1 / 10

IETF 63 - Paris VOIPPEER BoF A Broadband Service Provider’s Perspective on VoIP Peering

IETF 63 - Paris VOIPPEER BoF A Broadband Service Provider’s Perspective on VoIP Peering. August 5, 2005 Presented by Jason Livingood. The Context for VoIP Peering. If it originates on IP and terminates on IP, why convert it to something else in the middle?

aulii
Download Presentation

IETF 63 - Paris VOIPPEER BoF A Broadband Service Provider’s Perspective on VoIP Peering

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IETF 63 - ParisVOIPPEER BoFA Broadband Service Provider’s Perspectiveon VoIP Peering August 5, 2005Presented by Jason Livingood

  2. The Context for VoIP Peering • If it originates on IP and terminates on IP, why convert it to something else in the middle? • Adds cost and complexity (operational & network). • Decreases control over: • User Experience • Services & Quality • Network / Troubleshooting • So… Keep communications IP-based, end-to-end. • IP networks are generally private & free of traditional telecom regulation. • Helps make possible new, broadband IP-based services, not possible via PSTN. • Many big economic and strategic motivations…

  3. The Context for ENUM in VoIP Peering • Without ENUM: • Each switch (CMS) is largely an island unto itself. • Linking many CMSs is difficult to scale. • Vendor-specific methods to share TN / IP data. • Legacy / PSTN-centric solutions (inefficient via IP). • ENUM can tell me, for a dialed TN, what IP network element (CMS, Proxy, SBC, etc.) to send a call to. • Can help to enable easily scalable: • CMS-to-CMS calling (all PacketCable). • PacketCable-to-SIP calling. • Fixed-to-wireless calling. • MSO-to-MSO calling. • MSO-to-any IP-based carrier calling. • BUT, ENUM is just one part of the solution (lest we forget SIP). • Laying the foundation now: (1) Working to use ENUM as part of a solution to simplify call routing; peering work is incremental. (2) Working on backbone for peering and other uses (takes time).

  4. Comcast territory Preparing a Backbone for Intra/Inter-Network Peering National Backbone Network • Over 19,000 route miles of national fiber • Covers 95+% of Homes Passed • All major peering points • Transport capability of >2500+ Gbps in 2005 • 40Gbps IP links in 2005 • QoS based voice, video and data over IP

  5. Private ENUM & VoIP Peering • Development work underway with CableLabs (more later). • Could prioritize peering priorities based on economics (similar to peering analysis used in HSI peering) and/or business strategy. • Comcast and other parties could begin using private ENUM to peer without waiting for public “1.e164.arpa” being up and running. (Short-term hedge.) • Communications peering over IP could enable the federation of multimedia services not feasible over the PSTN due to bandwidth constraints. • Leverages unique capabilities of broadband networks. • Could include both TN-addressed and URI-addressed communications.

  6. Public ENUM & VoIP Peering • Bi-Lateral / multi-lateral, private trees will only scale so far before operational and management challenges present themselves. • Thus, Public ENUM is a long-term goal. • What form will this take? (Carrier or User ENUM) • Without carriers in e164.arpa is the business model for “User” sustainable? • Will there be a mix of different peering types? • Private POPs, with committed capacity. • Public peering points. • Over the Internet generally, best effort (no QoS). • Bottom line: Working towards public ENUM in the future (very important), while hedging our bets with work on private ENUM in the shorter term.

  7. Specific Near-Term VoIP Peering Challenges • Provisioning into / security for ENUM tree. • Normalization of different SIP profiles between providers. • Trust at network edge. • Security / encryption at network edge. • QoS at network edge / passing QoS between parties. • Lawful intercept. • Selection of best IP routes & advertising routes as # POPs increases. • Failover to PSTN routes in the event of IP route failure. • Explore the role of SBCs. • Some PacketCable™-related work on interfaces needed. • Evolves into part of PacketCable 2.0.

  8. PacketCable™ 2.0 Standards Development • Driven to support: • Backward-Compatible (PacketCable Multimedia & PC 1.X) • Enhanced Telephony • Video Telephony • Cross-Platform (voice/video/data convergence) Features • Cellular Integration • Presence and Availability • ENUM / Peering • Commercial Service Extensions

  9. In Summary • What VoIP Peering Is About for Us: • It is about a lot more than saving money. • It is more than just “voice” communications. • It is about enabling new services not possible on the PSTN. • It is about creating / increasing network effects; supercharging adoption. • It is about end-to-end control over communications and staying all-IP. • It is about reducing complexity & increasing efficiency vs. “PSTN-imitation” models. (“Keeping IP in VoIP”) • VoIP Peering is important to companies like Comcast. • Building network and systems infrastructure now. • Both ENUM and SIP are important to this effort; basic standards / protocol groundwork is there. • Some incremental standards work is necessary and vital to success.

  10. Thank You! Questions? Jason Livingood jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com +1-215-981-7813

More Related