Post on 24-Dec-2015
Rick ThompsonSenior Analyst, Heavy Reading
The Evolution of Triple Play:VOIP, IMS, FMC, WiMAX, IPTV
Triple Play Symposium 2006
Dallas, Boston, Paris
Heavy Reading Research• Heavy Reading has published numerous research reports, analyzing the
current state of the technology & expected market development for topics including IPTV, VOIP, IMS, FMC, Carrier Ethernet, IP DSLAMs, ROADMs, Pseudowires, AdvancedTCA, Next-Gen SONET, etc.
• Heavy Reading next-gen broadband/IPTV research 2005 and 2006:• IPTV and the Future of Telecom Video Network Architectures (6/05)
• IP DSLAMs: A Heavy Reading Competitive Analysis (8/05)
• MSAPs: A Heavy Reading Competitive Analysis (10/05)
• IP Video and the New Broadband Edge (12/05)
• DSL Gateways: Beyond the Router (2/06)
• Multimedia Whole-Home Networking: Solving the IPTV Distribution Dilemma (4/06)
• The Future of Internet TV: Emerging “Over-the-Top” Internet Video Services (planned Summer 2006)
• Heavy Reading conducted interviews with hundreds of technology suppliers, service providers & investors with a direct interest in telecom-related topics.
Wireless Backhaul
Beyond Triple Play: Flexibility Is the Killer APP
Online Collaboration
Video Telephony
Info ServicesSports, Games, Hobbies
VideoIP/PC TV
Video on DemandPay Per View
Digital Video Recording
Streaming AudioRadio
Concerts
Streaming Music
InstantMessaging
Fax Services
Dynamic BandwidthUpgrades
Personal StorageImages, Video, Data
Distributed PrintingPhotos, Etc.
Info ServicesFinancial, News, Travel
Home Monitoring
Entertainment Productivity/Reference Communications
Personal Video
Tiered VPN
SecurityAnti-VirusFirewallSPAM
URL Filtering
Voice (VoIP)On-Line GamingDownloads
Real-Time PlayMultiplayer Hosting
Incumbent Dilemmas, 2005• British Telecom
• Retail revenues down 2.5%• Retail profits down 10%
• Deutsche Telecom• Domestic revenues down 1.6%• Broadband/fixed revenues down 3.6%
• France Telecom• Domestic residential revenues down 1.2%• Domestic enterprise revenues down 5.4%
• KPN• Fixed network revenues down 4%• Business revenues down 9%
Major Themes• VOIP will be the dominant wireline telephony technology
within five years– situation is less certain on the wireless side • IMS has won near-universal support among service
providers, and is driving RFPs for NGNs• WiFi, WiMax and IP could disrupt the mobile telephony cartel,
with major long-term consequences• Multimegabit broadband networks will spread rapidly in the
next five years, with telcos moving increasingly to FTTx after 2008
• This transition is being driven by the need to provider high-quality video content, including HDTV and online gaming
• This in turn is having a major impact on home technologies, where the market is wide open to innovation
By 2007, VOIP Will DominateWhen do you expect to see more than 50% of voice traffic
carried over IP on your network?
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Core
Access
Percentage of respondents
Already is Within 1 year 1-2 years More than 2 years away Never
Source: Heavy Reading Survey of Service Provider Attitudes to VOIP, August 2005. Base: 125 Service Providers
Mainstream VOIP Is a Reality
• Service provider VOIP deployment plans • VOIP versus Internet voice
Source: The Future of VOIP: A Heavy Reading Service Provider Study, September 2005
There Are Still Technical Barriers
On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is "not an obstacle" and 5 is "a major obstacle," please rate the effect of the following factors in preventing or hindering the
deployment of VOIP in your company
2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6
Lack of user interest, or real demand
Might cannibalize existing revenues
Problems controlling or reducing opex
Lack of attractive devices or terminals
Problems integrated with legacy infastructure
Difficulties making a clear business case
Regulatory barriers
Initial costs of (subsidizing) CPE
No clear or interoperable standards
911, wiretapping and related issues
Difficulties controlling call quality
Network security and reliability concerns
Lack of agreed QoS across net boundaries
Lack of vendor interoperability, vendor lock-in
Average score
IMS Research Findings• The 2006-2007 time period will be the most important period in FMC, IMS and
NGN technology and service development.
• For service providers, IMS's main appeal is its ability to provide more applications faster and at lower cost.
• Fixed/mobile convergence is an important secondary motivator.
• Although IMS is seen primarily as a mechanism for deploying revenue-generating applications, there is little agreement about which applications should be deployed first, and this lack of consensus may delay carrier implementations.
• IMS is a complex specification, and there are gaps in the standards, especially around policy control and service creation.
• There are strong parallels and linkages between IMS and two other emerging industry standardization movements: service delivery platforms and AdvancedTCA.
When IMS?
Source: Heavy Reading Fall 2005 Survey of Service Provider Technology Deployment Plans
When do you expect to see widespread deployment of IMS in your company's networks?
0 10 20 30 40 50
Don't know/not sure
Never
After 2008
In 2007-2008
By the end of 2006
Percentage of Respondents
Why IMS?• Layered architecture
• Separates transport, control and applications• “We can buy best of breed at every layer!”
• Access-agnostic• Simpler convergence of fixed and mobile networks• “Services no longer tied to access network technology!”
• IP applications • With QoS, security, charging• “A means to fight IP applications leakage to the Internet!”
• New kinds of applications• Blended together • “Higher ARPU, lower churn!”
• More applications, much more quickly, at much lower cost• But controlled, supplied and billed by service provider • “No need to rely on a few killer apps!”
Apps and Services Drive IMSWhat is the most important factor driving IMS
deployment in your company?
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
Converge fixed and mobile services
Environment to enable quick and easylaunch of new services
Deliver applications that combine voice,data and video
Reduce service and applicationsdevelopment costs
Percentage of Respondents
Source: Heavy Reading 2006 Survey of Service Provider Plans for IMS. Base: 93 Service Providers
Service Providers Buy The FMC Vision
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Agree
Disagree
Don't know/Notsure
“Within the next de cade, the first link in every network will always be wireless -cellular, WiFi, WiMax, UWB, and so on -and devices will automatically choose the most appr o-priate type of wireless link based on loc ation, price, and bandwidth. ”
Source: Heavy Reading Survey of Service Provider Attitudes to Fixed-Mobile Convergence, November 2004. Base: 109 Service Providers
Expect FMC to Transform the Industry
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Agree
Disagree
Don't know/Notsure
"Within the next de cade, fixed-mobile convergence will gradually eliminate the border between wireline and wireless car riers and service providers. A new breed of supercarrier that uses any appr opriate network technology to serve its customers will have emerged."
Source: Heavy Reading Survey of Service Provider Attitudes to Fixed-Mobile Convergence, November 2004. Base: 109 Service Providers
FMC Is A Higher Priority For European Service Providers
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
NA
Europe
AsiaPac
Top Priority Important Less Important
Obstacles To FMC Progress
What is the biggest obstacle at present to FMC?
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Don't know/ not sure
Badly designed services or interfaces
Security and authentication
Lack of attractive handsets
Lack of real demand
Legacy infrastructure
Inability to ensure QoS across network/service boundaries
Poor coordination between wired/wireless service providers
Percentage of respondents
Source: Heavy Reading Fall 2005 Survey of Service Provider Technology Deployment Plans
WiMAX Deployment Plans
• Network operators are overwhelmingly positive about theimpact WiMax will have on networks
• WiMax enthusiasm cuts across all types of carriers and across all geographic regions
• The next 12 to 18 months will be critical in determining carrier investment in WiMax
• More than 80 percent of survey respondents expect to see WiMax deployments by the end of 2007
• Network operators are surprisingly open to deploying WiMax using unlicensed spectrum, but interest in pre-standard WiMax products is slight
• Carriers expect to use WiMax to bolster delivery of voice, data, and even triple-play services, but there’s less interest in WiMax for wireless backhaul
WiMAX Product Maturity
WiMAX Deployment Plans
Mobile or Fixed WiMAX?
Mobile WiMAX• The first Mobile WiMax services will launch in Korea in mid
2006, using Samsung equipment; U.S. service launches will follow, possibly as soon as 2007
• Stealth chipset startups are attempting to leapfrog the market and go directly to Mobile WiMax; names in the frame include Beecem, SiWave, Cygnus, Runcom
• Adaptix claims to have already demonstrated system-level mobility based on scaleable OFDMA
• A market for 802.16e line cards and software will emerge alongside demand for smart antenna software suites, as major fabs and OEMs catch on to Mobile WiMax's potential
• Initial services will offer handoff performance suitable for data, but unsuitable for VOIP services
IPTV: Telecom Meets Entertainment
• TV delivery is moving from HFC-based broadcast to IP-based multicast/unicast
• Telcos: IPTV, Telco TV, Telco Video (different names, same thing)• MSOs: SDV initiatives; NGNA (many IPTV-like concepts)
• “Internet TV” is organically evolving in parallel• Google, Yahoo, Apple, YouTube, MLB.com, major broadcast channels,
etc.• Technology platforms: Brightcove, Narrowstep, thePlatform, Veoh, etc.• Network technologies: DPI, Policy Control, granular QoS• Video search engines, P2P video file sharing, etc.• Competitive or complimentary to IPTV?
• Regardless of the model, multimedia content is driving telecom• Wireline• Wireless
Technology Shifts Impacting Market Evolution
• Compression & format: MPEG2 MPEG4; SD HD• More channels, lower bit rates
• Access network: 1.5-3 Mbit/s 20-30+ Mbit/s; ATM Ethernet/IP• Combination xDSL/FTTx
• Aggregation network: ATM GigE/10GigE, IP multicast, QOS• Right amount of aggregation layer intelligence?
• IP edge: High density/capacity, Ethernet-centric, per-service QOS, unicast/multicast scale, integrated B-RAS, high-availability edge
• Transport network: static/legacy reconfigurable/multiservice• Services evolve: Broadcast TV VOD PVR/nPVR integrated &
interactive services• Mobile & IMS?• Internet TV?
IPTV Inflection Points
Su
bscri
ber
Scale
Inte
gra
ted
Serv
ices
Integrated Communication,Information, Entertainment
Focus on scaling number of IPTV subscribers and
introducing “integrated services.”
Also includes potential IMS Integration.
Phase III: 2008 – 2010 Service Differentiation
Basic Broadcast TV(IP Multicast)
Initial, Limited VOD
Focus on initial network & service
layer infrastructure. Modest, controlled service rollouts.
Basic service offerings.
Phase I: 2004 - 2005Technical Viability
PVR, nPVRMPEG-4 HD
Portfolio Expansion:More HD, VOD, PVR
Focus on service assurance and QoE
for existing services and continue adding
new services: enhanced channel
package, additional HD content,
additional VOD content, subscription VOD, time-shifting.
Phase II: 2006 – 2007Quality of Experience
Multicast to Unicast Service Mix
IPTV Market Evolution
End-to-End IPTV: A Brief Overview
Video Serving Office (VSO)
Broadband Access Network Infrastructure
Broadband Aggregation Network Infrastructure
Broadband Routing Network Infrastructure
Super Head-End Office (SHO)
Copper
Metro Transport
RG
IP STBDSLAM
OLT/ONU
Video Hub Office (VHO)
Multimedia Home Network
Video Content Acquisition
Broadcast Video
VOD ServerComplex
Head-End System
Middleware,CA/DRM
Edge Router/B-RAS
Gigabit EthernetAggregation
Regional/LH Transport
Content Providers
20th Century FoxGeneral Electric
News Corp.Sony
Time WarnerViacom
Walt DisneyEtc.
National Video Head-End Office
TELECOM OPERATORResidential Subscriber
Core Router an/.or Edge
Router/B-RAS
Live and On Demand Content Acquired From
Multiple Satellite and Terrestrial
Broadcast Programming
Sources.
Edge Encoders
Numerous Regional VHOs Receive
National Content from SHOs and
Ingest & Distribute Regional Content
and IP VOD.
Local VSOs Receive &
Distribute Content from Upstream. Local Channels and Distributed
VOD Also Served From VSO.
Various Copper- and Fiber-based
Access Networks In Place To Deliver
IPTV to the Residential Subscriber.
SP Controlled Subscriber Premise:
ONT/NID, Residential Gateway, IP
STB/DVR, PC, VoIP, In-Home Distribution
Network
Redundant National SHOs Ingest &
Distribute IP-based Video Content.
Centralized VOD Libraries May Exist.
PC
VoIP
End-to-End Policy Control
Content Owner/Aggregator
Fiber
OLT ONU
ONT
IPTV Bandwidth Requirements
• Video • IPTV with MPEG2 compression
• Standard Definition 3.5Mbps• High Definition 19.3Mbps
• IPTV with MPEG4 compression• Standard Definition 2.0Mbps• High Definition 8.0Mbps
Centralized Architectures?
BroadbandAccess Network
BroadbandAggregation Network
BroadbandEdge Network
Residential Gateway
n HomesBroadband
AccessNodes
Broadband Aggregation
Switches/Routers
Broadband Edge Router
Policy Control Server
Voice
IP/MPLS Core
B’cast Video
VOD
HSI
Distributed Architectures?
Broadband Access Network
BroadbandAggregation Network
Broadband Edge Network
Residential Gateway
n Homes Broadband AccessNodes
Broadband Aggregation
Switches/Routers
Broadband Edge Router
Policy Control Server
Voice
Regional/LocalVideo Content
IP/MPLS Core
B’cast Video
VOD
HSI
Broadband Access
BroadbandAggregation
Broadband Edge
Residential Gateway
n Homes AccessNodes
GigE/10GigE Aggregation
Switches/Routers
EdgeRouter
•Centralized Policy Management•Video CAC•Topology Intelligence•Quality Measurement
Voice
Distributed Policy Enforcement
Regional/LocalVideo Content
B’cast Video
VOD
HSI
1 2 3 4
VoIP
IPTV
HSI First Mile:Aggregatebandwidthneeded forall services
VOD
B’cast
Second Mile:Concurrent VOD sessions
Non-blockingMulticast TV channels
Third Mile:Max. concurrentVoD sessions
Fourth Mile: Link bandwidth equals server capacityVOD controller limits total amount of streams
VOD
B’cast
Network Dimensioning Is Critical
QOE Measurement•Accurate measurement of:
• Overall video service quality• Usage per channel and viewer
density• VoD concurrency, channel
changes• User Quality of Experience
Is essential to: Monitor SLAs and troubleshoot issues Dimension capacity and tune VoD CAC
“IPTV2”: SureWest
• Improved integration• Emerging standards• Next-Gen STBs• Improved compression• Improved QoS• Improved security• Interactive features
IPTV Work in Progress
• Home networking solutions• Ability to utilize existing home wiring• Wireless
• Next-Gen STBs• SD, HD, PVR, Gateways
• Content• Interactive applications
Multimedia Home Networking Taxonomy
AccessNetwork
Copper and/or Fiber Infrastructure: ADSL2plus, VDSL2, FTTx(Home Networking WAN Interfaces Integrated into NID and/or ONT)
EthernetCable
(CAT-5,6)
CoaxialCable
(RG6, RG59)
Twisted PairPhoneline
ElectricalPowerline
Air
IEEE802.3
HPNAv3MoCA
ProprietaryHPNAv3
HomePlug AVProprietary (UPA)
IEEE802.11x
Network Connected Multimedia CPE: IP STB, DVR, Home Gateway, Media Bridges, PC/Laptop, Media Server, Gaming Console, Etc.
(Other Critical Technologies: MPEG-4 Decoders, DRM S/W)
Multimedia CPE UI Technologies: IPTV Browser, EPG, TV/PC Web Browser, Video Search and Navigation
TR-064: LAN side CPE MgmtTR-064: LAN
side CPE Mgmt
WT-111: Remote Mgmt of home devices
(TR-069 pass-thru)
WT-111: Remote Mgmt of home devices
(TR-069 pass-thru)
TR-069: WAN-side CPE Mgmt
TR-069: WAN-side CPE Mgmt
WT-135: STB Object modelWT-135: STB Object model
PhysicalMedium
Standard/Technology
HomeDevices
RemoteMgmt.
UserInterface
Thank You!
Q&A