Telecommunications infrastructure is undergoing a radical transformation as traditional providers shift away from proprietary, closed systems toward versatile, open-access models. Vladislav Zaimov, a seasoned specialist in enterprise telecommunications and risk management for vulnerable networks, joins us to discuss how this shift is redefining connectivity. With a focus on the recent strategic moves by industry giants and the technical frameworks making shared infrastructure possible, Zaimov provides a deep dive into the mechanics of modern broadband deployment.
Gigapower is currently deploying fiber in eight specific markets, including Arizona, Nevada, and Pennsylvania. How do you select these regions outside of traditional footprints, and what unique logistical hurdles arise when building broadband infrastructure across such geographically diverse states?
The selection process for these eight markets—which also include New Mexico, Minnesota, South Carolina, and Florida—is driven by a strategic mandate to reach 1.5 million customer locations outside of the traditional AT&T service footprint. We look for areas where the demand for high-speed fiber is underserved, yet the economic potential for a wholesale-only model remains high. Logistically, moving into geographically diverse states means navigating a patchwork of local permitting and construction challenges that vary wildly between the arid environments of Nevada and the coastal conditions in Florida. To manage this, we focus on establishing a dedicated interconnection office in each specific market, ensuring that our physical infrastructure is localized and ready for regional ISPs to plug in.
Maintaining a clean separation between the physical network and the Layer 3 service layer is a core principle of open access. How do you manage the handoff of customer ownership to independent ISPs, and what specific metrics do you use to measure the success of this wholesale-only model?
Our operational philosophy is built on providing the “pipe” while letting the ISPs handle the “service,” which ensures a very clean separation between our fiber and the Layer 3 traditional telecom layer. When we sign on partners like Flume or Dojo Networks, they take full responsibility for the internet service and maintain the primary relationship with the end-user, meaning the ISP owns the customer entirely. We measure our success through the “take rate,” aiming to exceed the 30% threshold that often makes or breaks the financial viability of a network. By focusing on our role as a wholesaler, we avoid the friction of competing with our own tenants, allowing us to focus on network uptime and route miles rather than retail marketing.
Industry leaders suggest that sharing infrastructure is becoming more viable than over-building due to the high costs of competing for the same customers. Can you walk through the financial trade-offs of this shift and provide examples of how it changes the long-term capital expenditure strategy for major providers?
The economics of fiber deployment are harsh; if you build a proprietary network and only achieve a 30% take rate, the return on investment is often insufficient to cover the massive upfront capital costs. When a second provider over-builds in that same area, they are essentially fighting for a slice of an already thin pie, which leads to wasted capital for both parties. By shifting to an open-access model, we consolidate the capital expenditure into a single, high-quality build that multiple providers can utilize. This “infrastructure sharing” turns a high-risk gamble into a stable utility-like asset, allowing us to scale “like wildfire” because the cost of entry for new ISPs is drastically reduced.
Utilizing TM Forum APIs allows for a “rinse-and-repeat” model when onboarding new internet service providers. What are the specific technical steps involved in this integration process, and how does this standardized software approach compare to using third-party OSS/BSS platforms?
Our integration process relies on software born in AT&T Labs that utilizes TM Forum APIs to handle all the necessary OSS/BSS functions, from billing to provisioning. Any ISP that can consume a standard API can connect with our network very quickly and easily, removing the need for custom, manual configurations for every new partner. This standardized approach is a significant departure from using various third-party platforms like COS Systems, as it creates a uniform digital interface across all our markets. It allows us to treat the onboarding of an ISP in Pennsylvania exactly like one in Arizona, creating a scalable, automated workflow that keeps our overhead low.
Recent acquisitions of mass-market assets have led to the creation of Forged Fiber 37. What are the primary challenges when transitioning legacy fiber assets into a wholesale open access platform, and how equity partnerships help scale these secondary networks more efficiently?
Transitioning the mass-market fiber assets we acquired from Lumen Technologies into Forged Fiber 37 involves a complex shift in operational DNA, moving from a retail-focused legacy mindset to a wholesale commercial open-access platform. The primary challenge is ensuring these older assets are technically compatible with a multi-tenant environment where AT&T acts as the anchor tenant rather than the sole operator. To fund and accelerate this transition, we use equity partnerships—similar to our joint venture with Blackrock for Gigapower—to bring in the necessary capital without overleveraging our own balance sheet. This model allows us to modernize legacy footprints and open them up to competition, which ultimately drives higher utilization of the existing glass in the ground.
Committees are currently working on formalizing standards to lower the barrier for new ISPs entering the market. Which specific processes are most in need of industry-wide alignment, and how would a single standard change the competitive landscape for smaller, local broadband providers?
Currently, groups within ATIS are working on standardizing the way ISPs interact with infrastructure owners, focusing heavily on the software interfaces that govern provisioning and maintenance. We need alignment on how different OSS/BSS platforms talk to one another, as there are currently several competing systems, including our own, COS Systems, and Ubiquity. A single, industry-wide standard would be a huge shift, effectively lowering the technical barrier to entry so that a small, local ISP wouldn’t need a massive engineering team to launch services on a national network. In a software-driven world, merging these standards is much easier than it was with proprietary hardware, and it will eventually allow smaller players to compete on service quality rather than infrastructure depth.
What is your forecast for open access networks?
I believe we are entering an era where the “single-provider” model will become the exception rather than the rule in American broadband. As Tier 1 providers like AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile continue to embrace these shared platforms, we will see a rapid consolidation of standards that will make switching between ISPs as seamless as switching between apps on a phone. The financial pressure to avoid over-building will drive open access to become the primary vehicle for reaching the final 1.5 million underserved locations in the country. Ultimately, the winners will be the consumers, who will finally see true competition and variety in markets that have been monopolies for decades.
