Download - Service Provider Involvement with WebRTC
10/8/2014– strictly confidential, confidential, internal, public – 1
SERVICE PROVIDER INVOLVEMENT WITH WEBRTCSEBASTIAN SCHUMANN, SLOVAK TELEKOM9. October 2014. London, United Kingdom
SCOPE
What is the current service provider involvement with WebRTC?
What are the WebRTC options for Telco’s: Not just IMS
How does WebRTC fit with PSTN / IMS / RCS / VoLTE strategies?
Developing WebRTC + Telco-OTT initiatives
How can WebRTC be deployed in the mobile world?
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 2
@s_schumann
Feedback is welcome; get in touch during/after the event!
SLOVAK TELEKOM
Former fixed and mobile incumbent (merger in 2010), Zoznam, Posam
Diverse service portfolio (fixed/mobile network and communications services, Internet access + content, data services, CPE, ICT services (data center + cloud), radio/TV broadcasting, call center services, …)
The major shareholder is Deutsche Telekom AG.
Successful deployments in SEE as well as in DT group:
One of the biggest national-wide deployment of NGN technology in Europe in 2004, whole city migrated to all-IP NGN in 2007
Fixed network IMS migration to be finished in 2014
Leader in IPTV, offering hybrid sat TV (s. 2009) & OTT app (s. 2012)
Extensive FTTx deployments (360k households)
First nation-wide 4G/LTE network (s. 2013)October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 3
Slovak Telekom Group is the telecoms market leader in Slovakia
WHAT IS WEBRTC?
It is implied that WebRTC = “communications”
Just look at the outline, nobody expects a talk about IPTV. And it is obvious. And correct.
WebRTC often mentioned on par with communications services, yet we have already in its early stages seen many different samples using the technology
Sharefest, Viblast, PeerJS/PeerCDN often unknown in operator discussion
For many, “adding WebRTC” means adding voice/video to a service and have this service in the browser
Due to Telecom’s business’ history “communications” = “telephony”
Is it important?
Yes, because it comes with certain presumptions for the service and also in discussions
It comes with less defined constraints than VoLTE/RCS, operators sometimes forget that!
When WebRTC is discussed within operator units, they are almost always discussed with legacy assumptions in mind
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 4
SETTING THE STAGE
Today’s aim is to shed light on a perspective about why many operators think about WebRTC the way they do
Based on this their involvement is discussed
Rational reasoning
The missing bits
Comparison with IMS/RCS/VoLTE/OTT also needs to answer to the question of what these actually are
Technologies, services, concepts, ways of thinking?
“VoLTE is just telephony” Telephony in the browser
This presentation is not about the data channel or non-RTC use cases to stay focused
“It’s a technology, not a service” often cited, deductions from that statement are in fact an iceberg
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 5
WEBRTC “OPTIONS”WHAT CAN THE TECHNOLOGY BE USED FOR?
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 6
Integration Options
Adding “RTC” to the “Web”Adding the “Web” to “RTC”
WebRTC WebRTC
? ?
HOW DOES WEBRTC FIT WITH PSTN/IMS/RCS/VOLTE?
IP technologies are not new, not even for operators. Novelty lies in importance of “soft UX” over “hard QA”
So far, major operator activities only in back-end, not customer facing part
Quote from my 2011 pres: marketing technology is “wrong communication with the customer”
Migration to IMS/VoLTE did not change the service at all
RCS is still based on legacy concepts
WebRTC does fit into All-IP strategy on paper
If back-end is IP, utilizing WebRTC to connect front-ends to back-ends is just logical conclusion
On paper? WebRTC is much more, because it is a new way of thinking and this has often not even started
Design of front-end defines service, back-end completely irrelevant
Many inherent “features” of IMS/VoLTE irrelevant, such as interconnect, “classic” federation
Value shifted from pure connectivity to application outcomes
May still include e.g. federation but more pragmatic w/ simple APIs benefiting all parties
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 7
WebRTC
HOW DOES WEBRTC RELATE TO LEGACY COMM’S?
Legacy communications dealt with RTC, has just recentlyreceived a new polished infrastructure
“Adding” multiple new ways of accessing it is natural
Should not be “WebRTC strategy”, but overhauling services now,so far only the technology has been updated
Only a very small part of what WebRTC enables us to do is (or should be) related to “legacy” telephony as a product
In the end, if operators chose to launch services (or partner) they may chose to add RTC to some of them, and may select WebRTC for a subset of those
Some may interwork with the PSTN, some may not
The operator may provide the solution for some, or identification/hosting/media handling… for others
Sometimes WebRTC will not be used, but maybe an API “that came along with its implementation”
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 8
Legacy
Comm’s
WebRTC
MOBILE DEVELOPMENT
Let’s look at VoLTE vs. WebRTC VoLTE vs. “VoIP telephony using/built with WebRTC most likely in a browser”
Service vs. technology comparison, does not often make sense
Either service characteristics are compared (e.g. legacy interworking, web/E.164 identity)
Or technologies are compared (e.g. Web sockets vs. SIP, EasyRTC vs. IMS)
Browsers will be starting point for PoCs, native still preferred for commercial deployments for now
Native requires different resources than just a few JavaScript programmers (for now)
Lower barrier that WebRTC brings to general RTC app development also true for mobile
Probably if we would see serious products with budget it will be native
Whether operators will have native apps soon or just approach mobile by hopefully at least building responsive web sites is open
Own trials/PoC and focus group targeting products most likely just browser
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 9
WebRTC
DEVELOPING OPERATOR STRATEGIES
WebRTC can be one of the technologies to accelerate development and decrease costs, if operators want to build “OTT services” services that are:
Access independent/network independent/location independent
Use a software front-end (app/web)
Are completely new in how they deliver voice in the application
A separate “OTT strategy” does not make sense
Is has to be elaborated per service how it should be exposed, delivered, and made accessible
Acknowledge that Telco technologists visions over-ran by actual user demands, shift in industry to actually listen to what customers want and value
Other businesses also affected by “telephony-trumping” use cases, for example
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 10
WebRTC
WHAT TO DO BEYOND TELEPHONY?
For “new services” comparison between new services to “Telco services” needed
Current “new” operator services such as VoLTE and RCS are “old Telco services ”
Stand-alone services, no initial and easy integration considered
QoS over QoE, etc.
Important to affect current planning and new services. Do not think about new communications services, but
Evolve existing communications services and innovate on UX/QoE
Embed features in new services (own, partnering)
Software expands to have messaging/voice as features
Integrate “WebRTC support” into other business areas (e.g. hosting, TURN server, integration)
We may not be the best partner for building service, but trusted in providing execution environment
Accelerate also development APIs that can be used!
New thinking needs to come with it, not yet clear everywhere!
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 11
WebRTC
CONSIDERATIONS FOR INTERNAL DISCUSSIONS
Stop seeing WebRTC as “one thing to have”
You won’t have “one system” that does WebRTC and you add it everywhere
Choose a platform depending on what you want to do
Get a gateway if legacy is important (incl. identity, integration etc.), if not chose depending on your resources
Choose your vendor wisely, WebRTC often comes with the IMS and that will have impact on your creativity
Good open-source products available, client-side JavaScript knowledge often enough to get started!
IMS is representative for several characteristics around telephony/aggregated communications
Interconnect (w/ other services), interoperability (between services, e.g. video), identification (E.164, identified operator relation)
Question if your new comm’s service needs it, assume your new not telephony focused services mostly doesn’t
While we are at it, consider to evolve existing services before building a new comm’s service!
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 12
WebRTC
CHALLENGES
Overcome misbelief that “we now have WebRTC”
Strategically important: It’s not one box or one service platform. It is not just some front-end to the IMS.
Proposition-wise important: We have to define the service now (at least more than before)
Operators should focus on a mix of architectural strategies
Can include IMS, but should contain also low-cost alternative for innovation
Requires a mix of enablers for delivering features for future services
Aggregation of architecture has limits, scalability and easy connection of enablers via APIs more important
Yet another organizational change is to happen
Change of fixed vs. mobile companies/units/team backgrounds often not 100% finished
The same aggregation will (and should?) happen for IT/NT
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 13
WebRTC
PRACTICAL BACKUP: WE ARE DOOGFOODING
Slovak Telekom has implemented a PoC not connected to legacy telephony, actively used by employees
A WebRTC gateway RfQ on IMS and show telephony would be easy, but doesn’t have much value yet
We developed a (simple but yet) contextual web application
Sent E-mails contain signature to web portal (address built using E-mail as identifier), contact employees
People can be contacted and also notified out-of-band using various channels, owner/guest not equal
No telephony dial-out: Faster, easy b/c no legacy boundaries such as billing, integration, approval
No complex account setup: Address confirmation using received hash/token for mapping
No one-size-fits-all: Many features consciously omitted (directory, collaboration, conferencing)
One application doing one thing well and which contains only those features required
Been there, done that!
We’ve done VoIP OTT commercially since 2008 and “web telephony” since 2009
Lessons learned from that are tremendously important for next products
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 14
SUMMARYTHE WEBIFICATION OF COMMUNICATION
Less ubiquitous, but more targeted applications will replace telephony general purpose communicationsuse case by use case
Think “web”, but know your playground
Standardized core technologies (HTML/CSS/JS, Objective-C, Java), but not services
Standardized interfaces (REST API w/ doc/SDK is enough) trumps complex E2E scenarios
Revenue “hand over” needs to fit operator business model, find good compromise
We have to “eat our own dog food” to learn and understand
It is imperative that any new service is considered both from technology and service evolution perspectives
Understand and acknowledge the tremendous change to our core business
WebRTC can be part of the solution, an ingredient. It is not THE solution, or A solution for that matter.
October 2014, London, UKSebastian Schumann: “Service Provider Involvement With WebRTC”, 3rd annual Telecom APIs 15
BUSINESS IS STILL KING! THAT MEANS HAVING TELEPHONY (AND ITS REVENUE) ON BOARD.
THANK YOU.Sebastian Schumann
Application & Platform Innovation | Slovak Telekom, a.s.
@s_schumann
+421 903 419 345