireless? Now, the question is, what's the cost of providing
enterprise is changing wireless, or whether that coverage? Let's see what the audience thinks.
Chris Nicoll: On a wireless side, we will expand
wireless is changing the enterprise. Chris and
the definition. It is much more than just cellular Monica: I had a big aha moment when I was
Monica had fun arguing back and forth on
coverage. Lot of studies have been done; for talking to a venue owner about the cost. What is
CBRS, Wi-Fi 6, private networks, small cells,
example, CommScope has put out a few of them the cost of wireless? We're trying to see is it worth
mmWave, and who will pay for all of this.
about the lack of indoor coverage and the issues it or not. He started comparing the cost of
Monica Paolini: Our topic today is whether of providing coverage from the outside network. wireless to the cost of carpeting.
wireless is changing the enterprise or is the That is referring to cellular service, particularly
enterprise changing wireless? Before we start, let’s voice service. I think that is telling because when you build
define what we mean by enterprise and wireless. something new, wireless has become part of the
We know about Wi-Fi and cellular on the inside, building. Basically, wireless costs less than
We use the term enterprise broadly to include but we also need to start thinking about IoT uses carpeting and it may be just as important, if not
venue owners and, generally, those who control and how they're impacting the business and the more. I think that is a new way to look at wireless.
the venue, the real estate. It could be an industrial enterprise as well.
site, a mall, an airport, a stadium, or a hospital, Chris: I can't decide if it's a good thing or bad
We're at a period of time when coverage within a thing that he was comparing wireless service and
but not a city where you have some control. It is
building has already proven to add value to the what it takes to provide wireless to a basic
not exclusive control of the real estate.

Watch the video of the Sparring Partner webinar:

Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless?

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |2|
amenity like carpeting, which I think enterprises CBRS and unlicensed access. This is to support When you talk about CBRS in particular, there are
tend to get pretty cheap anyway. We don't want new use cases, new business models and lots of questions still, about the PAL licenses, how
to go cheap on providing wireless coverage. deployment models. long and how big an area the licenses will cover,
plus device support. I'm concerned about some of
It's interesting that he is at least thinking of It goes both ways – enterprise changing wireless, the device availability and support for this broad
wireless coverage in terms of basic amenities such and wireless changing the enterprise – and it is to range of wireless technologies that enterprises
as carpeting and bathrooms, that are needed in a the advantage of everybody involved because we could use.
venue. need to gain more flexibility in using wireless
technologies in the enterprise. The question is, how quickly will they adopt
Monica: We're going to start by asking the different wireless technologies, and does it really
audience a question first: “Is wireless changing If you remember a few years ago, most of the fracture the ecosystem?
the enterprise or is the enterprise changing enterprises were just using Wi-Fi or proprietary
wireless?” technologies. Proprietary solutions made Monica: You're raising a great point in terms of
everything much more complicated, expensive, how to manage the complexity. The more
17% of the people think that it's enterprise, that and riskier because if your vendor goes out of spectrum, the merrier.
it's mostly changing wireless, 30% think that business then you have a problem. Using a
wireless is mostly changing the enterprise, and standards-based technology such as LTE or 5G is Chris: Sure. At least the more the spectrum, the
51% think it is both. better for the enterprise because interoperability faster the speeds.
creates a more flexible environment.
Chris, what do you think? Monica: At the same time, you want to keep the
Chris: It's flexible, but I'm concerned about the number of interfaces and the number of
Chris: What we're seeing is a realization that, if networks, to a minimum so that you don't get
added complexity that it brings, as well. In the old
you're going to provide an enterprise service, completely overwhelmed by the complexity. For
days, even a few years ago, when you brought
especially from a wireless type of service, the the enterprise, a big question is, which ones are
your device in and it was on one of the big mobile
building is going to have to adjust as well. You've the best solutions? Different enterprises would
carriers in the mobile networks, and you had
got to take advantage of different technologies answer this differently, depending on what they're
Wi-Fi, you were pretty much 100% covered.
and put them in place, not just cellular and Wi-Fi, trying to do.
this could include Bluetooth, Zigbee and who You probably didn't have great cellular coverage
knows what else, but you do have to make some within your building, but, from a data perspective, It's good to have a choice, but you need to make
accommodations within the building to make it all you had Wi-Fi because pretty much every sure you use your ability to choose wisely and
work. enterprise has set up some sort of Wi-Fi for the avoid deploying networks that are too complex.
data side.
With the different form factors such as access Device availability, as you mentioned, is an issue,
point, femto cell, small cells, Cat 5 or fiber, and As we get into LAA, MulteFire, private LTE, CBRS, and that is tied to the question of what spectrum
Ethernet services for the backhaul or fronthaul, I Zigbee, Bluetooth, and the IoT options, we're just band you should you use? Those are all concerns
do think that both wireless and the enterprise making it a little too complex for the enterprise that need to be addressed.
impact each other. and the building owners by having too many
There is a lot of work being done in MulteFire,
options because they're all also predicated on
Monica: Technologies like LTE are evolving to fit CBRS, OnGo, and LAA to make LTE (and
device availability.
in the enterprise, to support private networks, like eventually 5G) easier to deploy in an enterprise

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |3|
setting. It's also true that you need to manage LTE we're going to have to address as we move within the enterprise, so you want to keep them,
and 5G networks more carefully than Wi-Fi, it's forward. More access opens more threat vectors to some extent, separate.
not just adding a few access points. to the networks.
Chris: This might be a good time to start talking
Although it is also true that, with enterprise-grade I'm wondering, will Wi-Fi start equaling cellular in about CBRS and what's coming up with that
Wi-Fi, you just don't put access points out there performance, features, and capabilities? The spectrum. We've talked about this wide swath of
without RF planning. As the cellular technology is standards will be there, but their adoption is spectrum. Whether it is 3.5 GHz globally or CBRS
getting easier and easier to use in an enterprise going to be fairly slow because enterprises aren't in the US, for our discussion, we'll focus primarily
environment, Wi-Fi is also getting more going to want to manage two fairly complex on the US market.
sophisticated and looks more like cellular. You get networks.
better performance, but you pay a price with Now might be a good time to just get a feel from
more complexity. No enterprise is in business to manage a the audience. What do you feel about CBRS? We
telecommunications network. We'll see third got three questions here for you.
Chris: Wi-Fi continues to push the envelope and parties come about, service providers managing
become more cellular like. I'm wondering if that is it. For the most part, I think we'll continue to see Is CBRS a game changer? Who is going to deploy
actually such a good thing. Wi-Fi for basic data connectivity and then, it? When do you expect to see the commercial
potentially, private networks, VPN, CBRS, or deployment?
As we move high-performance users, for example MulteFire networks set up for higher security,
the heavy video users and the big data users, off I'm kind of a CBRS skeptic at this point. There are
higher-profile applications for the enterprise.
Wi-Fi and onto CBRS, or potentially using LAA or a lot of questions that still need to be addressed.
using MulteFire, for example, to me, at this point, Monica: With Wi-Fi 6 or IEEE 11ax, the next We'll get into those in just a minute. Monica, you
the Wi-Fi networks actually start performing generation of Wi-Fi, there is going to be a huge want to give your early thoughts on CBRS?
better. change in terms of what Wi-Fi can do. From an
Monica: I'm a more optimistic. But it's important
enterprise point of view, the transition to Wi-Fi 6
It's kind of like what we saw on the 3G to 4G to look at CBRS in the bigger context of the
is going to be gradual and fully integrated within
transition in the US, especially when you look at alternative options. For example, if Wi-Fi gets the
current Wi-Fi networks. Then, as devices and
T-Mobile when they started converting over, and 6 GHz spectrum, that might change the balance.
access points support Wi-Fi 6, you will benefit
AT&T, from HSPA to LTE. Suddenly, the HSPA from the new functionality. CBRS is a cool experiment in how to use
networks were very lightly loaded, still had terrific
spectrum. It allows us to think of a way to use
backhaul, and performance skyrocketed. Delays It's not like 5G, which you either have or you
spectrum that is already being used by
went down, and throughput went up because don't. With Wi-Fi, you don't need to have
incumbents, and of how to share spectrum. A lot
there were fewer users. everybody to buy a new Wi-Fi 6 handset to use
of the spectrum is underutilized because you have
the Wi-Fi 6 network in the way that you'd have to
I'm wondering if that same thing's going to one spectrum holder, the licensee, and that limits
do for 5G. As we move to 5G (and beyond that),
happen with Wi-Fi once we get into, potentially, the use of the spectrum.
Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi 6 will continue to meet most of
private LTE networks for enterprise and by the indoor capacity and connectivity demand. Exclusive spectrum licenses are necessary and
moving some of these users and applications off
that's a good use for many spectrum bands, but
of the best effort Wi-Fi and onto these other But we need multiple networks as well because
it's also good to have bands where multiple
networks, which have better QoS, and better this allows the enterprise to run different services.
security, in particular. Security is an issue I think You have different types of data applications

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |4|
entities can use the spectrum, while protecting of devices to use the new spectrum. That seems Monica: I completely agree with you. From a
the right of incumbents, if there are any. to be about where operators want to be in order regulatory point of view, we really need to get
to launch broadly a new service – 30% to 35% moving on PAL because it's going to take time to
In the 6 GHz band, we have the same problem device penetration. Hopefully, it'll go up from go through the process.
that we have with the 3.5 GHz CBRS band. There there. That's GAA.
are incumbents there too. The question then is, We also need to understand how valuable that
how do you deal with incumbents so that you can On the private side, PALs still are not defined spectrum is, and that is difficult to do because we
use spectrum more efficiently and yet protect [Editorial note: PAL terms are now 10 years]. In don't know how to establish the value of shared
their rights? That is just something that is going talking to large enterprises and the operators spectrum. It is not going to be the same as the
to be very important. themselves, we've been hearing from the FCC that value for exclusively licensed spectrum.
they're talking about this three-year license or the
How are we doing with the poll? Priority Access License, the PAL license. We don't know what the impact of GAA access on
the value of PALs is. If you can use the 3.5 GHz
Chris: "Is CBRS a game changer?" About half the For the operators, that's a nonstarter because it's band for free as a GAA user (without exclusive
audience, 51%, say yes; 21% say no; and 28% say going to take three years to get the network control of the CBRS channel), how much are you
they don't know. Excellent. It's good to have deployed and start generating revenue. Then, if willing to pay to be a protected, licensed user?
opinions running both ways. they lose the license, they've lost the investment.
We also still do not know who is going to bid for
"Who's going to deploy it?" Overwhelmingly, it On the enterprise side, I'm hearing almost exactly it. Operators might, but it is also a potential for a
looks like mostly the mobile operators as well as the same thing: that three years is not long neutral host or other companies. There might be
equally the enterprise mobile and cable enough. It's going to take them six months to a a wholesale player, which might buy the spectrum
operators. A couple naysayers say nobody's going year to get the network in place. It's going to take and then lease it in the secondary market. The
to deploy it. a year or two to really fine tune it, get the network lack of assigned PALs creates uncertainty, even
working for the specific application that they want among GAA users because the availability of GAA
Actually, I do think all of the operators will
it to work for. Then, suddenly, they could spectrum is in part contingent on who owns PALs.
potentially jump into CBRS at some point in time.
potentially lose the license. Even though you can deploy GAA without a PAL,
I do agree with the timelines here though: 15%
you may still be affected by who owns the
said 2019; 64% said 2020, I think that is the right It seems like both enterprises and service licenses and how they will deploy CBRS in your
time frame. providers want longer license terms for the PAL, area.
which is not necessarily what the ISPs and some
Here are the problems and the challenges with
of the competitive carriers want. In many enterprise and public environments,
CBRS that I see: on the GAA side, it's really going
venue owners control the venue – I mean the
to be device support. That's slowly coming up, Licensing is a huge issue as far as advancement of physical location – and they can protect their
but we know it takes anywhere from 18 to 24 CBRS in the private space. In the GAA space, investment by exerting control over the access to
months to get about 35% penetration of a new certainly I think that is going to augment Wi-Fi the real estate.
smartphone, or a new device, in the market. potentially. You've got more spectrum there, but
then you're still going to run into the issues that I Venue owners can deploy under GAA and can
Even if a new phone comes out today, we're
think we have with Wi-Fi, potentially with continue doing so even after PALs are issued
towards the end of 2018. We're still talking late
congestion and management, but we'll see how because they control who comes onto your
2019, 2020 to hit about a 30% to 40% penetration
that goes.

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |5|
premises. I think that this is going to be the first of the density. There are concert halls, play halls, This approach enables the use of the same access
market to go forward. and those kind of places where higher-band technology in different environments, and it can
spectrum is a good application, because they are benefit from the economies of scale that large
With respect to the poll question, I am more well contained, and, potentially, you could do adoption generates.
optimistic about the enterprise getting into the some architecture work to keep the signals from
market ahead of mobile operators. It is absolutely outside coming in and contaminating your CBRS For instance, the CBRS and MulteFire in-a-box
crucial, however, that operators do it too, because network (and vice versa). solutions are going to be crucial to the success of
they drive device adoption among subscribers. these technologies as they widen the addressable
I think there are some applications there, but market in the enterprise.
But, at the beginning we're going to see more what I don't see from a cellular perspective, until
enterprise or wireless ISP deployments where you the PALs get well defined, is the operators It doesn't matter how good the technology is. If
are not dependent on the devices such as mobile actually launching CBRS. But the US operators it's not sufficiently easy to use, it is not going to
phones. Wireless ISPs connect to their customers such as AT&T and Verizon are already deploying succeed.
through a CPE and do not need mobile devices antennas to support 3.5 GHz and 5 GHz bands to
for connectivity. I am more bullish on the GAA Chris: A couple comments came in. One is about
get ready to quickly launch services when they are
and enterprise in the short term, because I do not the building codes and, especially for the first
ready.
think most enterprises want to pay for or need responders, and the ability to have cellular
PALs. Will they use it like LAA, where they're combining coverage within the building. The building codes
LTE with Wi-Fi as a capacity extender? Potentially. are actually taking quite a while to get put in
When PALs are allocated, mobile operators will They could combine LTE with CBRS license to place.
become more aggressive in deploying CBRS. And boost speeds. I'm still concerned about user
if spectrum sharing works for the 3.5 GHz CBRS There is a thought for the building owners that
experience. Users don't tolerate variable
band in the US, there are a lot of opportunities in they need to provide some sort of good coverage
experiences very well. They like consistency. If the
other bands in the US and other countries. for first responders within the building. Whether
service is consistently mediocre, then they
or not CBRS is going to help with that, I'm not
understand that, but they don't want really good
Chris: Federated Wireless is talking about taking sure.
one day and then really bad the next day because
the spectrum sharing model and moving it into
then they can't run their applications the way they Then the cost for licensing. I brought up the term,
other bands as well. The C-band and the 4 GHz
expect. but of course the cost for the CBRS PALs hasn't
and 6 GHz bands are some of the bands that they
were proposing. been defined either. It was mentioned that only
I'm still a little concerned about how CBRS is
Ruckus is really talking about private CBRS.
going to roll out in the time frame: 2020 is still
We may end up seeing a bifurcation of CBRS
not quite a year and a half away. We'll see how A number of vendors may be not doing it as
where you've got GAA service. That is going to be
and when it actually deploys. publicly, but the companies that we've been
almost like high-speed Wi-Fi for operators and
enterprises and for others. Then private networks working with are talking about LTE and the
Monica: Another important part, both with CBRS
will come in on the PALs. 3.5 GHz band and private network use.
and MulteFire, is the concerted effort from the
wireless industry to make those technologies Networks are a challenge. We talk about network-
To your point, there are about 1,800 stadiums in
available and sufficiently simple in an enterprise in-a-box. It is still not there after all these years
the US with 10,000 seats and larger. Smaller
or private-network setting.
venues may be a little more problematic because

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |6|
and now we're talking about a wireless network- much easier to share the infrastructure if it does If we're talking about 5G and network slicing,
in-a-box and that is even a little more complex. not rely their licensed spectrum. eventually 5G is going to run over the 3.5 GHz
band. Sprint was talking about that at Mobile
This is what vendors like Nokia, Ericsson, Huawei, But if access is shared with operators, we need to World Congress Americas, running 5G over their
Affirmed and Mavenir are talking about with the worry about quality of experience. In moving 2.5 GHz spectrum.
mobile core, from a virtualized perspective, being forward, CBRS will be deployed using 5G and then
able to run this on a few cores, on a few servers. you have a better way to manage infrastructure We're going to see these technologies crossing
The idea being that that we will have a resurgence sharing with multiple operators. multiple bands. With network slicing coming into
of private networks moving forward. play you need the operations tools to keep up
Operators can use CBRS as an opportunistic with getting to the users and understanding the
Monica: Access to the 3.5 GHz band is very addition to what they have. If they have good user experience.
important, because there is no macro visibility in the network, they retain control of the
infrastructure there and this creates a great QoE, and decide when subscribers should use How does this apply to the enterprise? Whether
opportunity for small cells to take off. If you look licensed or CBRS bands for access. it's CBRS or mmWave, it's starting to use the
at it from an enterprise point of view, you can get applications running on top of the spectrum for
good in-building coverage with a 3.5 GHz Chris: We've talked about neutral host for a things like geofencing. Are the employees in a
network with small cells. And you can have a number of years, especially around small cells. part of the building where they should be in or
neutral host that allows the enterprise to share Ruckus had an example, where they put in a are allowed to be in? Can you identify where the
the network with mobile operators. network for a resort, but because of the way the employees are in case of an emergency?
spectrum played out, they ended up putting in
We've been talking about sharing networks, multiple units, one for each operator on the same If we're talking about a first responder network,
sharing the infrastructure with small cells, for a shared infrastructure. what role does CBRS play? What we don't know
long time. This is not going anywhere if you have yet is, what are the bands and the devices that
to use licensed spectrum that is already used in Other manufacturers have multi-operator small first responders are actually going to have?
the macro network. Most operators are not open cells put in place. Certainly Huawei, Nokia and
to share spectrum that is already used in macro Airspan have them. The idea around neutral host I would suspect that they're not going to have
networks in indoor small-cell networks. is more than just spectrum. It has to come with single-band devices. First responders will have
the management and operations tools so that the bands that will support the 5 GHz, potentially 3.5
Every operator wants to use its own spectrum, operators can individually see and manage the GHz, the 700 MHz, 800 MHz, 2.5 GHz and so on. It
understandably, because this allows it to manage user experience for their users on the shared is possible to use indoor cellular systems such as
interference and optimize spectrum reuse. What infrastructure. CBRS, and maybe mmWave as well, for first
that means is that, in an enterprise, if you want to responders to use for their communications, and
have small cells then you need to have small cells Certainly, SON comes into play from a global wrap a lot of things into that.
for each operator. That model doesn't really work perspective to minimize interference, especially if
very well. It's not cost-effective. It's too expensive. you're talking about higher spectrum. Just Getting back to mmWave, it offers a huge
managing interference among the small cells opportunity for indoor coverage, but it comes
CBRS is really a huge opportunity to actually get themselves, but also getting into the analytics and with its own challenges. Not the least of which is
this in-building coverage through small cells in a being able to get down to the user, is critically its very high spectrum and device support.
cost-effective way because, for operators, it is important. Definitely, device support is going to be a big
issue.

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |7|
Monica: Let's move to the mmWave poll: “Where to increase wireless capacity, indoors and Whether it's a vast or distributed small cell
will mmWave be deployed?” outdoors. network, can I put those antennas in the rooms
where I need them? I can pull back the
Chris: Where do I think that mmWave is going to Monica: Let's talk about mmWave for outdoor intelligence into a more centralized architecture
be deployed? Fixed wireless. In the US, Verizon access and fixed links in the enterprise. A lot of or have distributed intelligence. What is going to
talking about it. Internationally, they're talking the attention is on using it as last-mile fixed be the cost factor there? Of course, cost is always
about some fixed wireless as well. broadband solution. Does this work on a large a driving factor for enterprises as they make their
scale? I don’t think it's going to replace wireline decisions.
Purely indoor, equally indoor-outdoor, or is this because in most places wireline is cheaper, more
what are called dots on the map? It's just limited, efficient, and more effective. MmWave indoors, with proper device support,
not going to be deployed widely. It'll be really could change the way enterprises architect
interesting to see what the audience says as far as But there are environments where fixed wireless is their network, enhance security, enhance some of
how mmWave will be deployed. We have seen the best choice. It can be cost-effective – and in those services with the much broader bandwidths
from the vendors mixed messages. A couple years some areas it may be the only cost-effective way supported.
ago at Mobile World Congress Americas, Nokia's to provide residential broadband. What is the
CTO came out and was cold on fixed wireless good business model? Where are those niche Maybe video conferencing really does become
access for mmWave and showed a lot of results environments? How big is the niche anyway? desktop-to-desktop and much more applicable
from some of the testing and things that they had than even we have today. We're on Zoom today
done. Chris: I'm a big proponent of the mmWave in the here and that’s on my 5 GHz Wi-Fi.
indoors. On the indoor side, the challenging
Nokia subsequently walked that back a little bit propagation characteristics are actually an asset. Maybe we will really start seeing more use of
from the practical application perspective. We're face-to-face and personalized communications
seeing some things with mmWave in the real This enables setting up a network that is limited because they'll have the bandwidth and the ability
world that didn't come up in the models, which room to room to room, instead of across whole to do so without putting in expensive
changes some of the opportunities to deploy. floors of a building. This is an opportunity where infrastructure.
Let's see the results that we have from the poll wireless may change the enterprise, where
here before we continue on too much. enterprises now start thinking in terms beyond Monica: If you use mmWave in small spots of
ubiquitous network access. high connectivity, the per-bit cost is going to be
Monica: We have a split audience here: 37% very low.
outdoors, 10% indoor, 22% equally indoor and If we're providing access for a team, the indoor
outdoor, 31% only niche limited deployment. mmWave network doesn't bleed over to An enterprise may have Wi-Fi and cellular
anywhere else. Security is enhanced without even networks, and add mmWave in areas with high
MmWave has been around forever. We never having firewalls and different security usage, to offload the rest of the network. It's
could figure out what to do with it because the mechanisms. The network itself is limiting, and I basically the same idea of small cells taken one
propagation is so bad. consider that a benefit. layer down.

Propagation used to be a limitation of the band, What we still don't know is what is going to be Again, device availability is going to be a major
but it is now an advantage. The limited the cost of the small cells to deploy that type of issue, although probably less so in the 60 GHz
propagation in mmWave bands is the best architecture. Can it have a more distributed band, where you will have lots of spectrum for
defense for interference. It is a huge opportunity system? Wi-Fi. It is an unlicensed band, but, at those high

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |8|
frequencies, interference is not much of an issue. propagation. pay for enterprise deployments, and others don’t.
This is going to change the way we deploy, think Even within the same type of player, you might
of and use connectivity. Again, is it going to be broadly deployed? I don't have different opinions on how to go about
think we're painting the map yellow, magenta, paying to deploy and run the network.
Chris: Even outside, we’re starting to see, from red, blue, or whatever. I think it's going to be
the ISP perspective, use of fixed wireless access spots on the map, but those are going to be very Chris: I wonder if we're not creating potential for
from a monopole to an access point to replace important spots. a new market here. For example, there were tower
fiber. companies set up that actually put these towers
Monica: Reflection can be valuable, but it is up and have multiple operators hanging their
It is much less expensive to deploy wireless than something that is difficult for a vendor to market. antennas off of these towers.
trenching fiber. You can actually seed a market It can't just say to a customer: "You just have to
using FWA, see how many customers you get have the right reflection and then mmWave will The operators at one point were buying their own
signed up, and determine if you really need to go work." towers and putting their equipment up and then
to fiber in the future because you do have the leasing it back. Now we're seeing that offload. Are
demand. It is going to be more ad hoc. You have to learn we going to start seeing managed service
how to use reflection to your advantage. The providers come into play?
From a campus perspective, I think mmWave position of objects in the environment change:
makes perfect sense. It is easy to deploy. It does how do you deal with environmental changes? I I'm not talking about operators, but actually
withstand weather better than it was expected to. think that the use of reflection is going to be a service providers setting up these neutral host
What I'm hearing from trials from operators as below-the-radar benefit, rather than a big press networks and, similar to an antenna or a tower,
well as vendors is that the signal bounces. We talk release topic. But, it can still quite valuable for the leasing services back to the operators so that they
about propagation, and about the fact that the enterprise. don't have to run that part of the network and the
signal doesn't go through walls. So yes, mmWave neutral host operator will run it for the operator
has issues with outside-in coverage. It bounces off Now, let’s talk about business models. We have itself, like the regional operators and the smaller
of them. But they're getting better performance talked much about technology, but who's going operators.
than they were expecting because of the fact that to pay for all this? Is that going to change?
the signal is not going to go through this wall, it's They're operating under a license from one of the
We have another poll for the audience: "Will the major mobile operators but, in effect, they're
not going to go through this glass, but it's going
enterprise pay, deploy, and operate wireless running the network themselves. It'll be
to bounce and reflect off and get to an antenna
networks in their premises?" The option is pay interesting to see what our attendees think as far
from a different path than what was expected.
and deploy, pay for somebody else to do it, as who's actually going to pay for these networks.
You just have to address how to get that signal
operators will pay, and a mix of the above.
indoors.
A few think the enterprise themselves will pay and
Chris: I love this. "Operators will pay." Yeah, the deploy. That goes against my thinking, but no
This is a case where we may start seeing mmWave
other guys will pay for it, for me to use it. Sure, enterprise wants to operate a network for the
outdoor deployments on shorter antennas, say, 3
yeah, not a problem (doubtfully!). Not that I have sheer joy and pleasure of doing it. A few people
meters, not 5 or 10 meters high, because when
an opinion on this. think that that's probably the case.
you're up that high, you get into the trees and the
foliage, some of the other interference that they Monica: It will be interesting to see what will Service providers will manage service, 36% of
can't get around. When it's lower, you can actually happen. For instance, some neutral hosts want to responses. I think that's pretty good. Operators
bounce the signal and you get better

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |9|
will pay, not as much. In a mix, people taking the arrangement, one that works for all parties T-Mobile equipment to run a Verizon service over.
easy way out and saying "Yeah, we're not sure. It involved? That becomes more of an issue.
could be anything." That is probably the right
answer. Until we get pricing models and we We have the technology tools to do that, but we I think for the smaller enterprises, being able to
understand what the business case is for this, don't have the experience yet. There is a lot of put a small femto cell or a Magic Box that is plug-
we're not sure who's actually going to end up work that needs to be done on both ends – and-play, you get better coverage. You're good
paying. operators and enterprises. for up to probably 20, maybe 50 employees. If
you have a larger building, then you put several
Monica: There is a growing expectation that the Chris: This is where I think small enterprises may units in and you're good to go.
enterprise will pay, and I think that’s a good sign. have an advantage over big enterprises. We've
seen this with Sprint. We're seeing this with The large campuses, the large enterprises, the
Some think it is wishful thinking to expect that the T-Mobile as well. AT&T is doing it and Verizon high-rise office buildings, that is where I think
enterprise will pay. But when I talk to enterprises, too. you've got a real problem that industry is still
sometimes I get the opposite answer: they trying to address as far as neutral host, indoor
demand to pay. The reason for that is, if you pay What I'm talking about here is the enterprise coverage, what is the best way of doing it, and
for something, you decide what kind of coverage femto or the small cell femto. For Sprint, it's that who is going to pay for it.
you have, what kind of capacity you have, what Magic Box by Airspan. With T Mobile, it seems to
network to deploy. You have or can demand be Nokia femto cells. We're talking about not tens It's one thing to have the infrastructure, fiber or
visibility and control over the network. of thousands of units, but hundreds of thousands Cat 5, Cat 6 Ethernet. It's another thing to actually
of units. have a network set up so that now you've got to
For the enterprises, this is really crucial. They want deal with the operators to lease their spectrum
to know what they're getting. They don't want to If you need better indoor coverage and you're an and then build and operate the network. This is
have an operator that comes in, even if it is willing enterprise, you go to your provider and you say, "I where I think it's almost an easier problem for
to pay, to add a few cells here and there. It’s an need a small cell, I need a femto cell, or I need small businesses to solve than large.
improvement, but not really what enterprises better indoor coverage." They send you a Magic
need. For enterprises, paying for the infrastructure Box or they send you a femto cell. Monica: It is important to have these kinds of
is a way to ensure that they get what they want. solutions to address small and medium
The larger enterprises have a much more complex enterprises, because that is a market that
If operators want to have access to the enterprise issue to try to deal with. If they're providing traditionally has been underserved. You need to
private infrastructure, they need to determine cellular service, they're paying for service for their have very simple solutions that they can pick and
what's the best way to manage that access, from a employees, it's who did they sign up and do they deploy easily.
technology and business model perspective. have multiple operators.
Chris: One of the questions from the audience
What kind of control and what kind of visibility do If it's one or two operators, then setting up a Q&A is about roaming. With about 80% of traffic
operators want or need to have in an enterprise network to improve coverage for their operator of really being generated indoors, there's actually a
network? True, the enterprise may run it or have choice, that decision is made. Now, if they change very small percentage of traffic that moves from
somebody else run its network – maybe a neutral operators after a few years and move from indoor to outdoor or outdoor to indoor. I don't
host. Can the operators be comfortable with T-Mobile to Verizon, very different spectrum think roaming is nearly as much of an issue as
giving access to their subscribers to a network bands here. It's not like you can repurpose the maybe some people might think it's going to be. I
that they do not run? What is the best think much more the indoor coverage is the issue.

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |10|
That actually removes some level of complexity. If a call drops, the subscriber can simply call cellular networks, private LTE, private 5G as well,
We've all had the situation where you walk in the again. This is a type of behavior we learned from and then they need to figure out a way to make
building, your call drops. You reconnect once you Wi-Fi: if something does not work, try again. Of all of that work.
get in, hop into an elevator, or something. I think course, operators don't want to be dropping calls
humans have adjusted their behavior to expect all the time. But it's much better to have good
those kinds of things. indoor coverage than not having a dropped call. Glossary

Do we need infinite reliability that, when I walk in My parting point is about change in the CBRS Citizen Broadband Radio Services
a building, I don't drop my phone call? No, we operators. As the role of wireless in the enterprise FWA Fixed wireless access
just need to hit the send button again and keep changes, the role of operators will change too. GAA General Authorized Access
going. HSPA High Speed Packet Access
Are the operators going away? No. Their role is
ISPs Internet service providers
Monica: You're right. I am glad you mentioned it. still absolutely crucial and important, but there is
IoT Internet of things
We need to think about reliability in a different going to be more of the need to work with the
LAA Licensed Assisted Access
way. For non-real data applications, reliability is enterprise. But the way they operate is going to
LTE Long Term Evolution
not as crucial as it is for voice and video. Buffering change, to some extent.
PAL Priority Access License
can resolve most of reliability issues for streamed
Chris: I agree with that. The operators are here to QoS Quality of service
video. But it’s a much bigger issue for voice or
stay. They provide that connectivity fiber between SON Self-organizing network
conversational video.
all the sites, but the business models are going to VPN Virtual private network
What is reliability for mobile operators? Wireless have to change for the operators to recognize mmWave Millimeter wave
users can deal with occasional service disruption. they probably are going to see more private

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |11|
About Nicoll Associates

Nicoll Associates provides content generation and competitive response advisory support on wireless technologies
and services for equipment vendors and operators around the world. We provide a practical view of technology
maturity, application and user acceptance to help clients strengthen their tactical and strategic messaging, marketing
and communications activities.

About Chris Nicoll

Chris Nicoll, Principal at Nicoll Associates provides strategic insights and guidance to telco vendors and operators regarding
competitive response and positioning as well as technology application and maturity. He has worked around the world on the technical
design, configuration, installation and operation of terrestrial and satellite voice and data networks.
He is a frequent presenter and moderator at 5G and Mobility conferences including Mobile World Congress and the Brooklyn 5G
Summit often commenting and presenting on the current state of technology and user behavior. He has also written many reports
and articles on the technologies, services and market issues impacting the telco space.
He has held roles in Systems and Network Engineering, Strategic Marketing and leading analytical research teams in the US, Europe
and Asia working for Tymnet, Netrix, Visual Networks, Current Analysis, Lucent and Alcatel Lucent, Yankee Group, Analysis Mason and
ACG Research.

©Senza Fili, 2019 Sparring Partners: Is wireless changing the enterprise, or is the enterprise changing wireless? |12|
About Senza Fili
Senza Fili provides advisory support on wireless technologies and services. At Senza Fili we have in-depth expertise
in financial modeling, market forecasts and research, strategy, business plan support, and due diligence. Our client
base is international and spans the entire value chain: clients include wireline, fixed wireless, and mobile operators,
enterprises and other vertical players, vendors, system integrators, investors, regulators, and industry associations.
We provide a bridge between technologies and services, helping our clients assess established and emerging
technologies, use these technologies to support new or existing services, and build solid, profitable business models.
Independent advice, a strong quantitative orientation, and an international perspective are the hallmarks of our
work. For additional information, visit www.senzafili.com.

About Monica Paolini

Monica Paolini, PhD, founded Senza Fili in 2003. She is an expert in wireless technologies and has helped clients
worldwide to understand technology and customer requirements, evaluate business plan opportunities, market their
services and products, and estimate the market size and revenue opportunity of new and established wireless
technologies. She frequently gives presentations at conferences, and she has written many reports and articles on
wireless technologies and services. She has a PhD in cognitive science from the University of California, San Diego
(US), an MBA from the University of Oxford (UK), and a BA/MA in philosophy from the University of Bologna (Italy).

© 2019 Senza Fili. All rights reserved. The views and statements expressed in this report are those of Senza Fili and Nicoll Associates, and they should not be
inferred to reflect the position of the sponsors or other parties involved in this document. The document can be distributed only in its integral form and
acknowledging the source. No selection of this material may be copied, photocopied, or duplicated in any form or by any means, or redistributed without express
written permission from Senza Fili. While the document is based on information that we consider accurate and reliable, Senza Fili makes no warranty, express or
implied, as to the accuracy of the information in this document. Senza Fili assumes no liability for any damage or loss arising from reliance on this information.
Trademarks mentioned in this document are the property of their respective owners.