Beyond lock-in: How Open Digital RF is changing ground segment procurement

Today, ground infrastructure is expected to support multiple orbits, diverse applications and shifting service demands, often from shared sites. The challenge facing buyers is no longer limited to performance or availability. It is how to procure infrastructure that works reliably today without closing off options tomorrow. Against this backdrop, the move towards digitized RF and the emergence of open standards such as Digital IF Interoperability (DIFI), is beginning to influence how ground systems are specified, bought and integrated.

By John Vesey, Business Development Director of ETL Systems

John Vesey, Business Development Director of ETL Systems

For decades, satellite ground segment procurement followed a familiar pattern. Operators invested in tightly integrated RF chains supplied by a small number of vendors, optimized for specific missions and designed to remain in service for many years. That model delivered reliability and predictability, but it did so by limiting flexibility. As missions multiplied and system requirements evolved more quickly, those trade-offs became increasingly difficult to justify.

The procurement problem operators are really trying to solve

From a buyer’s perspective, pressure on ground segment procurement is coming from several directions at once. Network architectures are becoming more complex; capital budgets are under scrutiny and deployment timelines are tightening. At the same time, operators are being asked to future-proof infrastructure against requirements that are not yet fully defined.

Traditional procurement models can struggle under these conditions. Vertically integrated RF systems are often highly optimized for a given use case, but they can be difficult to adapt once deployed. Adding new capabilities may require significant reintegration effort, or even the replacement of infrastructure that is otherwise still performing its intended role.

The result is a growing tension between reliability and adaptability. Buyers want systems that are proven and dependable, but they are increasingly cautious about committing to architecture that ties them to a single vendor or technical approach for the long term.

Comparison of vertically integrated RF procurement models with open, standards-based Digital IF architectures. Open ground segment approaches enable multi-vendor interoperability, reduce long-term lock-in and support capability-led, modular evolution.

Buyer trade-offs under pressure

These pressures force procurement teams to make a series of difficult trade-offs. Cost certainty is often weighed against future flexibility. Highly integrated solutions can offer clearer upfront pricing and reduced integration effort at the point of purchase, but they may limit the ability to evolve systems incrementally over time. More open, modular approaches promise adaptability but can introduce uncertainty around integration work and long-term cost.

A similar balance exists between integration risk and vendor dependence. Single-vendor systems can simplify accountability, but often at the expense of negotiating leverage and architectural choice. Multi-vendor approaches distribute risk differently, requiring greater oversight at the system level while offering resilience against lock-in.

Speed of deployment also plays a major role. Under time pressure, there is a natural tendency to prioritize solutions that can be deployed quickly, even if they introduce constraints later on. Architectural purity, while attractive in principle, often gives way to pragmatic decisions shaped by operational urgency. These are not failures of procurement discipline, but reflections of the realities buyers face when balancing competing priorities.

Illustration of an open Digital IF ecosystem, where RF front ends, modems and orchestration platforms from different vendors interoperate via standardised DIFI interfaces, enabling greater flexibility and supplier choice.

Why did digitization alone not remove lock-in

Digitization was initially seen to break this cycle. By converting RF signals into digital form earlier in the signal chain, operators gained greater flexibility in how signals could be transported and processed, using software-defined techniques and commercial networking technologies.

In practice, early digital RF deployments did not always deliver this level of freedom. Proprietary digital interfaces often replaced analogue dependencies, and interoperability remained limited. While digitization improved performance and scalability in many cases, it did not, on its own, change how procurement decisions were being made.

This experience has led many buyers to recognize that digitization, while necessary, is not sufficient on its own. Without open interfaces, digital systems can remain just as closed as their analogue predecessors.

Lifecycle view of modern ground segment deployment, highlighting how open Digital IF architectures support capability-led procurement, multi-vendor integration and incremental system evolution over time.

DIFI and the shift towards open digital RF ecosystems

This is where DIFI represents a meaningful change. By defining open, vendor-agnostic interfaces for digitized intermediate frequency, it creates the conditions for different parts of the RF chain, from front ends through to transport and processing, to work together with suppliers.

The significance of this shift extends beyond engineering. Open interfaces change how ecosystems behave. They allow buyers to separate concerns, source components from different suppliers, and evolve systems incrementally rather than through large, disruptive upgrades.

The analogy is often drawn with Wi-Fi. Not because satellite ground systems will ever be as simple as consumer networking, but because common standards change the basis of competition. Value moves away from proprietary interfaces and towards performance, integration capability, and service quality.

Interoperability still requires discipline

One of the most persistent misconceptions surrounding open standards is the assumption that they eliminate integration complexity. Interoperability enables choice, but it does not remove the need for careful system design.

Systems that comply with the same standard can still behave very differently under load, place different demands on timing and synchronization, or interact with surrounding infrastructure in unexpected ways. Interoperability allows systems to work together, but it does not guarantee that components are interchangeable.

For procurement teams, this distinction matters. Simply asking for “DIFI-compliant” equipment is rarely sufficient. Without a clear understanding of system-level requirements and responsibilities, openness can introduce ambiguity rather than clarity.

High-level representation of the Digital RF value chain, showing the relationship between RF hardware, digital transport infrastructure and compute or processing domains connected through standardised Digital IF interfaces.

Rethinking RFPs in a DIFI-enabled world

As a result, procurement processes themselves need to evolve. In an open digital RF environment, effective RFPs tend to focus less on individual products and more on clearly defined capabilities.

When requirements are vague, risk shifts back onto the buyer. Ambiguity around performance expectations, timing requirements, or responsibility for integration can lead to misaligned assumptions between suppliers and operators. Rather than accelerating deployment, poorly specified openness can slow projects, increase integration effort, and complicate accountability.

Clear, capability-led RFPs help mitigate this risk. By articulating outcomes rather than components, buyers are better placed to benefit from interoperability while retaining control over how systems behave in practice.

Procurement and operations: closing the gap

Another challenge often underestimated at the procurement stage is the transition to operations. Decisions made during sourcing shape the integration and support burden that operational teams inherit, sometimes long after contracts are signed.

Procurement teams, engineers and operations staff need a shared understanding of how systems are expected to behave and where responsibility sits when issues arise. Open standards place greater emphasis on cross-functional alignment. Without this alignment, the benefits of openness can be diluted by operational complexity.

When procurement and operations are closely aligned, open digital RF architectures are easier to manage and adapt over time. When they are not, integration challenges can persist long after deployment, undermining confidence in the approach.

Hybrid architecture and pragmatic decision-making

It is also important to recognize that openness does not imply an immediate move to fully digital, end-to-end architectures. For many buyers, hybrid systems that combine analogue and digital elements remain the most practical option.

Existing analogue infrastructure often represents significant investment and continues to perform reliably in defined roles. Incremental digitization allows organizations to build experience, test new approaches, and manage risk without exposing critical operations to unnecessary disruption.

Hybrid architectures, when designed deliberately, should not automatically be viewed as a compromise. They are often a pragmatic response to the realities of cost, capability, and operational risk. Open standards help make these hybrid approaches more sustainable by ensuring that digital elements introduced today do not constrain future evolution.

What success looks like for buyers

Over the next five years, successful ground segment procurement is likely to be characterized by modular approaches rather than single, tightly integrated designs. Buyers will prioritize architecture that can evolve incrementally, integrating new capabilities without forcing large-scale replacement.

Open standards such as DIFI provide an important foundation for this approach, but they are not the end goal. The real prize is a procurement model that balances flexibility with discipline, enabling innovation while maintaining control over performance, cost, and risk.

In that sense, the shift towards open digital RF is less about technology than about mindset. For buyers willing to adapt how they specify, source, and operate ground infrastructure, it offers a credible path away from lock-in and towards long-term resilience.