Europe’s telecoms networks are entering another significant period of change. Security and resilience are increasingly influencing decisions about the technology that can remain within critical networks and what may need to replace it.
The latest GSMA Intelligence report, The cost of removing designated third-country vendors from EU telecoms networks, estimates that European operators could face €30-40 billion in costs if equipment supplied by designated high-risk vendors has to be removed from networks.
That figure puts the potential scale of the challenge into perspective. But procurement is only one part of a major network replacement programme. Every change creates two parallel flows of technology: new infrastructure entering the network and existing infrastructure leaving it.
How operators manage both will have a significant bearing on cost, resilience, disruption and sustainability.
Start with what is already in the network
Large telecoms networks have evolved over decades, through successive technology generations, vendors, acquisitions and upgrades. As a result, asset records do not always provide a complete picture of what is physically installed or how different parts of the network depend on one another.
Before replacement begins, operators need a clear understanding of the affected estate, including configurations, connectivity, power requirements and the services each element supports. Removing one platform can have implications for transmission, fibre, power, management systems, cabling and other infrastructure around it.
This is why network audit, design and planning are so important. Identifying those dependencies early reduces the risk of unexpected problems during deployment and creates an opportunity to look beyond like-for-like replacement. If engineers are already entering sites and infrastructure is being changed, could redundant equipment also be removed, racks consolidated or legacy technology rationalised?
A necessary replacement programme can become an opportunity to simplify and improve the wider network.
Protect resilience while the network changes
Replacing infrastructure in a live network is fundamentally different from building a new one. Services still need to operate while technology is being changed around them, making migration planning just as important as the replacement technology itself.
Operators need to consider sequencing, testing, rollback procedures, capacity, spares and engineering support, while coordinating procurement, configuration, staging, logistics and field activity. At scale, a delay or constraint in one part of the programme can quickly affect another.
The aim is not simply to install new infrastructure as quickly as possible. It is to manage the transition without compromising the performance and resilience of the network the programme is ultimately intended to protect.
Understand the value of what is coming out
The economics also extend beyond the cost of buying and installing replacement equipment.
When infrastructure is removed, it does not automatically become worthless. Depending on the applicable security, regulatory, contractual and technical requirements, assets may require different routes. Some may be eligible for redeployment, refurbishment or resale where permitted and appropriate. Others may have value through component harvesting or the recovery of materials such as copper, aluminium and steel.
Those decisions should be made before decommissioning begins.
If asset recovery is considered only once equipment has already left the network, assets can accumulate in storage, records can become disconnected from the physical equipment and potential value can decline. Building the outgoing asset strategy into the programme from the beginning gives operators greater control over both the financial and environmental outcomes.
Decommissioning is part of the transformation
The focus of a replacement programme naturally falls on what is going into the network. Yet removing the existing estate at scale can be a major operation in its own right.
Equipment needs to be safely disconnected, identified and transported. Data-bearing assets may require secure sanitisation, while clear chain-of-custody processes are needed to provide visibility over where equipment goes and how it is ultimately processed.
This becomes particularly important when infrastructure is being removed in response to security or regulatory requirements. Taking equipment out of a live network should not mean losing sight of it once it leaves the site.
The same planning also supports better sustainability outcomes. Where reuse is permitted and appropriate, extending the life of technology can preserve more of the value already embedded within it. Where it is not, responsible recycling can recover valuable materials and keep them in productive use rather than allowing them to become waste.
Think in lifecycles, not individual projects
Security and compliance may be the catalyst for infrastructure replacement, but operators have an opportunity to achieve more from the investment.
A well-planned programme can improve asset visibility, rationalise legacy infrastructure, protect network resilience and ensure technology leaving the network follows the most appropriate route. It can also recover financial value where possible and reduce unnecessary waste.
At TXO, we believe this is why network transformation needs to be considered across the complete technology lifecycle. Audit, design and planning should connect with deployment and migration, while decommissioning, asset recovery, reuse and responsible recycling should be considered from the outset rather than at the end.
Because when infrastructure has to change at scale, the question is not only what replaces it? It is also what happens to everything that comes out?