ngn - athens university of economics and business · towards the ngn (next generation ... network...
TRANSCRIPT
NGN
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Towards the NGN (Next Generation Network)
The network has bigger role than offering bit pipes
Services use the concept of sessions (SIP)
The network controls sessions (associations)
Assigns resources (QoS), CAC
Offers open market for creating on-demand service bundles, service portal to customers
Performs accounting and billing
Network offers personalization and customization
Network services extend to higher layers than layer 3
Is in a better position to control users and influence e2e associations
No more network neutrality?
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Next Generation Networks
Transition from single-service networks to multi-service networks
In NGN service intelligence is decoupled from network transmission
Offers converged services: fixed telephony, mobile telephony, broadband Internet, leased lines, …
Traffic from various access networks types is aggregated: fixed (ISDN, FTTx), mobile (PLMN), wireless (802.1x), …
Network is IP-based
Supports QoS (G/MPLS)
IP Core Network
Access
Access Access
Clients
Access
Access Access
Servers
Communcation Control
Content Content
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
The NGN layers
network
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Next Generation Network
SPs to offer differentiated services
Rapid introduction of new value added services
Personalized applications to reduce churn and
enhance differentiation
Multimedia and Combinational (e.g. Fixed-Mobile)
Services
SPs require close User and Network control
Authentication, Charging, Policy Enforcement
(QoS, Security, Accounting…)
“Walled Garden” Service Concept for a wide variety
of Services
Network Convergence
Access independence and mobility
Transport convergence over IP
Reuse of common resources
Aging PSTN Equipment
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Services in NGN
Subscriber Personalization
Actively Manage the Subscribers Identity and Adjust the Service Offering/Packaging (i.e., different identity in different worlds)
Mass-Scalability
Leverage Mass-Customization Principles: Service-Bundling; subscriber-Grouping and Per-Group Processing
Minimize support Calls: Self Management
Service Evolution
From Transport Based Service Models (Time/Distance/Volume) to Content Based Service Models
Flexible service creation is a must!
Many new applications will have lower adoption rate (likely <10%) therefore not justifying vertical solution
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Service Customization and Identity
You can only customize for whom you know
Subscription defined Identity
Home-Network Provider
Access-Network Provider
Feedback & behaviour derived: Know the customer better than he does himself
Identity handling:
Pre-defined as part of the subscription (contract, portal)
Provisioned data: Identity gathering (from multiple sources and events)
Identity becomes a function of time estimated from the data path
Authorized service portfolio can be linked to Identity, associated to a subscriber “Session”
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
British Telecom’s 21 CN
ROW
&
Other
NetworksIP
DPCN
DSL
PSTN
PDH
Fibre
Copper
DWSS
ASDH
End
User
~5k
nodes
~2k
nodes
~400
nodes
~100
nodes
~15
nodes
MSH -SDH
~1k
nodes
Mesh -SDH
CWSS
ATMIP
PSTN
Kstream
Agg box
&copper
Leased Lines are
merged with
IP/ATM
Merge of
ATM/IP
Merge of
optical
technologies
Suppression of
PSTN
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
ΒΤ 21CN program
ΒΤ financial info
Revenues ~20b£
Profit ~2b£
Employees: ~100k
Employee Cost: ~5 b£
BT 21CN info
Duration: 2004-2010
Cost: 10b£
Est. Benefit: 1b £/χρόνο
5.000 employee reduction
Core
Node
Core
Node
MSAN
Core
Node
Metro
Node
Metro
Node
Metro
Node
Metro
Node
MSAN
MSANMSAN
MSAN
MSAN
MSAN
MSAN
MSAN
MSAN MSAN
Core Network
ISP 2
ISP 1
IPsphere
Creating a
commercially
sustainable framework
for IP services
Realizing Next Generation Revenues
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
The problem
Internet is not a single large infrastructure that continues to be
developed apace, but a federation of separate cooperating IP networks
An imbalance in the risk vs reward for the participants threatens the
cooperative outcome and the IP market
Today’s IP service framework lacks the means to compensate partnering
service providers in proportion to their contribution of resources to an
end-to-end service
How to ensure that investments in service innovation and infrastructure
development are rewarded and encouraged?
Need for mechanisms that allow the compensation for incremental
investments in development and deployment of new services
Any resource capability contributed to enhance an overall retail service
offer should be framed in a business context
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
The sustainability of the Internet
www services succeeded due to the almost zero marginal cost of
adding www applications to a fixed-price Internet access platform
This allowed many new diverse relationships and experiences to be
conceived and tried out, many www players forged significant buyer-
seller relationships on the basis of the Internet’s global connectivity
They arbitraged the relatively low cost of Internet BW, representing
net market loss viewed from the perspective of conventional telecom
service portfolios
Similarly, new operators enjoyed a low barrier of entry but eventually
did not managed to build sustainable businesses
Incumbents network operators naturally seek to develop new service
revenues to offset losses due to arbitrage of traditional portfolios
Conclusion: next generation of services and revenues will depend on
the online industry’s capability to sustain investment by all
stakeholders, and cheap enough not to drive innovation out
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
A solution
Middle ground: allow providers to specify and charge for services
offered to their customers and other providers
No incentive for walled gardens since revenue is generated by
participating in the service value chain of competitors
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Handles the challenge of developing a standard efficient and flexible framework and business models to deal with operational and administrational processes associated with service planning, marketing, fulfilling and assuring
Service management and operations today utilize service-specific monolithic management systems linked to similarly monolithic network technology
As telecommunication providers move to a converged service delivery platform this vertical structure needs to be broken down in order to facilitate the creation, provisioning and management of these new services that span multiple provider boundaries and stakeholder control domains.
The IPsphere Framework has been developed to enable providers to concurrently optimize flexibility and efficiency by focusing on the translation of a generalized service offering into a set of generalized resource commitments to meet the overall service goals
In the IPsphere Framework Services are structured via the decomposition of a Service into constituent Elements that represent the capabilities of a set of technology resources
The IPsphere Framework allows a service provider (called Administrative Owner) to provide an end-to-end Service, while collaborating with partnering service providers (called Element Owners) that are responsible for the Elements composing the Service
The scope of the IPsphere Framework is based on two key aspects namely,
service abstraction: providing a mechanism to declare a service offer in terms of technical and business constraints
service decomposition: mapping a service offer to resource commitment across one or more providers.
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
“IPSphere” is the vision for an internet that
is capable of being partitioned into virtually independent service-specific subnetworks/overlays
– Internet will be a subnetwork with best-effort quality
service attributes can be controlled as on a private IP network
This vision is gaining increased attention from stakeholders
Successor of Juniper Networks’ “Infranet” vision
Members include service providers, system integrators, software developers and infrastructure vendors (including Cisco)
Purpose: viable business models for service providers
Tasks
Identify and develop the missing parts of the underlying IP infrastructure
– In association with a third-party body in order to be compatible with existing & emerging standards
Design a commercial framework that will bring trust among providers and create a more flexible value chain
IPSphere can complement IMS, by bringing QoS
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
IPsphere architecture elements
Traffic Handling (TH) Stratum delivers packets from one end point to another
Most traditional networking technologies and equipment reside in this stratum (routers, Multiplexers,…)
Network Policy and Control (NP&C) Stratum Coordinates the delivery of packets in the TH
Stratum (push policy decisions to network elements on the TH Stratum for enforcement)
– brings intelligence to the network
Traditional network OSS and policy servers reside in this stratum
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
IPsphere architecture elements
Service Structuring Stratum (SSS) Has few roots in traditional networking
Based on Web Services for managing collaborative services (service creation, discovery, negotiation, activation, assurance and provision)
– Every participating provider publish a list of “Elements” to a registry that represent services and roles the provider is willing to accept
– Services are created by assembling elements in a structured fashion
– A Grid-like marketplace
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Vertically Integrated Services Explicit walled garden
Cooperative Services Revenues in proportion to
the resources each partner contributes (implicit walled garden)
Best-effort case: Internet
IPsphere internet
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
IPsphere service creation
The IPsphere divides a service into Elements, which include
Access
Transport/Connection
Content/Processing
Users/Access point
A given service may have any number of elements of any of these types as needed, and services are created by combining Elements contributed by providers.
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
IPsphere service examples
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
IPsphere characteristics
Assurance through SLAs
Security through well defined interfaces
Quality of service by setting up inter-carrier MPLS paths
Differentiated services
Not only on price, but service attributes as well
On-demand services: end-user applications shall automatically request the level of security, quality of service and bandwidth they need from their network provider and have that delivered across the internet
Backup slides
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
IMS Architecture
MRF
IMS Core
RNCMSC(Server)
SGSNGGSN
CN
MGW
BSC
UMTS/GPRS
SIP Application
Servers
P-CSCF
I-CSCF
S-CSCF
HSS
SIP Application
Servers
SIP Application
Servers
IMS Applications
MGCF
BGCF
MGW
VoIP Interworking
Elements
IP Bearer Network
DSL/Cable Modem
DSLAM/CMTS
WLAN
CDMA 2000
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
What does IMS provide?
Services and Control• Adds call session control to the packet network (GPRS)• Enables peer-to-peer real-time services - such as voice, video -
over a packet-switched domain • Scalable common service control (based on SIP) gives the ability
to manage parallel user servicesMixed Multimedia
• Ability to pick and mix various multimedia flows in single or multiple sessions
• Can handle real-time voice, video, dataAccess Independence
• Provides access to IP based services independent of the underlying access technology
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Business Possibilities (1)
1. Faster Application Launch• Time to market
2. Mixed Services: Voice + Data + Video • Blended lifestyle services - customization• Multimedia Services (higher ARPU)• Operational Savings through unified all-IP network
3. Fixed – mobile Convergence• Bundle of services (quad-play)• Single network results in lower OPEX
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Business Possibilities (2)
4. More Control in services
• Carriers offer services, not only bit pipes
• Preserve the Walled garden model and extend it to services
5. Reduced CAPEX and OPEX
• Competition on service quality as basic service offering becomes a commodity.
6. Market of service components
• Operators buy service components from many competitive suppliers (like in service Grid)
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
How? (1)
1. Faster Application Launch• Through reusing service modules (e.g. billing, roaming,
authentication, user profile data, DRM) for multiple services.• Through opening of networks to 3rd parties for new application
development
2. Mixed Services: Voice + Data + Video• With IMS acting as a “middleware” between the today’s different
networks (for voice, data and cable TV)• IMS offers standard means of mixing different media using
appropriate application servers
3. Fixed – mobile Convergence• Same as 2
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
How? (2)
4. More Control on service layer• Service level awareness• Access to services based on user profile (basic,prenium,gold) • Better Control in packet resources used
5. Reduced CAPEX and OPEX• Through simpler architecture, shared functionality and re-use of
infrastructure for multiple services
6. Market of service components • Through open and well defined interfaces which allow multi-vendor
interoperation
C. Courcoubetis and G. StamoulisOTE seminar 4/2007
Open issues…
IMS does NOT ensure end-to-end QoS
Interoperability of different networks for end2end IMS services (both technological and commercial)
Services not standardized yet (a few will)
Fixed and mobile operators have different drivers Fixed operators need to tackle VoIP and increased competition
while mobile operators need to increase ARPU in a saturated oligopolistic market
Need for Compatible terminals Eg mobile capable of multimedia, IP adress, IDs, SIP clients