1 / 16

Convergence and its Impact on Users and Providers of Interactive Multimedia Services

This article explores the impact of convergence on traditional voice and video services, discusses the fundamental technical enablers, and examines the regulatory implications. It also highlights the differences between first and next-generation VoIP and the importance of protocols in enabling the creation of applications and content.

egaines
Download Presentation

Convergence and its Impact on Users and Providers of Interactive Multimedia Services

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. ITU Future of Voice 2007 Convergence and its Impact on Users, Providers, and Users as Providers of Interactive Multimedia Services Dr. Eric W. Burger Deputy CTO, BEA Systems, Inc. Member of the Board, SIP Forum VP, IMS Forum 15 January 2007

  2. Agenda • Points from other work • Fundamental technical enablers • Impact on traditional voice and video services • Regulatory implications

  3. Points From Other Work (Today and Tomorrow) • Natural monopoly disappearing, yet ever-present • Excellent economic analysis of last mile and core network sunk cost issues • Difference between telco, cableco, and mobileco?Access Network ONLY! • Many examples of fall in price of communications due to IP enabling new businesses and dramatic economic growth • It is hard to educate consumers about nature of VoIP,Especially if framed as “Cheap Voice” • Voice IP traffic indistinguishable from other IP traffic • Barring port blocking or deep packet inspection • Both defeatable (cf. Skype), but no defense against deliberate stream damage

  4. FS Parlay H.248 H.248 MS MG MGC H.248 First-Generation VoIP • Is convergence simply IP interfaces on TDM equipment? • Approach through 1990’s • Embodied by H.323, H.248 • Many examples of equipment and architectures: e.g., SoftSwitch • Makes sense, coming from telco environment SCP Q.1248.2 Q.1248.3 PRI Q.931 SSP IP

  5. Problems With First Generation VoIP • Same applications: simple voice calling • More equipment • More vendors • Initially higher cost, but promises of “data center economics” • Worse yet, proprietary systems improved in performance 10% every 18 months, not promised 100% • Identical to performance improvements of traditional TDM equipment • “Data center economics” is not about IP interfaces or Intel • Cost to develop new hardware (€250,000 - €2,000,000/board) • Volume to amortize hardware development cost • Competitive pressure to use latest silicon

  6. Next Generation VoIP: Is SIP the Only Difference? • Key point is not that we trade API’s for SIP everywhere • SIP everywhere means session establishment and processing is transparent to client and server AS SIP SIP SIP SIP SIP SIP SCIM MGC P-CSCF I-CSCF I-CSCF S-CSCF SIP SIP Phone SIP H.248 MRB MG RTP SIP MRF Full 3GPP IMS Architecture AS • Get benefits today of Applications and Services infrastructure; deploy IMS when ready SIP SIP MGC SIP Phone SIP H.248 MG MRF Leverage SIPRouting Cloud RTP RTP

  7. Provider Network Physics of Media ProcessingConferencing Example • Many have welcomed or bemoaned the migration of intelligence to the edge • Some things are best done “in network”

  8. Provider Network Physics of Media Processing:All Intelligence at Edge • Many have welcomed or bemoaned the migration of intelligence to the edge • Some things are best done “in network” • Each node receives at least three times more traffic • Complex service logic coordination and topology • All traffic going through thin access pipe to provider network SL SL SL SL

  9. Provider Media Processor Network Physics of Media Processing:All Processing Centralized at ASP • Many have welcomed or bemoaned the migration of intelligence to the edge • Some things are best done “in network” SL • Each node receives single stream • Straightforward service logic and media processing • Lots of bandwidth required at ASP ASP

  10. Provider Service Network Logic Physics of Media Processing:All Intelligence at ASP, Media in Network • Many have welcomed or bemoaned the migration of intelligence to the edge • Some things are best done “in network” • Each node receives single stream • Straightforward service logic and media processing • Only signaling (low bandwidth) needed at ASP • Customer data stays at ASP; heavy mediaprocessing done by network MRF ASP

  11. First Generation Use IP versions of SS7 H.248 JAIN Parlay Parlay-X Developer pool Java (or Web Services) developers who are experts in SS7, CS-2 (Apologies to Zygmunt) Impact unquestionably huge for captive / TEM development Second Generation Use real-time multimedia extensions of Web SIP VoiceXML CCXML MSCML Developer pool Minimal training over HTTP (SIP) Minimal training over HTML (XML) Impact huge for enterprise, user, and new entrant development Is Next Generation VoIP Really Different than First Generation VoIP? Key is how applications developed and deployed

  12. Why is This Distinction Important? • Dramatically lowers barrier of entry for users to create applications and content • Protocols built from ground-up to survive hostile environments (Internet) enable disaggregation of functions, such as MRF • Creates new opportunities for service providers • Creates environment for wealth generation • Flattens marketplace • 1990: “In America, you open your garage door, and you see a market of 250 000 000 people; in Sweden, you open your garage door, and you see 2 meters of snow.” • 2007: “You open your garage door anywhere in the world, put up a server, and see a market of a few hundred million people.”

  13. Distinction Lost: The Voice Call • Innovative applications may use person-to-person, real-time, audio communication • Teamspeak for World of Warcraft • Vivox for Second Life • Is this a phone call, or part of the game? • Truly indistinguishable: recalling other presentations today and tomorrow • Defeating VoIP defeats new, wealth-creating applications (often worth much more than displaced voice revenues)

  14. Distinction Lost: The Video Value Chain • Is BitTorrent a cable provider? • Provide access to movies • But also provide access to many other kinds of multimedia • Is YouTube a cable provider? • Provide access to movies • Most are not studio productions, but user productions • Anyone who has tried to create municipal networks understands negotiating for content is hard • But when content comes from users, with implicit right-to-view, not an issue • Still role for content aggregators

  15. Issues for Regulators • Universal services now mean IP access, not an analog voice line or basic cable video service • Revenue from voice calling falling precipitously, but IP end-user access is nowhere near free • Technically difficult if not impossible to determine what is a voice call (for tariff and tax purposes) • Expect to give up that source of revenue • Look for alternatives for universal IP access • Alternative: Lose national wealth potential, innovation, and competitive advantage

  16. Thank You Dr. Eric W. Burger 15 January 2007 Questions

More Related