A Special Supplement to In Partnership with

C1 Supp 5/23/06 3:37 PM Page C1

The Ultimate Guide to IPTV is a supplement to the June 2006 issue of Telecommunications“ Americas. Copyright 2006 Horizon House Publications.

Using IMS and IP convergence todeliver what the customer wants.Andrea Sorensen, Amdocs

Helping service providers rede�ne the end-user service experience.JimWhite, Alcatel

�e traditional emphasis on managingnetworks must change to providethe reliability, QoS and ‘always-on’bandwidth availability essential for IPTV.Sameh Yamany, Trendium

Service providers need to look beyond IPTV alone and bundle it as one ofmany services. Adopting this strategywill help dramatically increase broadband service revenue.Gary Southwell, Juniper Networks

�e ability to provide real-time,�exible billing, provisioning solutionswill be critical to the success of many service providers as they enter new markets.Renata Silva, Siemens

Telecom providers with rich IPTV service creation platforms will be the masters of their own fate.Phil �ompson, mPhase Technologies

�e real lesson for service providers is evolution — and pricing.Tom Nolle, CIMI Corp.

For service providers and OEM players, hybrids will deliver more reliability and fewer customer service calls, having a signi�cant impact on customer satisfaction and brand loyalty.Kurt Scherf, Parks Associates

Service providers and vendors areworking collaboratively to de�ne the architecture, requirements and standards for IPTV.Maria Estefania, ATIS

Leveraging the power of IMS and intelligent, content-aware optical/Ethernet networks to deliver innovative TV services wherever, whenever and however your customers want them.Rob Piconi, Lucent Technologies

Video/IPTV-to-network linkages are needed in order for providers to be able to deliver a high-quality experience to millions of customers while maximizing resources. David Benham, Cisco Systems

Savvy service providers are embracing IPTV as the winning platform for delivering the latest revenue-generating entertainment and communications services.Christine Heckart, Microso� TV,and Carl Rijsbrack, Alcatel

Take nothing for granted,early adopters say. Jim Barthold,Telecommunications® Magazine

The Ultimate Guide to IPTV is a supplement to the June 2006 issue of Telecommunications® Americas. Copyright 2006 Horizon House Publications.

p03 TOC Supp 5/19/06 11:38 AM Page 3

The Ultimate Guide to IPTV is a supplement to the June 2006 issue of Telecommunications“ Americas. Copyright 2006 Horizon House Publications.

Using IMS and IP convergence todeliver what the customer wants.Andrea Sorensen, Amdocs

Helping service providers rede�ne the end-user service experience.JimWhite, Alcatel

�e traditional emphasis on managingnetworks must change to providethe reliability, QoS and ‘always-on’bandwidth availability essential for IPTV.Sameh Yamany, Trendium

Service providers need to look beyond IPTV alone and bundle it as one ofmany services. Adopting this strategywill help dramatically increase broadband service revenue.Gary Southwell, Juniper Networks

�e ability to provide real-time,�exible billing, provisioning solutionswill be critical to the success of many service providers as they enter new markets.Renata Silva, Siemens

Telecom providers with rich IPTV service creation platforms will be the masters of their own fate.Phil �ompson, mPhase Technologies

�e real lesson for service providers is evolution — and pricing.Tom Nolle, CIMI Corp.

For service providers and OEM players, hybrids will deliver more reliability and fewer customer service calls, having a signi�cant impact on customer satisfaction and brand loyalty.Kurt Scherf, Parks Associates

Service providers and vendors areworking collaboratively to de�ne the architecture, requirements and standards for IPTV.Maria Estefania, ATIS

Leveraging the power of IMS and intelligent, content-aware optical/Ethernet networks to deliver innovative TV services wherever, whenever and however your customers want them.Rob Piconi, Lucent Technologies

Video/IPTV-to-network linkages are needed in order for providers to be able to deliver a high-quality experience to millions of customers while maximizing resources. David Benham, Cisco Systems

Savvy service providers are embracing IPTV as the winning platform for delivering the latest revenue-generating entertainment and communications services.Christine Heckart, Microso� TV,and Carl Rijsbrack, Alcatel

Take nothing for granted,early adopters say. Jim Barthold,Telecommunications® Magazine

The Ultimate Guide to IPTV is a supplement to the June 2006 issue of Telecommunications® Americas. Copyright 2006 Horizon House Publications.

p03 TOC Supp 5/19/06 11:38 AM Page 3

pleased to partner with Telecommunications® Magazine in presentingto you �e Ultimate Guide to IPTV. In this publication, you will �nd the latestinformation supporting IPTV service deployments, by the communicationsindustry’s leading equipment and so�ware companies.

Over the past several years, service providers have made enormous investmentsin new network infrastructure and �ber deployments, all designed to bring unsurpassed bandwidth speeds and new services to the user. Among these newservices is IPTV, or Internet Protocol Television.

IPTV o�ers an unparalleled and revolutionary video and entertainmentexperience. �at’s because it o�ers much more than just “live television.” IPTVo�ers a dizzying array of entertainment options and functions – iTV, gamingoptions, Video on Demand, Pay Per View, and much more. It is capturing theimagination of consumerswho’ve already had the opportunity to either subscribe,

or in some cases preview this exciting new servicein various test markets.

As IPTV matures as a technology, so does the need for industry collaboration. Critical to the ongoingrollout and mass deployment of IPTV service isthe ability of service providers and the vendorcommunity to reach consensus on critical architecture requirements, as well as standards that supportcontent delivery, digital rights management, Quality of Service, interoperability, and other technicaland operational considerations. It is for this reason that the Alliance for TelecommunicationsIndustry Solutions (ATIS) moved forward with the creation of the IPTV Interoperability Forum– an industry venue where leading service providers, manufacturers and so�ware companies are�eshing out the architecture and standards that will further support the delivery of IPTV into themarketplace. In this Ultimate Guide to IPTV you will learn more about this exciting initiative, andthe path ATIS member companies are taking to fully realize IPTV service.

Also featured in this informative guide are valuable contributions from several industry leadersin IPTV. From their articles, you will learn more about how these companies are supporting IPTVwith solutions for service assurance, middleware, service integration, billing, and much more.

�ank you for your interest in the Ultimate Guide to IPTV. We hope you �nd it most useful asyou give consideration to the technology and operations path and real business opportunities thatIPTV service o�ers to our industry and its users.

Susan M. MillerPresident & CEO, ATIS

p04 Supp 3 5/19/06 11:45 AM Page 4

pleased to partner with Telecommunications® Magazine in presentingto you �e Ultimate Guide to IPTV. In this publication, you will �nd the latestinformation supporting IPTV service deployments, by the communicationsindustry’s leading equipment and so�ware companies.

Over the past several years, service providers have made enormous investmentsin new network infrastructure and �ber deployments, all designed to bring unsurpassed bandwidth speeds and new services to the user. Among these newservices is IPTV, or Internet Protocol Television.

IPTV o�ers an unparalleled and revolutionary video and entertainmentexperience. �at’s because it o�ers much more than just “live television.” IPTVo�ers a dizzying array of entertainment options and functions – iTV, gamingoptions, Video on Demand, Pay Per View, and much more. It is capturing theimagination of consumerswho’ve already had the opportunity to either subscribe,

or in some cases preview this exciting new servicein various test markets.

As IPTV matures as a technology, so does the need for industry collaboration. Critical to the ongoingrollout and mass deployment of IPTV service isthe ability of service providers and the vendorcommunity to reach consensus on critical architecture requirements, as well as standards that supportcontent delivery, digital rights management, Quality of Service, interoperability, and other technicaland operational considerations. It is for this reason that the Alliance for TelecommunicationsIndustry Solutions (ATIS) moved forward with the creation of the IPTV Interoperability Forum– an industry venue where leading service providers, manufacturers and so�ware companies are�eshing out the architecture and standards that will further support the delivery of IPTV into themarketplace. In this Ultimate Guide to IPTV you will learn more about this exciting initiative, andthe path ATIS member companies are taking to fully realize IPTV service.

Also featured in this informative guide are valuable contributions from several industry leadersin IPTV. From their articles, you will learn more about how these companies are supporting IPTVwith solutions for service assurance, middleware, service integration, billing, and much more.

�ank you for your interest in the Ultimate Guide to IPTV. We hope you �nd it most useful asyou give consideration to the technology and operations path and real business opportunities thatIPTV service o�ers to our industry and its users.

Susan M. MillerPresident & CEO, ATIS

p04 Supp 3 5/19/06 11:45 AM Page 4

• Functions in the home networking environment that ware necessary for the consumer to receive IPTV services.

Because there are no accepted metrics for assessing requirements for contentsecurity and quality of content delivery,content providers today are somewhat unilaterally establishing requirements for purposes of granting rights to distributecontent via IPTV.

Regarding quality of content delivery,while some standards do exist, a planning tool for video may be needed, which mightbe similar in scope to the “E-Model” voice transmission planning tool as speci�ed in ITU-T Recommendation G.107. Such a technology independent metric would allow service providers to engineer their content networks from an application layer to overcome impairments that maybe speci�c to a particular technology.

For these reasons, the ATIS IIF is actively de�ning the requirements for the interoperability of systemsand components in the IPTV digital rights management (DRM)/security environment. Its Digital Rights Management Task Force is nowcompleting work on the new ATIS standard, IIF-WT-008R11, which de�nes such requirements, for purposes of creating an IPTV DRM/security interoperability speci�cation during its next phase of work. Additionally, a third IIF Task Force that is addressing QoS is giving consideration to de�ning applications and requirements for a “V-Model” planning tool.

RecognizingthatIPTVserviceproviders must have the �exibility to select, adopt, and deploy solutions according to their speci�c business needs, a key objective ofthe ATIS IIF is to enable the widest rangeof IPTV business models, while keepingIPTV content secure, and enabling security vendor competition and platformoperator choice.

�e need for end-to-end QoS is not

unique to IPTV service, but is needed tosupportaconsumer’squalityofexperience (QoE) expectations while multiple service tra�c types are also on the samenetwork. While today’s deployments are �nding pragmatic solutions, end-to-end QoS for multiservice (voice, video, data) networks is de�nitely viewed today as a

work in progress, or perhaps better stated as “works in progress” because there is no single solution to the issue.

While industry standard de�nitions exist for QoS and network performance requirements for delivering video content, some substantial challenges remain for QoS in the context of IPTV.As examples, lacking are proven, robust, and scalable standardized mechanismsfor the following:• Rapid and complete restoration of IP layer (not just physical layer) connectivity following severe outages (or attacks) ofheavily loaded networks.• Path availability levels comparable to

what users have become accustomed with circuit-based data �ows.• Timing and synchronizationmechanisms similar to those present in

circuit–based networks that impact QoS and network performance.• Assuring that satisfactory end-to-end IP performance is actually achieved, whichcould require seamless signaling of end-to-end QoS parameters across bothnetwork and user interfaces.• Path establishment (call set-up,

channel-switching delays, network server responses) comparable to what users have experienced with non-IPTV services.• Reliability and robustness of service components and critical protocols (e.g.,routing, especially multicast routing).• Operation during, and recovery from, commercial power outages.• Assuring that satisfactory end-to-end performance is actually achieved,especially when disparate networks (e.g., �ber and wireless) are being traversed.

�e ATIS IIF’s QoS Task Force is presently working on a series ofrequirements for QoS that are based onuser QoE tests that address these areas

and others, and seeks to identify orestablish appropriate QoS metrics for IPTV. Such metrics would include �delity standards for subscriber video delivery;

Source: Atis

CoreTransports region-Independent video content– Premium channels, Broadcast network feeds,

centralized video ser vers

Metro/Aggregation Transports region-Independent video content Transports region-specific video content

– Community content, local network feeds, distributed video servers

DNGVSOVHO

CoreSegment

SHE

Metro/AggregationSegment

AccessSegment

Home NetworkSegment

Region-DependentVideo Content

Region-IndependentVideo Content

UnicastTraffic

MulticastTrafficUnicast

Traffic

MulticastTraffic

p06-08 Supp #4 5/19/06 12:31 PM Page 7

gained tremendous momentum for purposes of deploying real-time entertainment video and TV service o�erings. Providers of “traditional” telecom services throughout the world currently utilize, or are presently deploying video services over IP networks.

From the telecom service provider’sstandpoint, IPTV encompasses service provider network subscriber services thatdeliver secure broadcast-quality audio and video to devices for display or recording. Services may include broadcast type services beyond live TV, to include video on demand (VOD),PayPerView(PPV)services,LiveTVPause and Rewind Functionality, Interactive

TV (iTV) services and even distribution ofcontent by IPTV service users/consumers.Such IPTV services are delivered across anaccess agnostic, packet switched network thatemploys the IP protocol to transport the audioand video signals. In contrast to video overthe public Internet, with IPTV deployments,network security and performance are tightlymanaged to ensure a superior entertainmentexperience, resulting in a compellingbusiness environment for content providers,advertisers and customers alike.

Broad industry agreement on both

the standards and the most appropriatetechnology path is a critical step towardse�ective deployment of IPTV services, and the desired revenue generation thatwill follow. It is for this reason that the Alliance for Telecommunications IndustrySolutions (ATIS) – the communicationsindustry’s technical planning and standards development organization based in Washington, DC – established the IPTV Interoperability Forum (IIF).

�e ATIS IIF is responsible for developingbusiness-driven technical requirements and standards,andforfacilitatingrelatedtechnical activities that enable the interoperability, interconnection and implementation of

IPTV systems and services. �e scope of work within the ATIS IIF includes: • Develop interoperability agreements, technical reports, or other types of ATIS standards where appropriate.• Provide a venue for interoperability activities.• Provide a venue for the assessment of IPTV issues in the context of NGN directions. • Coordinate standards activities thatrelate to IPTV technologies. �is includes providing a liaison function between various standards organizations and forums that areeach working on important components for

multimedia, but may not have visibility toother aspects of the application.

Companies active in the ATIS IIF include service providers such as AT&T, Bell Canada, BellSouth, BT, Qwest, Rogers Wireless and Verizon; as well as industry vendors, to include Alcatel, Cisco,Ericsson, Fujitsu, Juniper Networks, Lucent, Microso�, Nortel Networks, Siemens, and Sun Microsystems. ATIS established the IIF in June 2005, following the recommendationof an exploratory group of ATIS member companies, which identi�ed a series oftechnical and operational issues surrounding IPTV that need to be addressed by the industry. �ose issues include:

To support the smooth and e�ective rolloutof IPTV, it is critical for the industry toreach consensus on an overarching referencearchitecture that addresses all elementsof an IPTV solution. In response to thisneed, the ATIS IIF Architecture Task Forcerecently completed its IPTV ArchitectureRequirements Document (ATIS IIF-WF-100R12), which de�nes, in broad terms, thescope for IPTV services, and identi�es thehigh-level requirements that will guide thedevelopmentofarchitecturespeci�cationsovertime.Areasof focuswithintheIIFArchitectureRequirements Document include:• A �nite de�nition of services that qualify as IPTV services.• �e functions necessary for contentproviders to provide content to the service providers.• Functions required by service providers to o�er IPTV services.• Functions required by network providers to deliver IPTV services.

Service providers and vendors are working collaboratively to de�nethe architecture, requirements and standards for IPTV

Maria Estefania, ATIS

p06-08 Supp #4 5/19/06 12:30 PM Page 6

• Functions in the home networking environment that ware necessary for the consumer to receive IPTV services.

Because there are no accepted metrics for assessing requirements for contentsecurity and quality of content delivery,content providers today are somewhat unilaterally establishing requirements for purposes of granting rights to distributecontent via IPTV.

Regarding quality of content delivery,while some standards do exist, a planning tool for video may be needed, which mightbe similar in scope to the “E-Model” voice transmission planning tool as speci�ed in ITU-T Recommendation G.107. Such a technology independent metric would allow service providers to engineer their content networks from an application layer to overcome impairments that maybe speci�c to a particular technology.

For these reasons, the ATIS IIF is actively de�ning the requirements for the interoperability of systemsand components in the IPTV digital rights management (DRM)/security environment. Its Digital Rights Management Task Force is nowcompleting work on the new ATIS standard, IIF-WT-008R11, which de�nes such requirements, for purposes of creating an IPTV DRM/security interoperability speci�cation during its next phase of work. Additionally, a third IIF Task Force that is addressing QoS is giving consideration to de�ning applications and requirements for a “V-Model” planning tool.

RecognizingthatIPTVserviceproviders must have the �exibility to select, adopt, and deploy solutions according to their speci�c business needs, a key objective ofthe ATIS IIF is to enable the widest rangeof IPTV business models, while keepingIPTV content secure, and enabling security vendor competition and platformoperator choice.

�e need for end-to-end QoS is not

unique to IPTV service, but is needed tosupportaconsumer’squalityofexperience (QoE) expectations while multiple service tra�c types are also on the samenetwork. While today’s deployments are �nding pragmatic solutions, end-to-end QoS for multiservice (voice, video, data) networks is de�nitely viewed today as a

work in progress, or perhaps better stated as “works in progress” because there is no single solution to the issue.

While industry standard de�nitions exist for QoS and network performance requirements for delivering video content, some substantial challenges remain for QoS in the context of IPTV.As examples, lacking are proven, robust, and scalable standardized mechanismsfor the following:• Rapid and complete restoration of IP layer (not just physical layer) connectivity following severe outages (or attacks) ofheavily loaded networks.• Path availability levels comparable to

what users have become accustomed with circuit-based data �ows.• Timing and synchronizationmechanisms similar to those present in

circuit–based networks that impact QoS and network performance.• Assuring that satisfactory end-to-end IP performance is actually achieved, whichcould require seamless signaling of end-to-end QoS parameters across bothnetwork and user interfaces.• Path establishment (call set-up,

channel-switching delays, network server responses) comparable to what users have experienced with non-IPTV services.• Reliability and robustness of service components and critical protocols (e.g.,routing, especially multicast routing).• Operation during, and recovery from, commercial power outages.• Assuring that satisfactory end-to-end performance is actually achieved,especially when disparate networks (e.g., �ber and wireless) are being traversed.

�e ATIS IIF’s QoS Task Force is presently working on a series ofrequirements for QoS that are based onuser QoE tests that address these areas

and others, and seeks to identify orestablish appropriate QoS metrics for IPTV. Such metrics would include �delity standards for subscriber video delivery;

gSource: Atis

CoreTransports region-Independent video content– Premium channels, Broadcast network feeds,

centralized video ser vers

Metro/Aggregation Transports region-Independent video content Transports region-specific video content

– Community content, local network feeds, distributed video servers

DNGVSOVHO

CoreSegment

SHE

Metro/AggregationSegment

AccessSegment

Home NetworkSegment

Region-DependentVideo Content

Region-IndependentVideo Content

UnicastTraffic

MulticastTrafficUnicast

Traffic

MulticastTraffic

p06-08 Supp #4 5/19/06 12:31 PM Page 7

gained tremendous momentum for purposes of deploying real-time entertainment video and TV service o�erings. Providers of “traditional” telecom services throughout the world currently utilize, or are presently deploying video services over IP networks.

From the telecom service provider’sstandpoint, IPTV encompasses service provider network subscriber services thatdeliver secure broadcast-quality audio and video to devices for display or recording. Services may include broadcast type services beyond live TV, to include video on demand (VOD),PayPerView(PPV)services,LiveTVPause and Rewind Functionality, Interactive

TV (iTV) services and even distribution ofcontent by IPTV service users/consumers.Such IPTV services are delivered across anaccess agnostic, packet switched network thatemploys the IP protocol to transport the audioand video signals. In contrast to video overthe public Internet, with IPTV deployments,network security and performance are tightlymanaged to ensure a superior entertainmentexperience, resulting in a compellingbusiness environment for content providers,advertisers and customers alike.

Broad industry agreement on both

the standards and the most appropriatetechnology path is a critical step towardse�ective deployment of IPTV services, and the desired revenue generation thatwill follow. It is for this reason that the Alliance for Telecommunications IndustrySolutions (ATIS) – the communicationsindustry’s technical planning and standards development organization based in Washington, DC – established the IPTV Interoperability Forum (IIF).

�e ATIS IIF is responsible for developingbusiness-driven technical requirements and standards,andforfacilitatingrelatedtechnical activities that enable the interoperability, interconnection and implementation of

IPTV systems and services. �e scope of work within the ATIS IIF includes: • Develop interoperability agreements, technical reports, or other types of ATIS standards where appropriate.• Provide a venue for interoperability activities.• Provide a venue for the assessment of IPTV issues in the context of NGN directions. • Coordinate standards activities thatrelate to IPTV technologies. �is includes providing a liaison function between various standards organizations and forums that areeach working on important components for

multimedia, but may not have visibility toother aspects of the application.

Companies active in the ATIS IIF include service providers such as AT&T, Bell Canada, BellSouth, BT, Qwest, Rogers Wireless and Verizon; as well as industry vendors, to include Alcatel, Cisco,Ericsson, Fujitsu, Juniper Networks, Lucent, Microso�, Nortel Networks, Siemens, and Sun Microsystems. ATIS established the IIF in June 2005, following the recommendationof an exploratory group of ATIS member companies, which identi�ed a series oftechnical and operational issues surrounding IPTV that need to be addressed by the industry. �ose issues include:

To support the smooth and e�ective rolloutof IPTV, it is critical for the industry toreach consensus on an overarching referencearchitecture that addresses all elementsof an IPTV solution. In response to thisneed, the ATIS IIF Architecture Task Forcerecently completed its IPTV ArchitectureRequirements Document (ATIS IIF-WF-100R12), which de�nes, in broad terms, thescope for IPTV services, and identi�es thehigh-level requirements that will guide thedevelopmentofarchitecturespeci�cationsovertime.Areasof focuswithintheIIFArchitectureRequirements Document include:• A �nite de�nition of services that qualify as IPTV services.• �e functions necessary for contentproviders to provide content to the service providers.• Functions required by service providers to o�er IPTV services.• Functions required by network providers to deliver IPTV services.

Service providers and vendors are working collaboratively to de�nethe architecture, requirements and standards for IPTV

Maria Estefania, ATIS

p06-08 Supp #4 5/19/06 12:30 PM Page 6

allowance for transcoding and packet loss; error “link budgets;” speci�cations for errorconcealment in video codecs; and de�nitions for measuring channel change latency.

While considerable work is underway on interoperability testing for some of the components of IPTV (DSL, for example), there appears to be little work on interoperability testing at the IPTV application level. Some areas where interoperability standards would help in the delivery of IPTV services include:• Customer – network interface speci�cation for

customer equipment (such as set-top boxes)• Content provider – network interface speci�cation for third-party content providers.

• Encoder – Set-top box compatibility for MPEG-4 AVC.• Video Encoder – Network QoS standards for joint optimization of the networkand codec algorithms.• OSS and BSS interfaces.

A fourth ATIS IIF Task Force – theTesting and Interoperability Task Force – was established to de�ne interface speci�cations; identify appropriate testingand interoperability work within the

standards development community; developtest plans for equipment based on interface speci�cations; and serve as a potential sponsor of testing and certi�cation activities. �is Task Force will begin its work once the guidelines and requirements are established by the other IIF Task Forces.

IPTV service is critical to the business strategies of today’s telecommunicationsservice providers. �e IPTV video and entertainment experience is receiving anenormously positive response in test markets throughout the U.S., and globally. To fully seizethebusinessopportunitiesnowavailable with IPTV, service providers, manufacturers, and so�ware companies must collaborate on the technical requirements and standards needed to move IPTV technologies and applications ever more aggressively into the marketplace.

For more information on the work of theATIS IPTV Interoperability Forum, and to obtain IPTV standards and architecture requirements, visit the ATIS web site at www.atis.org.

Maria Estefania is vice president ofIndustry Forums at ATIS

p06-08 Supp #4 5/19/06 12:30 PM Page 8

allowance for transcoding and packet loss; error “link budgets;” speci�cations for errorconcealment in video codecs; and de�nitions for measuring channel change latency.

While considerable work is underway on interoperability testing for some of the components of IPTV (DSL, for example), there appears to be little work on interoperability testing at the IPTV application level. Some areas where interoperability standards would help in the delivery of IPTV services include:• Customer – network interface speci�cation for

customer equipment (such as set-top boxes)• Content provider – network interface speci�cation for third-party content providers.

• Encoder – Set-top box compatibility for MPEG-4 AVC.• Video Encoder – Network QoS standards for joint optimization of the networkand codec algorithms.• OSS and BSS interfaces.

A fourth ATIS IIF Task Force – theTesting and Interoperability Task Force – was established to de�ne interface speci�cations; identify appropriate testingand interoperability work within the

standards development community; developtest plans for equipment based on interface speci�cations; and serve as a potential sponsor of testing and certi�cation activities. �is Task Force will begin its work once the guidelines and requirements are established by the other IIF Task Forces.

IPTV service is critical to the business strategies of today’s telecommunicationsservice providers. �e IPTV video and entertainment experience is receiving anenormously positive response in test markets throughout the U.S., and globally. To fully seizethebusinessopportunitiesnowavailable with IPTV, service providers, manufacturers, and so�ware companies must collaborate on the technical requirements and standards needed to move IPTV technologies and applications ever more aggressively into the marketplace.

For more information on the work of theATIS IPTV Interoperability Forum, and to obtain IPTV standards and architecture requirements, visit the ATIS web site at www.atis.org.

Maria Estefania is vice president ofIndustry Forums at ATIS

p06-08 Supp #4 5/19/06 12:30 PM Page 8

to go beyond traditional service o�erings to provide powerful, high-demand IP multimedia applications such as:

• Caller ID on TV: Displays CallerID information on the TV screen andallows consumers the option to pauseprogramming, answer the call – andresume the video where they left offwhen they’re done -- or send the callto voice mail.• Video and data services bundling: Enables subscribers to use their TV tolaunch new applications during TVprogramming, letting them browse the web, shop, or vote in interactive programs, or access their voicemail or e-mail.• Locator for Family Finder applications: Locate speci�ed friends and family members and have their locationdisplayed on their TV, using their loved one’s existing cell phone presence enablement features. • Personalized Advertisements: Userswill receive and view ads that aretargeted to them and selected basedon their preferences and viewing/purchasing habits.• Mobile Multimedia: Access TV services from any location, using any device, while enjoying the same selection, look and feelof home applications.

�e examples noted above are just a fewof the service blends that IMS-enabled TV services -- or IP Multimedia TV -- can enable operators to o�er. Each of these blended services share some fairly unique, and compelling attributes that current-generation TV providers will behard-pressed to match in the near term.

Perhaps most notably, IMS enables services to be easily personalized to address the needs of individual users. IMS also addresses the need for portability, ensuring that services can be delivered seamlessly across wireless and wireline networks of various types, reaching subscribers wherever they are in the form most appropriate to their location, and preferences.

In addition, IMS includes elements that support dynamic allocation of bandwidth, enable the network toadapt to particular customer needs, andsupply the appropriate level of networkresources to ensure a given level of quality for a particular application. �eservice can thus be delivered in a way thatis compatible with the device being used

and with a consistent look and feel that ispersonalized to the needs of the speci�c end-user.

While these new services present enormousopportunities for operators, they alsopresent some challenges. �e introductionof video onto service provider networks isexpected to generate network tra�c thatwill dwarf the volume of tra�c generatedby both current and future data and voiceservices; recent bandwidth studies highlightthis expected growth (see Figure 1). Froma network infrastructure perspective,distributing this video tra�c e�ectively,scaling it to support thousands and evenmillions of users while delivering a superiorquality of experience will be prioritynumber one.

To achieve this, the network infrastructure must be resilient and able to uphold the level of QoS, reliability,and availability demanded by users. �ough the network must continue tosupport traditional voice and data tra�c, it also needs to scale to support much higher-bandwidth blended services. Such services have substantially lower tolerance to network errors and require the network to support the followingservice capabilities:• High availability – deliver user expected quality of experience with hardware, so�ware and network redundancy andsub-50 millisecond network recovery, avoiding service interruptions• High scalability of bandwidth, subscribers, and QoS to support delivery of multiple services to a large subscriber base• E�cient multicast for high video scalability - support both Layer 3protocol independent multicast (PIM)-based multicast to optimize bandwidth usage and Layer 2 virtual private LANservice (VPLS)--based multicast to

simplify multicast hierarchy and service management• Cost e�ciency enabling competitiveservice bundles

Many large carriers have selected VPLS-based carrier Ethernet infrastructure to aggregate the subscriber tra�c coming over DSL, FTTH or wireless connections, for its reliability, scalability and lower cost. To maintain sub-50 millisecond recovery,carriers can implement technologies suchas SONET APS, SDH SNCP, and VPLS/MPLS

Ultimately, the technologies employeddepend on several factors including expected capacity requirements, tra�c engineering and QoS requirements. Operators also need to evaluate existinginfrastructure investments, and the economics of the business case. In order to achieve greater e�ectiveness in the design of the solution, the best approachmay entail the split of the network intoseveral parts with the best technology chosen for each. In other instances,

converged platforms combining the latest Ethernet and VPLS capabilities combined with TDM, WDM and routing capabilities may be employed. �e key to success is combining all these technology and infrastructure choices with integrated management and services.

Continued on page 14

p10-11 Supp #5 5/19/06 12:33 PM Page 11

consumers have changed – they want communicationsexperiences to be available when and where they are, and provide a richer and moreinteractive experience. �ey want their TV, Internet, e-mail, IM, and personal voice services to �nd them – whatever device they are using and wherever they are, be itat home, at work or on the go. �ey wouldalso like to be able to sign-on to the network once to access all of their services, and to receive a single bill that is clear and easy tounderstand. Most importantly, they wantall of these features to be personalized to address their individual needs and interests and to be delivered in a way that is simpleand seamless and that enhances their

lifestyle, rather than complicates it.To compete with competitive triple play

o�erings from cable TV multiple service operators (MSOs), many traditional telecom service providers are beginning to introduce IPTV o�erings to address consumers’ entertainment needs – IP provides anattractive method for delivering TV and video services because it o�ers operators and their subscribers a great deal of �exibility in terms of the ability to personalize service o�erings and in the future support access to a virtually unlimited channel line-up created

from multimedia content anywhere in the world, that can be sent to anywhere in theworld, with channels selected based on each individual user’s preferences. �ese video and new multimedia services represent signi�cant growth opportunities for service providers, who will be required to o�set the degradation in their traditional voice revenue as VoIP and other service o�erings from new competitors begin to take share.

Service providers are exploring ways toaddress these customer demands, and havetaken steps to simplify things for their subscribers. For instance, many operatorshave introduced service bundles designed to give consumers a single, integrated package of the key services they are looking for, most

notably voice, broadband Internet access, and TV – typically over cable or satellite – aswell as mobile voice and data services.

However, while standard IPTV o�eringsare likely to help operators retain andacquire customers, these services do not address one of the fundamental challenges inherent in bundling of services, namelyprice erosion. Typically, when multiple services are bundled, subscribers pay asingle, low price, driving down the averagerevenue per user (ARPU) derived from eachindividual service. Additionally, in most

cases bundled services still require separate services platforms or “stovepipes” for eachtype of service, so capital and operational costs remain quite substantial.

�e IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) architecture, however, o�ers operators anopportunity to move beyond conventional bundled services to create pro�table, personalized, blended services. It is important to point out that services blending is very di�erent from the services bundling described above.

Blending comes about by enabling traditionally independent services to interact with one another, typically by sharinginformation such as buddy lists, locationdata, presence information and subscriberpreferences and pro�les.

Because they are based on a single deliveryplatform, services such as instant messaging can be combined with voice and IPTVcapabilities to create such new o�erings as multiparty video-enabled messaging on TV. Additionally, because IMS-based services are delivered using a standardized network framework, operators can take advantageof both capital and operational savings andquicker “time to service delivery,” which over time could give them a competitiveadvantage against other providers. While some level of blending is possible using the “stovepipe” approach, o�ering blended services in this way would be both costly and complex.

As service providers begin to rollout more widespread commercial IPTV services, they will need a way to compete with, and take share from other more establishedplayers in the �eld -- cable and satellite TV providers – and IMS can provide the edge they need. With IMS, operators will be able

Leveraging the power of IMS and intelligent, content-aware optical/Ethernet networks to deliver innovative TV services wherever, wheneverand however your customers want them

Rob Piconi, Lucent Technologies

p10-11 Supp #5 5/19/06 12:32 PM Page 10

to go beyond traditional service o�erings to provide powerful, high-demand IP multimedia applications such as:

• Caller ID on TV: Displays CallerID information on the TV screen andallows consumers the option to pauseprogramming, answer the call – andresume the video where they left offwhen they’re done -- or send the callto voice mail.• Video and data services bundling: Enables subscribers to use their TV tolaunch new applications during TVprogramming, letting them browse the web, shop, or vote in interactive programs, or access their voicemail or e-mail.• Locator for Family Finder applications: Locate speci�ed friends and family members and have their locationdisplayed on their TV, using their loved one’s existing cell phone presence enablement features. • Personalized Advertisements: Userswill receive and view ads that aretargeted to them and selected basedon their preferences and viewing/purchasing habits.• Mobile Multimedia: Access TV services from any location, using any device, while enjoying the same selection, look and feelof home applications.

�e examples noted above are just a fewof the service blends that IMS-enabled TV services -- or IP Multimedia TV -- can enable operators to o�er. Each of these blended services share some fairly unique, and compelling attributes that current-generation TV providers will behard-pressed to match in the near term.

Perhaps most notably, IMS enables services to be easily personalized to address the needs of individual users. IMS also addresses the need for portability, ensuring that services can be delivered seamlessly across wireless and wireline networks of various types, reaching subscribers wherever they are in the form most appropriate to their location, and preferences.

In addition, IMS includes elements that support dynamic allocation of bandwidth, enable the network toadapt to particular customer needs, andsupply the appropriate level of networkresources to ensure a given level of quality for a particular application. �eservice can thus be delivered in a way thatis compatible with the device being used

and with a consistent look and feel that ispersonalized to the needs of the speci�c end-user.

While these new services present enormousopportunities for operators, they alsopresent some challenges. �e introductionof video onto service provider networks isexpected to generate network tra�c thatwill dwarf the volume of tra�c generatedby both current and future data and voiceservices; recent bandwidth studies highlightthis expected growth (see Figure 1). Froma network infrastructure perspective,distributing this video tra�c e�ectively,scaling it to support thousands and evenmillions of users while delivering a superiorquality of experience will be prioritynumber one.

To achieve this, the network infrastructure must be resilient and able to uphold the level of QoS, reliability,and availability demanded by users. �ough the network must continue tosupport traditional voice and data tra�c, it also needs to scale to support much higher-bandwidth blended services. Such services have substantially lower tolerance to network errors and require the network to support the followingservice capabilities:• High availability – deliver user expected quality of experience with hardware, so�ware and network redundancy andsub-50 millisecond network recovery, avoiding service interruptions• High scalability of bandwidth, subscribers, and QoS to support delivery of multiple services to a large subscriber base• E�cient multicast for high video scalability - support both Layer 3protocol independent multicast (PIM)-based multicast to optimize bandwidth usage and Layer 2 virtual private LANservice (VPLS)--based multicast to

simplify multicast hierarchy and service management• Cost e�ciency enabling competitiveservice bundles

Many large carriers have selected VPLS-based carrier Ethernet infrastructure to aggregate the subscriber tra�c coming over DSL, FTTH or wireless connections, for its reliability, scalability and lower cost. To maintain sub-50 millisecond recovery,carriers can implement technologies suchas SONET APS, SDH SNCP, and VPLS/MPLS

Ultimately, the technologies employeddepend on several factors including expected capacity requirements, tra�c engineering and QoS requirements. Operators also need to evaluate existinginfrastructure investments, and the economics of the business case. In order to achieve greater e�ectiveness in the design of the solution, the best approachmay entail the split of the network intoseveral parts with the best technology chosen for each. In other instances,

converged platforms combining the latest Ethernet and VPLS capabilities combined with TDM, WDM and routing capabilities may be employed. �e key to success is combining all these technology and infrastructure choices with integrated management and services.

Continued on page 14

p10-11 Supp #5 5/19/06 12:33 PM Page 11

consumers have changed – they want communicationsexperiences to be available when and where they are, and provide a richer and moreinteractive experience. �ey want their TV, Internet, e-mail, IM, and personal voice services to �nd them – whatever device they are using and wherever they are, be itat home, at work or on the go. �ey wouldalso like to be able to sign-on to the network once to access all of their services, and to receive a single bill that is clear and easy tounderstand. Most importantly, they wantall of these features to be personalized to address their individual needs and interests and to be delivered in a way that is simpleand seamless and that enhances their

lifestyle, rather than complicates it.To compete with competitive triple play

o�erings from cable TV multiple service operators (MSOs), many traditional telecom service providers are beginning to introduce IPTV o�erings to address consumers’ entertainment needs – IP provides anattractive method for delivering TV and video services because it o�ers operators and their subscribers a great deal of �exibility in terms of the ability to personalize service o�erings and in the future support access to a virtually unlimited channel line-up created

from multimedia content anywhere in the world, that can be sent to anywhere in theworld, with channels selected based on each individual user’s preferences. �ese video and new multimedia services represent signi�cant growth opportunities for service providers, who will be required to o�set the degradation in their traditional voice revenue as VoIP and other service o�erings from new competitors begin to take share.

Service providers are exploring ways toaddress these customer demands, and havetaken steps to simplify things for their subscribers. For instance, many operatorshave introduced service bundles designed to give consumers a single, integrated package of the key services they are looking for, most

notably voice, broadband Internet access, and TV – typically over cable or satellite – aswell as mobile voice and data services.

However, while standard IPTV o�eringsare likely to help operators retain andacquire customers, these services do not address one of the fundamental challenges inherent in bundling of services, namelyprice erosion. Typically, when multiple services are bundled, subscribers pay asingle, low price, driving down the averagerevenue per user (ARPU) derived from eachindividual service. Additionally, in most

cases bundled services still require separate services platforms or “stovepipes” for eachtype of service, so capital and operational costs remain quite substantial.

�e IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) architecture, however, o�ers operators anopportunity to move beyond conventional bundled services to create pro�table, personalized, blended services. It is important to point out that services blending is very di�erent from the services bundling described above.

Blending comes about by enabling traditionally independent services to interact with one another, typically by sharinginformation such as buddy lists, locationdata, presence information and subscriberpreferences and pro�les.

Because they are based on a single deliveryplatform, services such as instant messaging can be combined with voice and IPTVcapabilities to create such new o�erings as multiparty video-enabled messaging on TV. Additionally, because IMS-based services are delivered using a standardized network framework, operators can take advantageof both capital and operational savings andquicker “time to service delivery,” which over time could give them a competitiveadvantage against other providers. While some level of blending is possible using the “stovepipe” approach, o�ering blended services in this way would be both costly and complex.

As service providers begin to rollout more widespread commercial IPTV services, they will need a way to compete with, and take share from other more establishedplayers in the �eld -- cable and satellite TV providers – and IMS can provide the edge they need. With IMS, operators will be able

Leveraging the power of IMS and intelligent, content-aware optical/Ethernet networks to deliver innovative TV services wherever, wheneverand however your customers want them

Rob Piconi, Lucent Technologies

p10-11 Supp #5 5/19/06 12:32 PM Page 10

pattern for video packets means that both drops caused by congestion and drops caused by bit errors on physical links must be avoided or concealed.

Instead of allowing more video sessionsto set up than the deployed bandwidthcan handle, operators need a network-based admission control that candeliver a busy signal to the requestingsubscriber. While a busy signal is notwhat the subscriber wants to receive,the possibility of mass degradation ofthe VoD service is much worse.

An intelligent solution could supportmore sophisticated busy signals. Forexample, if a service knows that streamsare ending soon, busy messages couldgive subscribers choices such as adelayed start of a VoD or an alternativeservice o�ering.

Performing admission control for the VoD service, for example, is a key video-to- network linkage that can preserve ahigh QoE for subscribers. �e admission control solution must be able to take intoaccount complex network topologies that have redundant and load-sharingpaths in the transport network as well as access link utilization and/or business policies that may be enforcing other types of constraints on the subscriber’s service. To do this, the network’s routers, in coordination with policy managers and on-demand servers/managers, need to collectively perform an admission control function called Integrated Video Admission Control.

First, an in-path method performs admission control for the complex coreand distribution network topologies found in service provider next-generationnetwork designs. �e solution utilizes the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) for in-path signaling, sent by the VoD server or a component on its behalf priorto starting the VoD session.

�e RSVP message traverses the exact path the VoD session will use, thustracking in real time any changes in the complex network topologies in the core and distribution layers. Along the path, IP routers perform a bandwidthaccounting function, either allowing the session or denying it if bandwidth is notavailable for that VoD stream. Having

IP, or Layer 3 routing, present on everynetwork element from the VoD server complex to the aggregation router in the central o�ce makes in-path admission control possible.

Second, to prevent a video stream frombeing sent to a set-top box if the access link to a subscriber’s home doesn’t haveenough capacity to carry the stream, the VoD server or a network component inthe path mechanism will send a request to an o�-path component. �e o�-pathcomponent may be a policy server, as

shown in Figure 2, that is keeping track of the access network, which is usually a simple and static topology. �e policy server can check to see if the access link has enough unused bandwidth as well ascheck business policies that may or maynot allow the stream to be supported, andthen either allow the VoD session or deny it at that time.

Only using an o�-path component toperform admission control for the coreand distribution layers, where trackingin real time any changes in the complex network topologies is needed, is sub-optimal. �e combination of in-path admission control with an o�-path policy server at the edge is the most reliable and

e�cient way for an admission controlsolution to decide whether or not a new VoD stream should be allowed toa speci�c subscriber and their video-consuming devices.

Unlike with the on-demand service, subscribers that experience a complete outage in the broadcast service cannotcome back when the outage is over andcontinue where they le� o�. �us, the

availability requirements for the broadcast service are understandably high.

When the aggregation router is con�gured as the Layer 3 edge device for video, the distribution network can take advantage of “anycast” support for a quickfailover of video encoders/streamersin separate headend facilities. With the anycast feature, you con�gure two ormore multicast sources that are sending to the same IP multicast group (samemulticast destination address) and have the same IP source address. IP multicast technology uses a reverse path lookup todetermine which IP source is closest to any particular PIM edge node.

�e result is that the replication path

p12-14 Supp #9 5/19/06 12:37 PM Page 13

and IPTV services,especially a mix of new high-de�nitionchannels and on-demand video, will drive theneed for large amounts of bandwidth. ServiceProviders need intelligent video-to-network

linkages in order to provide a high quality ofexperience (QoE) to viewing audiences.

�e amount of network bandwidth required to transport video services is typically much more than what is required to support voice and Internet access services. Increased use

of on-demand services and the conversion to high-de�nition further accelerate video bandwidth requirements.

So, how much bandwidth is needed tosupport a robust video/IPTV service? For

the bandwidth-consuming on-demand service, the most di�cult factor to predict is the peak concurrency rate, which is thenumber of subscriber devices, such as set-top boxes, that will want to acquire anyon-demand stream at the same time. With the addition of premium channel contentavailable on demand and bundled inside a subscription service, peak concurrency rates

experienced on Friday and Saturday nights have already climbed to as high as 20 percentof all set-top boxes in many U.S. markets.

UsingtheexampleinFigure1,adistribution network that is designed to deliver on-demand content to 4000 subscribers served out of one central o�ce with an assumed 20 percent peak concurrency rate requires about 4 Gbps of capacity for the on-demand service alone.

Because video, especially on-demand services, can quickly consume much morenetwork bandwidth than the Internet access and VoIP services, it is easy to see why the network must be optimized for it.

What happens when demand rises above the peak concurrency rate that was assumed when designing the network and/or video on demand (VoD) service capacity? If aparticular VoD server complex cannotservice a particular request, it may get rerouted to another VoD server complex thathas capacity. If the network capacity over aset of link(s) is exceeded, allowing too manyVoD sessions to be set up could cause a high packet drop rate for nearly all of the video streams. �is will result in many subscribers perceiving an outage.

Why?Videoisvery intolerant topacket loss, in large part because it is highly compressed.Losing a packet may result in the loss of valuable encoded information and a visible degradation of video quality. To achieve a goal of no more than one visible artifact per 2-hour movie, the allowed packet loss rate for video is 10-6. Assuming a random loss

Video/IPTV-to-network linkages are needed in order for providers to be able to deliver a high-quality experience to millions of customers while maximizing resources

David Benham, Cisco Systems

4M Homes / 400 CO = 10,000 average homesVideo Play Take Rate = 40% = 4,000 Video Subs/CO2 TVs/Sub x 20% VoD Peak Concurrency = 1600 streams/CO94% VoD at SD @ 2M/stream + 6% at HD @ 8M/stream

~ 4xGbps / CO

300 channels w/ 20% HDTV at 8M/each & 80% SD at 2M/each ~ 1xGbps/CO

p12-14 Supp #9 5/19/06 12:36 PM Page 12

pattern for video packets means that both drops caused by congestion and drops caused by bit errors on physical links must be avoided or concealed.

Instead of allowing more video sessionsto set up than the deployed bandwidthcan handle, operators need a network-based admission control that candeliver a busy signal to the requestingsubscriber. While a busy signal is notwhat the subscriber wants to receive,the possibility of mass degradation ofthe VoD service is much worse.

An intelligent solution could supportmore sophisticated busy signals. Forexample, if a service knows that streamsare ending soon, busy messages couldgive subscribers choices such as adelayed start of a VoD or an alternativeservice o�ering.

Performing admission control for the VoD service, for example, is a key video-to- network linkage that can preserve ahigh QoE for subscribers. �e admission control solution must be able to take intoaccount complex network topologies that have redundant and load-sharingpaths in the transport network as well as access link utilization and/or business policies that may be enforcing other types of constraints on the subscriber’s service. To do this, the network’s routers, in coordination with policy managers and on-demand servers/managers, need to collectively perform an admission control function called Integrated Video Admission Control.

First, an in-path method performs admission control for the complex coreand distribution network topologies found in service provider next-generationnetwork designs. �e solution utilizes the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) for in-path signaling, sent by the VoD server or a component on its behalf priorto starting the VoD session.

�e RSVP message traverses the exact path the VoD session will use, thustracking in real time any changes in the complex network topologies in the core and distribution layers. Along the path, IP routers perform a bandwidthaccounting function, either allowing the session or denying it if bandwidth is notavailable for that VoD stream. Having

IP, or Layer 3 routing, present on everynetwork element from the VoD server complex to the aggregation router in the central o�ce makes in-path admission control possible.

Second, to prevent a video stream frombeing sent to a set-top box if the access link to a subscriber’s home doesn’t haveenough capacity to carry the stream, the VoD server or a network component inthe path mechanism will send a request to an o�-path component. �e o�-pathcomponent may be a policy server, as

shown in Figure 2, that is keeping track of the access network, which is usually a simple and static topology. �e policy server can check to see if the access link has enough unused bandwidth as well ascheck business policies that may or maynot allow the stream to be supported, andthen either allow the VoD session or deny it at that time.

Only using an o�-path component toperform admission control for the coreand distribution layers, where trackingin real time any changes in the complex network topologies is needed, is sub-optimal. �e combination of in-path admission control with an o�-path policy server at the edge is the most reliable and

e�cient way for an admission controlsolution to decide whether or not a new VoD stream should be allowed toa speci�c subscriber and their video-consuming devices.

Unlike with the on-demand service, subscribers that experience a complete outage in the broadcast service cannotcome back when the outage is over andcontinue where they le� o�. �us, the

availability requirements for the broadcast service are understandably high.

When the aggregation router is con�gured as the Layer 3 edge device for video, the distribution network can take advantage of “anycast” support for a quickfailover of video encoders/streamersin separate headend facilities. With the anycast feature, you con�gure two ormore multicast sources that are sending to the same IP multicast group (samemulticast destination address) and have the same IP source address. IP multicast technology uses a reverse path lookup todetermine which IP source is closest to any particular PIM edge node.

�e result is that the replication path

p12-14 Supp #9 5/19/06 12:37 PM Page 13

and IPTV services,especially a mix of new high-de�nitionchannels and on-demand video, will drive theneed for large amounts of bandwidth. ServiceProviders need intelligent video-to-network

linkages in order to provide a high quality ofexperience (QoE) to viewing audiences.

�e amount of network bandwidth required to transport video services is typically much more than what is required to support voice and Internet access services. Increased use

of on-demand services and the conversion to high-de�nition further accelerate video bandwidth requirements.

So, how much bandwidth is needed tosupport a robust video/IPTV service? For

the bandwidth-consuming on-demand service, the most di�cult factor to predict is the peak concurrency rate, which is thenumber of subscriber devices, such as set-top boxes, that will want to acquire anyon-demand stream at the same time. With the addition of premium channel contentavailable on demand and bundled inside a subscription service, peak concurrency rates

experienced on Friday and Saturday nights have already climbed to as high as 20 percentof all set-top boxes in many U.S. markets.

UsingtheexampleinFigure1,adistribution network that is designed to deliver on-demand content to 4000 subscribers served out of one central o�ce with an assumed 20 percent peak concurrency rate requires about 4 Gbps of capacity for the on-demand service alone.

Because video, especially on-demand services, can quickly consume much morenetwork bandwidth than the Internet access and VoIP services, it is easy to see why the network must be optimized for it.

What happens when demand rises above the peak concurrency rate that was assumed when designing the network and/or video on demand (VoD) service capacity? If aparticular VoD server complex cannotservice a particular request, it may get rerouted to another VoD server complex thathas capacity. If the network capacity over aset of link(s) is exceeded, allowing too manyVoD sessions to be set up could cause a high packet drop rate for nearly all of the video streams. �is will result in many subscribers perceiving an outage.

Why?Videoisvery intolerant topacket loss, in large part because it is highly compressed.Losing a packet may result in the loss of valuable encoded information and a visible degradation of video quality. To achieve a goal of no more than one visible artifact per 2-hour movie, the allowed packet loss rate for video is 10-6. Assuming a random loss

Video/IPTV-to-network linkages are needed in order for providers to be able to deliver a high-quality experience to millions of customers while maximizing resources

David Benham, Cisco Systems

4M Homes / 400 CO = 10,000 average homesVideo Play Take Rate = 40% = 4,000 Video Subs/CO2 TVs/Sub x 20% VoD Peak Concurrency = 1600 streams/CO94% VoD at SD @ 2M/stream + 6% at HD @ 8M/stream

~ 4xGbps / CO

300 channels w/ 20% HDTV at 8M/each & 80% SD at 2M/each ~ 1xGbps/CO

p12-14 Supp #9 5/19/06 12:36 PM Page 12

for a single multicast group can consist ofa separate multicast tree for each broadcast encoder/streamer, in this case, splittingthe subscriber base between two headend facilities as shown in Figure 3.

When anycasting technology is combined with the ability of the network to detect the failure of an encoder/streamer, routing protocolswillreconverge.�isreconvergence will result in the reverse path from the

aggregation routers to the core edge router being recalculated to take into account the change in location of the multicast source.

None of these actions involve the subscriber’s video-consuming equipment. �e quick failover between redundant broadcast encoders/streamers using the anycast approach results in only a portion ofsubscribers experiencing a brief disruptionto the quality of their broadcast while the remainder of subscribers experience no disruption at all.

While the example shows two sources withpresumably the same channel line-up, theycould be supporting di�erent ad zones withdi�erent content inserted. �is solutiongives the greatest �exibility in failover design while minimizing the number of subscribers that might experience a very brief outage in the event of a failover.

Innovative video service-to-network linkages, plus enough bandwidth to supporta successful launch of VoD and HDTV, can enable service providers to provide video/IPTV services with a high quality ofexperience to their subscribers.

David Benham is Senior Manager, Video/IPTV Solutions Development, Cisco Systems

It is clear that IPTV services o�er a very attractive opportunity for telecomoperators to generate incremental revenue, and retain subscribers that might beconsidering triple-play bundles fromtraditional TV competitors. IP Multimedia TV, however, could provide these operatorsthe opportunity to take share from their competitors by introducing value-added,personalized multimedia services that other providers simply can’t match. �ough it is critical that these new services be delivered reliably and in a manner that meets orexceeds the expectations that customers

have become accustomed.To this end, IMS-enabled network

elements allow providers to o�er such service assurance, and to derive premium value from their network investments through atight integration with the IMS architecture. �ese elements interoperate with the IMS architecture via ITU-T’s Resource Admission and Control Functions (RACF) to provide bandwidth and QoS policing and monitoring either on a per user sessionor on an aggregate of user sessions. �is enables service control and transport to be bridged thereby providing dynamic resource

allocation across transport networks and achieving end-to-end QoS.

Clearly, the key to success is optimizing the underlying infrastructure to supportall of these services while providing a very high-quality user experience at an attractiveprice point. By leveraging an IMS-based core network, combined with an intelligent, content-aware transport architecture integrating carrier Ethernet and converged optical/Ethernet technologies – controlled through RACF -- operators will be able to meet the challenge of competing in the emerging world of real-time multimedia services. �is combination o�ers operatorssomething that traditional TV service providers can’t easily replicate.

IPTV + IMS = IP Multimedia TV – IPTV the way it should be.

Rob Piconi is vice president and generalmanager, Broadband Solutions,

Lucent Technologies.

From page 11

p12-14 Supp #9 5/19/06 12:36 PM Page 14

for a single multicast group can consist ofa separate multicast tree for each broadcast encoder/streamer, in this case, splittingthe subscriber base between two headend facilities as shown in Figure 3.

When anycasting technology is combined with the ability of the network to detect the failure of an encoder/streamer, routing protocolswillreconverge.�isreconvergence will result in the reverse path from the

aggregation routers to the core edge router being recalculated to take into account the change in location of the multicast source.

None of these actions involve the subscriber’s video-consuming equipment. �e quick failover between redundant broadcast encoders/streamers using the anycast approach results in only a portion ofsubscribers experiencing a brief disruptionto the quality of their broadcast while the remainder of subscribers experience no disruption at all.

While the example shows two sources withpresumably the same channel line-up, theycould be supporting di�erent ad zones withdi�erent content inserted. �is solutiongives the greatest �exibility in failover design while minimizing the number of subscribers that might experience a very brief outage in the event of a failover.

Innovative video service-to-network linkages, plus enough bandwidth to supporta successful launch of VoD and HDTV, can enable service providers to provide video/IPTV services with a high quality ofexperience to their subscribers.

David Benham is Senior Manager, Video/IPTV Solutions Development, Cisco Systems

It is clear that IPTV services o�er a very attractive opportunity for telecomoperators to generate incremental revenue, and retain subscribers that might beconsidering triple-play bundles fromtraditional TV competitors. IP Multimedia TV, however, could provide these operatorsthe opportunity to take share from their competitors by introducing value-added,personalized multimedia services that other providers simply can’t match. �ough it is critical that these new services be delivered reliably and in a manner that meets orexceeds the expectations that customers

have become accustomed.To this end, IMS-enabled network

elements allow providers to o�er such service assurance, and to derive premium value from their network investments through atight integration with the IMS architecture. �ese elements interoperate with the IMS architecture via ITU-T’s Resource Admission and Control Functions (RACF) to provide bandwidth and QoS policing and monitoring either on a per user sessionor on an aggregate of user sessions. �is enables service control and transport to be bridged thereby providing dynamic resource

allocation across transport networks and achieving end-to-end QoS.

Clearly, the key to success is optimizing the underlying infrastructure to supportall of these services while providing a very high-quality user experience at an attractiveprice point. By leveraging an IMS-based core network, combined with an intelligent, content-aware transport architecture integrating carrier Ethernet and converged optical/Ethernet technologies – controlled through RACF -- operators will be able to meet the challenge of competing in the emerging world of real-time multimedia services. �is combination o�ers operatorssomething that traditional TV service providers can’t easily replicate.

IPTV + IMS = IP Multimedia TV – IPTV the way it should be.

Rob Piconi is vice president and generalmanager, Broadband Solutions,

Lucent Technologies.

From page 11

p12-14 Supp #9 5/19/06 12:36 PM Page 14

this market isn’t just to provide a packageof TV services. It is really to provide a connected TV experience. We’ve all heard about the triple play of voice, videoand data, but the real value comes when service providers can deliver converged services running seamlessly across auni�ed service delivery environment. �ere are a wide variety of converged services that can be created as you mix and match the underlying elements. And since we’re thinking big, we should stretch into new territory, like the integration of commerce, communication and community. Combined with content, these are the four “Cs”.

An example: As your customer comes to the end of a great movie they have rentedfrom your service, you can give them the opportunity to buy the DVD or thesoundtrack, right from their TV. You can o�er them the opporutnity to record a program from the cell phone service you provide them while they commute home, and then watch that recorded show fromany TV in the house, with advertisingappropriate to their interests. Today, as a provider, you can connect people using PCs and phones. With IPTV you can turn the TV into a two-way communication vehicle that provides your customers a rich window into the lives of theirextended family and friends.

And as a provider you can link all thesetogether to help cement your relationshipwith valued customers. Your customerscan send a home video of their childrenstraight to grandma’s TV set from acrossthe country, or take a picture from theircell phone while at the beach and send itto their TV screen for immediate viewingand they can even talk about it. �ese areexamples of converged services, and it isone part of the “think big” vision of IPTV.

For the service provider, IPTV is anopportunity to transform the business model from bandwidth-based tocontent-based services and applications. It is a chance to deeply entwine voice,video and data into rich experiences. It is a chance to complement existingpay TV experiences by monetizing new commerce, community and communications experiences.

Do you know the killer application for thetelevision? It’swatchingTV.Mostpeoplereally

just want great content, great entertainment,in a relaxed environment. In the United Statesalone, the average American spends a fewhours in front of the TV set daily.

We’ve painted a picture of what TV canand will be with IPTV. But for now, it’stime to frame that picture, hang it on thewall, roll up our sleeves and get to work.�at work starts by nailing the basics.

First, you will need to go to market with a better TV o�ering. Start witha strategy for three critical types oftransformation–aservicetransformation, a network transformation and a business transformation. �ese must work together to bring about the total transformationneeded to survive and thrive in the next decade. �e service transformationrequires strategic planning of the converged personal services you want to o�er and acquire the right content to do it. You can also �nd third-party content aggregators if you don’t want to cut individual content deals on your own.

Second, you need one IP network thatcan deliver any type of service mix witha great experience. �is probably means upgrading your network bandwidth and converging disparate networks. Invest early in your IP network architecture forservice orchestration between IPTV and IMS service delivery, a strategic step to prepare for a seamless user experience ofvoice, data and video.

�ird is the potential for business transformation. �is involves upgrades to

customer care, payment systems and the service creation environnement, as well as strategies for service packaging, value creation, and entry into new markets.

Recent consumer research shows thata package of features that tie the PC, the TV and the phone are much moreenticing to customers than a lower price.

New thinking is required as the industry moves into this new territory. Grabbingshare with lower prices simply starts a price war and erodes the very marginsthat will pay for the transformationsneeded and the new innovations desired by consumers. Focus on delivering new value, not on lowering prices for traditional packages. As tempting as low prices may be, it is a short-term solution and a long-term problem.

If you’re a service provider and you’re notin this market yet, are you behind? Notyet, but you will be if you don’t move fast. �e market is evolving quickly. Today’s

As IPTVevolves, consumers will be able to get caller-ID on their TV

Continued on page 39

p16-17 Supp #7 5/19/06 11:59 AM Page 17

“the next big thing” in the industry.As a network operator, can you succeed in transforming your business model fromtransport-centric to content-centric? Whatmodels will prove most successful duringthis transition? Perhaps most importantly,when and how should you enter this market?

Is now too soon, too late, or the right time?�e �rst step is to transform your disparate

voice and data networks into a single IP-based service delivery environment forcreating and delivering new video, voice and data services.

Building IPTV capability into a network allows you to deliver TV and video contentover a common IP network. And it allowsvoice and data to be fully integrated as well.�at ful�lls the promise at last of a single,

secure IP network over which all services can be delivered. �is is crucial because it serves to fundamentally change your operational costs over time. Since this is a two-way network, it also provides you with a competitive advantage over traditional broadcast networks and contains the seeds to

transform the entertainment and advertising industries, as well.

So while the part of the acronym IPTV that’s most widely understood is TV, this is by no means the most important element. �e shi� toward “all-IP”-based communicationswill not only change our entertainment experience, but our entire communicationsexperience. It places users squarely at the center of their own communicationsuniverse and allows them to choose which device is most appropriate at a given time.

As the content and advertising industries have become better acquainted with IPTV,they’re already beginning to see the realopportunities for their businesses, fromimproved security, enhanced contentpackaging, more interactive programming and advertising, and more measurable business results.

First-generation IPTV services, o�en based on ATM technologies, have been in the market for several years and provided the formative learning experiences needed to

create today’s enhanced platforms. �ese new, all IP-based systems are now being adopted by the world’s largest and most respected telecom companies, including AT&T, BT, Deutsche Telekom, Swisscom, and many others.

�e IPTV industry has made remarkable progress in developing a platform that will drive the future of television and ultimatelymeet and exceed consumers’ expectations. It will give consumers greater selection of TV content and services, tailored to their individual tastes, as well as cross-device connected entertainment services. Most importantly for you, this platform is thefoundation for a dramatic service provider business transformation that brings newrevenues, new pro�ts, new business models, and an entirely new relationship withcustomers. �e platform provides entry into markets for content and communicationsand can be expanded to include commerce and community aspects, as well. We areon the edge of a new frontier, and it is thepioneers that will reap the largest rewards.

If there is “gold in them hills,” not tomention the land grab opportunities, how do you enter this market and initially take share? And is there an opportunity beyond just the share shi�? Can we, in fact, �nd gold? Can we increase the overall size of the industry as we expand beyond basic content into whole new o�erings and business models?

�e opportunity is signi�cant, and the best method for seizing this opportunity is tothink big, get started, and move fast.

IPTV is an underlying technology that creates a whole new range of services to bedelivered to homes. �e goal of entering

Savvy service providers are embracing IPTV as the winningplatform for delivering the latest revenue-generating entertainment and communications services.

Christine Heckart, Microso� TV, and Carl Rijsbrack, Alcatel

Furtherdown the road,consumers will be able to viewprogramming

from the guide ina smaller picturewithin the guide

itself.

p16-17 Supp #7 5/19/06 11:59 AM Page 16

this market isn’t just to provide a packageof TV services. It is really to provide a connected TV experience. We’ve all heard about the triple play of voice, videoand data, but the real value comes when service providers can deliver converged services running seamlessly across auni�ed service delivery environment. �ere are a wide variety of converged services that can be created as you mix and match the underlying elements. And since we’re thinking big, we should stretch into new territory, like the integration of commerce, communication and community. Combined with content, these are the four “Cs”.

An example: As your customer comes to the end of a great movie they have rentedfrom your service, you can give them the opportunity to buy the DVD or thesoundtrack, right from their TV. You can o�er them the opporutnity to record a program from the cell phone service you provide them while they commute home, and then watch that recorded show fromany TV in the house, with advertisingappropriate to their interests. Today, as a provider, you can connect people using PCs and phones. With IPTV you can turn the TV into a two-way communication vehicle that provides your customers a rich window into the lives of theirextended family and friends.

And as a provider you can link all thesetogether to help cement your relationshipwith valued customers. Your customerscan send a home video of their childrenstraight to grandma’s TV set from acrossthe country, or take a picture from theircell phone while at the beach and send itto their TV screen for immediate viewingand they can even talk about it. �ese areexamples of converged services, and it isone part of the “think big” vision of IPTV.

For the service provider, IPTV is anopportunity to transform the business model from bandwidth-based tocontent-based services and applications. It is a chance to deeply entwine voice,video and data into rich experiences. It is a chance to complement existingpay TV experiences by monetizing new commerce, community and communications experiences.

Do you know the killer application for thetelevision? It’swatchingTV.Mostpeoplereally

just want great content, great entertainment,in a relaxed environment. In the United Statesalone, the average American spends a fewhours in front of the TV set daily.

We’ve painted a picture of what TV canand will be with IPTV. But for now, it’stime to frame that picture, hang it on thewall, roll up our sleeves and get to work.�at work starts by nailing the basics.

First, you will need to go to market with a better TV o�ering. Start witha strategy for three critical types oftransformation–aservicetransformation, a network transformation and a business transformation. �ese must work together to bring about the total transformationneeded to survive and thrive in the next decade. �e service transformationrequires strategic planning of the converged personal services you want to o�er and acquire the right content to do it. You can also �nd third-party content aggregators if you don’t want to cut individual content deals on your own.

Second, you need one IP network thatcan deliver any type of service mix witha great experience. �is probably means upgrading your network bandwidth and converging disparate networks. Invest early in your IP network architecture forservice orchestration between IPTV and IMS service delivery, a strategic step to prepare for a seamless user experience ofvoice, data and video.

�ird is the potential for business transformation. �is involves upgrades to

customer care, payment systems and the service creation environnement, as well as strategies for service packaging, value creation, and entry into new markets.

Recent consumer research shows thata package of features that tie the PC, the TV and the phone are much moreenticing to customers than a lower price.

New thinking is required as the industry moves into this new territory. Grabbingshare with lower prices simply starts a price war and erodes the very marginsthat will pay for the transformationsneeded and the new innovations desired by consumers. Focus on delivering new value, not on lowering prices for traditional packages. As tempting as low prices may be, it is a short-term solution and a long-term problem.

If you’re a service provider and you’re notin this market yet, are you behind? Notyet, but you will be if you don’t move fast. �e market is evolving quickly. Today’s

As IPTVevolves, consumers will be able to get caller-ID on their TV

Continued on page 39

p16-17 Supp #7 5/19/06 11:59 AM Page 17

“the next big thing” in the industry.As a network operator, can you succeed in transforming your business model fromtransport-centric to content-centric? Whatmodels will prove most successful duringthis transition? Perhaps most importantly,when and how should you enter this market?

Is now too soon, too late, or the right time?�e �rst step is to transform your disparate

voice and data networks into a single IP-based service delivery environment forcreating and delivering new video, voice and data services.

Building IPTV capability into a network allows you to deliver TV and video contentover a common IP network. And it allowsvoice and data to be fully integrated as well.�at ful�lls the promise at last of a single,

secure IP network over which all services can be delivered. �is is crucial because it serves to fundamentally change your operational costs over time. Since this is a two-way network, it also provides you with a competitive advantage over traditional broadcast networks and contains the seeds to

transform the entertainment and advertising industries, as well.

So while the part of the acronym IPTV that’s most widely understood is TV, this is by no means the most important element. �e shi� toward “all-IP”-based communicationswill not only change our entertainment experience, but our entire communicationsexperience. It places users squarely at the center of their own communicationsuniverse and allows them to choose which device is most appropriate at a given time.

As the content and advertising industries have become better acquainted with IPTV,they’re already beginning to see the realopportunities for their businesses, fromimproved security, enhanced contentpackaging, more interactive programming and advertising, and more measurable business results.

First-generation IPTV services, o�en based on ATM technologies, have been in the market for several years and provided the formative learning experiences needed to

create today’s enhanced platforms. �ese new, all IP-based systems are now being adopted by the world’s largest and most respected telecom companies, including AT&T, BT, Deutsche Telekom, Swisscom, and many others.

�e IPTV industry has made remarkable progress in developing a platform that will drive the future of television and ultimatelymeet and exceed consumers’ expectations. It will give consumers greater selection of TV content and services, tailored to their individual tastes, as well as cross-device connected entertainment services. Most importantly for you, this platform is thefoundation for a dramatic service provider business transformation that brings newrevenues, new pro�ts, new business models, and an entirely new relationship withcustomers. �e platform provides entry into markets for content and communicationsand can be expanded to include commerce and community aspects, as well. We areon the edge of a new frontier, and it is thepioneers that will reap the largest rewards.

If there is “gold in them hills,” not tomention the land grab opportunities, how do you enter this market and initially take share? And is there an opportunity beyond just the share shi�? Can we, in fact, �nd gold? Can we increase the overall size of the industry as we expand beyond basic content into whole new o�erings and business models?

�e opportunity is signi�cant, and the best method for seizing this opportunity is tothink big, get started, and move fast.

IPTV is an underlying technology that creates a whole new range of services to bedelivered to homes. �e goal of entering

Savvy service providers are embracing IPTV as the winningplatform for delivering the latest revenue-generating entertainment and communications services.

Christine Heckart, Microso� TV, and Carl Rijsbrack, Alcatel

Furtherdown the road,consumers will be able to viewprogramming

from the guide ina smaller picturewithin the guide

itself.

p16-17 Supp #7 5/19/06 11:59 AM Page 16

hoping that some of the new compression technologies will get you the coverage,”he said.

Cavalier Telephone, a CLEC launching IPTV on the eastern seaboard, uses carrier network infrastructure primarilyfrom Verizon Communications and has adopted the new compression technology approach.

�e Richmond, Va.-based carrier is one of the �rst telcos to embrace next-gen MPEG-4 over an ADSL2+ platform. �e combination gives the carrier 10 Mbps to 15 Mbps over a copper pair and “was a catalyst for our ability to deliver this service,” said Andy Lobred, Cavalier’svice president of product managementand marketing.

“We feel like we have a convergence ofthe network technology; a convergence ofthe ADSL2+ technology as well as things that are going on with respect to MPEG-4 in the video platform,” he said.

As if that isn’t enough, the carrier is alsoeyeing some forms of copper bonding to increase capacity even more.

ShaneBroyles,researchanddevelopmentcoordinator at Rural Telephone Service Co. in Lenore, Kan., agreed that clean plant is only part of provisioning networks to carry big chunks of bandwidth.

“You certainly need to be doing at least ADSL2+ because with 2+ you’re gettinganywhere from 20 to 23 megs on the downstream,” Broyles said.

Since Rural consumes about 4.5 Mbps per standard video stream, ADSL2+ is plenty of bandwidth to deliver two viable video streams and high-speed data.

�e access network also must bemonitored closely before, a�er and during provisioning. �is is wherevendor-provided and generic cable test equipment “is extremely important,” Broyles said. “We could probably do a better job of using it. Without those,you’re just working in the dark.”

Even then there are problemsbecause the copper network is loadedwith passive devices “which you can’tinterrogate or provision; you have tohave a guy go out there and hook it up,”Dittberner’s Baker said.

When it comes to video on demand

— a key piece of any IPTV o�ering— measurable quality assurance goes outthe window, Larribeau said.

“QoS does not work when you go to videoon demand because you’re sending uniquestreams to the subscriber and your networkbecomes dominated by video tra�c,”Larribeau explained. “�at means there arevery few lower priority packets to discard,not enough to discard when congestionoccurs and you have to start discardingvideo or voice-over-IP packets. �at’s not agood situation and that’s an issue in termsof how these networks are engineered anddeployed.”

Cable companies have delivered video since their inception and have always used headends to receive, encrypt or otherwise format and send out the video streams.Carriers have had COs and switches. Video, as everyone concedes, is a di�erent beast and a headend is not a CO.

Project Mutual Telephone in Rupert, Idaho, evinces cable’s headend model with its IP television system. It has a main CO and a remote headend or satelliteranch, of sorts, at its construction yard about two miles out of town.

“We pull video signals o� a Simulsat dish and a dish that’s tailored to pull inHITS (headend in the sky) signals. We

transport that into town via �ber optic cable and that signal is transported out onour local network,” said Mike Tylka, vice president and plant manager.

Of course, Project Mutual was already in the cable TV business and “had the analog headend, and it became a natural

progress to migrate into the digital world,” he said.

Provisioning work within the headend or CO isn’t as complex as it once was, or at least it doesn’t have to be, said DanProkopetz, vice president of so�ware for SaskTel International, the carrier-owned equipment vendor.

“What you have to do is extend yourPOTS provisioning processes into yourhigh-speed Internet ... and then you extendit into your video,” Prokopetz said. “Youneed one integrated platform that willprovision all these services, and, of course,you have to mix VoIP into that as well andwhatever else comes down the pike.”

Too many providers, he said, layer one OSS on top of another on top of theexisting infrastructure in a vertical pile that’s sloppy and ine�cient. Prokopetz suggests scraping away the layers and using what’s familiar.

“Itmakessensetouseasingleprovisioningprocess and extend the base application outto encompass everything else. If you can

do POTS, you extend it into high-speedInternet, extend it into video, extend it intoVoIP, extend it into whatever else happens,”he said.

Another headend headache is just

p18-20 Supp #14 5/19/06 12:44 PM Page 19

you can’t take for granted.•�e dentist isn’t lying when he says “�is may hurt a teensy bit.”•�e federal government will step up and help when a natural disaster �attens your community.•Video is just another IP application.

For this article, only the third point is serious; the others are facetious. �ere is no way that video is just another IP application running on a telephone network.

“Deploying IP video is a very large e�ort that becomes more di�cult as the network becomes larger because the problems tend to compound themselves,” said Bob Larribeau, program director for IPTV at MRG Research.

MRG has identi�ed several key areas

that service providers must address when provisioning an IPTV network:•�e access and aggregation networks for distributing the content;•�e video headend and equipment fordealing with the content;•Content protection, including digital rights management for encryption around

broadcast content;•�e home networks and set-top boxes.

If the carrier is not deploying �ber to the premises — a relatively safe assumption— the access network can be a tricky piece of the video provisioning puzzle, becausetwisted-pair copper, no matter how clean, was never expected to handle video’s high bandwidth requirements.

Even if that copper is already carrying high-speed Internet over DSL, it’s not necessarilyup to the challenge of video.

“Data is a best-e�ort attempt, so if a packet of information is lost during transmission, the system knows to resend the packet. In the case of video, we can’t tolerate any lost packets because that would show up as an anomaly on the screen,” saidBill DeMuth, CTO of northern California-based SureWest Communications, an earlyservice deployer.

Still, for the sake of argument, it seems as if video should be just another IP element on an advanced telco network.

“It sounds like it ought to be easy enoughto do, but because IPTV or video is such a bandwidth hog, it creates its own set of problems,” said Rick Vergin, CEO ofChibardun Telephone Cooperative.

Chibardun, Vergin emphasized, “didn’thave too much of a problem” with its existingcopper infrastructure delivering signals about6,000 feet to suburban and rural Wisconsincustomers over a VDSL network.

“We haven’t found there’s too muchproblem with our plant, but some people are going out 12,000, 18,000 feet (with more conventional DSL products), and they’vehad some problems with reduced capacity,”Vergin said.

�at scenario — the infrastructure’s good enough to carry the content as long as youprovision the content correctly on thatinfrastructure — was a recurring service provider theme.

“Everyone likes to believe that the access network is not important — the copper wireand provisioning it. But when you think about it, they have to install new service in new neighborhoods,” said Dan Baker,research director for Dittberner Associates.

While not everyone takes the copper for granted, most believe it’s good enough.

“You’re always going to have a line hereor a line there where you may have issues,” said Brian Eltom, director of marketing andbusiness development for digital interactivevideo at Canadian carrier SaskTel. “We were quite fortunate in that our copper plant wasin pretty good shape.”

Actually, Eltom said, most copper plant is serviceable.

“�ere are going to be cases where we haveto replace drops, but we would probablyhave had to perform that work just for theInternet or voice products,” he said.

SureWest has approached the video business from almost every angle: �ber, coaxand twisted pair. Its technical foundation has always been to deliver two video streamsand have enough bandwidth le� for at least amegabit of high-speed data throughput and voice.

“�at’s going to take about 10 megabits ofdelivery,” DeMuth said.

With those requirements in mind,the operator must then determine what percentage of the network can be fed with10 megabits in the near term then expand that to a longer term view accomplished “either by tightening up the network or

Take nothing for granted, early adopters say

Jim Barthold, Telecommunications® Magazine

p18-20 Supp #14 5/19/06 12:43 PM Page 18

hoping that some of the new compression technologies will get you the coverage,”he said.

Cavalier Telephone, a CLEC launching IPTV on the eastern seaboard, uses carrier network infrastructure primarilyfrom Verizon Communications and has adopted the new compression technology approach.

�e Richmond, Va.-based carrier is one of the �rst telcos to embrace next-gen MPEG-4 over an ADSL2+ platform. �e combination gives the carrier 10 Mbps to 15 Mbps over a copper pair and “was a catalyst for our ability to deliver this service,” said Andy Lobred, Cavalier’svice president of product managementand marketing.

“We feel like we have a convergence ofthe network technology; a convergence ofthe ADSL2+ technology as well as things that are going on with respect to MPEG-4 in the video platform,” he said.

As if that isn’t enough, the carrier is alsoeyeing some forms of copper bonding to increase capacity even more.

ShaneBroyles,researchanddevelopmentcoordinator at Rural Telephone Service Co. in Lenore, Kan., agreed that clean plant is only part of provisioning networks to carry big chunks of bandwidth.

“You certainly need to be doing at least ADSL2+ because with 2+ you’re gettinganywhere from 20 to 23 megs on the downstream,” Broyles said.

Since Rural consumes about 4.5 Mbps per standard video stream, ADSL2+ is plenty of bandwidth to deliver two viable video streams and high-speed data.

�e access network also must bemonitored closely before, a�er and during provisioning. �is is wherevendor-provided and generic cable test equipment “is extremely important,” Broyles said. “We could probably do a better job of using it. Without those,you’re just working in the dark.”

Even then there are problemsbecause the copper network is loadedwith passive devices “which you can’tinterrogate or provision; you have tohave a guy go out there and hook it up,”Dittberner’s Baker said.

When it comes to video on demand

— a key piece of any IPTV o�ering— measurable quality assurance goes outthe window, Larribeau said.

“QoS does not work when you go to videoon demand because you’re sending uniquestreams to the subscriber and your networkbecomes dominated by video tra�c,”Larribeau explained. “�at means there arevery few lower priority packets to discard,not enough to discard when congestionoccurs and you have to start discardingvideo or voice-over-IP packets. �at’s not agood situation and that’s an issue in termsof how these networks are engineered anddeployed.”

Cable companies have delivered video since their inception and have always used headends to receive, encrypt or otherwise format and send out the video streams.Carriers have had COs and switches. Video, as everyone concedes, is a di�erent beast and a headend is not a CO.

Project Mutual Telephone in Rupert, Idaho, evinces cable’s headend model with its IP television system. It has a main CO and a remote headend or satelliteranch, of sorts, at its construction yard about two miles out of town.

“We pull video signals o� a Simulsat dish and a dish that’s tailored to pull inHITS (headend in the sky) signals. We

transport that into town via �ber optic cable and that signal is transported out onour local network,” said Mike Tylka, vice president and plant manager.

Of course, Project Mutual was already in the cable TV business and “had the analog headend, and it became a natural

progress to migrate into the digital world,” he said.

Provisioning work within the headend or CO isn’t as complex as it once was, or at least it doesn’t have to be, said DanProkopetz, vice president of so�ware for SaskTel International, the carrier-owned equipment vendor.

“What you have to do is extend yourPOTS provisioning processes into yourhigh-speed Internet ... and then you extendit into your video,” Prokopetz said. “Youneed one integrated platform that willprovision all these services, and, of course,you have to mix VoIP into that as well andwhatever else comes down the pike.”

Too many providers, he said, layer one OSS on top of another on top of theexisting infrastructure in a vertical pile that’s sloppy and ine�cient. Prokopetz suggests scraping away the layers and using what’s familiar.

“Itmakessensetouseasingleprovisioningprocess and extend the base application outto encompass everything else. If you can

do POTS, you extend it into high-speedInternet, extend it into video, extend it intoVoIP, extend it into whatever else happens,”he said.

Another headend headache is just

p18-20 Supp #14 5/19/06 12:44 PM Page 19

you can’t take for granted.•�e dentist isn’t lying when he says “�is may hurt a teensy bit.”•�e federal government will step up and help when a natural disaster �attens your community.•Video is just another IP application.

For this article, only the third point is serious; the others are facetious. �ere is no way that video is just another IP application running on a telephone network.

“Deploying IP video is a very large e�ort that becomes more di�cult as the network becomes larger because the problems tend to compound themselves,” said Bob Larribeau, program director for IPTV at MRG Research.

MRG has identi�ed several key areas

that service providers must address when provisioning an IPTV network:•�e access and aggregation networks for distributing the content;•�e video headend and equipment fordealing with the content;•Content protection, including digital rights management for encryption around

broadcast content;•�e home networks and set-top boxes.

If the carrier is not deploying �ber to the premises — a relatively safe assumption— the access network can be a tricky piece of the video provisioning puzzle, becausetwisted-pair copper, no matter how clean, was never expected to handle video’s high bandwidth requirements.

Even if that copper is already carrying high-speed Internet over DSL, it’s not necessarilyup to the challenge of video.

“Data is a best-e�ort attempt, so if a packet of information is lost during transmission, the system knows to resend the packet. In the case of video, we can’t tolerate any lost packets because that would show up as an anomaly on the screen,” saidBill DeMuth, CTO of northern California-based SureWest Communications, an earlyservice deployer.

Still, for the sake of argument, it seems as if video should be just another IP element on an advanced telco network.

“It sounds like it ought to be easy enoughto do, but because IPTV or video is such a bandwidth hog, it creates its own set of problems,” said Rick Vergin, CEO ofChibardun Telephone Cooperative.

Chibardun, Vergin emphasized, “didn’thave too much of a problem” with its existingcopper infrastructure delivering signals about6,000 feet to suburban and rural Wisconsincustomers over a VDSL network.

“We haven’t found there’s too muchproblem with our plant, but some people are going out 12,000, 18,000 feet (with more conventional DSL products), and they’vehad some problems with reduced capacity,”Vergin said.

�at scenario — the infrastructure’s good enough to carry the content as long as youprovision the content correctly on thatinfrastructure — was a recurring service provider theme.

“Everyone likes to believe that the access network is not important — the copper wireand provisioning it. But when you think about it, they have to install new service in new neighborhoods,” said Dan Baker,research director for Dittberner Associates.

While not everyone takes the copper for granted, most believe it’s good enough.

“You’re always going to have a line hereor a line there where you may have issues,” said Brian Eltom, director of marketing andbusiness development for digital interactivevideo at Canadian carrier SaskTel. “We were quite fortunate in that our copper plant wasin pretty good shape.”

Actually, Eltom said, most copper plant is serviceable.

“�ere are going to be cases where we haveto replace drops, but we would probablyhave had to perform that work just for theInternet or voice products,” he said.

SureWest has approached the video business from almost every angle: �ber, coaxand twisted pair. Its technical foundation has always been to deliver two video streamsand have enough bandwidth le� for at least amegabit of high-speed data throughput and voice.

“�at’s going to take about 10 megabits ofdelivery,” DeMuth said.

With those requirements in mind,the operator must then determine what percentage of the network can be fed with10 megabits in the near term then expand that to a longer term view accomplished “either by tightening up the network or

Take nothing for granted, early adopters say

Jim Barthold, Telecommunications® Magazine

p18-20 Supp #14 5/19/06 12:43 PM Page 18

starting to throb: getting MPEG-4 content from satellite providers and mixing that with formatted o�-air signals. At the veryleast this is going to require several hundred thousand dollars of headend investment.

“We’re looking to NRTC (National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative) and SES Americom. �ey’re going to do all the

compression and converting the signals intoan IP signal then beam it up to the satellite,which is going to beam it down to ILECs in IP format,” Vergin said.

�e carriers must install an MPEG-4 headend to receive and retransmit the satellite signals then spend another chunk of change to translate local o�-air channels into MPEG-4 as well.

“�e cost of the headend is one of the majorbarriers to small telcos getting involved inthis,” Vergin said, pointing to an average cost

of around $300,000, about two-thirds of whichwould be to get the local o�-air channels andconvert them to MPEG-4.

While a grouping of disparate pieces, theheadend is driven by middleware that “sets upwhatchannelsthecustomergets,”saidBradEvans,CEO and chairman of Cavalier Telephone.

“We tied our middleware into our OSS system, so we’re going to have �ow-throughprovisioning, where it will automatically set up the channels the customer wants, �ow through to our DSL and loop orderings, and set up the phone features, Internet features and video features,” Evans said.

Middleware also drives Cavalier’s billing, tying everything back to the base POTSprovisioning infrastructure.

In the past, except for a few premium

channels, there wasn’t overwhelming demand for encryption, scrambling or other video content security. �at’s now becoming a hot button for telcos provisioning IPTV.

“Certainly we have encountered that on thevideo-on-demandplatform,[and]weareseeinga few more broadcasters beginning to ask aboutcontent security,” SaskTel’s Eltom said.

SaskTel is implementing a system proactively that will deliver across-the-boardsecurity for every channel — even thoughEltom thinks that’s overkill.

“Today, because it’s a closed IP network, we have some security and content controlsin place. We also have an audit process thatgoes on at the router points in the city wherethere’s a check that looks at what a customer’schannel subscription looks like and what channels they are accessing,” he said.

�e problem is, IP equates to Internet and

that throws a scare into content providers.“More and more content providers are

requiring encryption,” Cavalier’s Lobred said, suggesting that it’s a good idea to usean encryption so�ware provider that has a relationship with those who develop thecontent. “�at helps move through some ofthe hurdles with some of the content guys.”

Provisioning the home, everyone agreed, is the biggest IPTV hassle. With a number of new players getting into the set-top, cost shouldn’t be a big problem for a situation where every television set needs a box. Outside that, though, the home is a free-for-all battle zone.

“�e phone company can bring the IPsignal up to the household like they donow for DSL [but] can’t necessarily rely on

the inside wiring being as high quality as it needs to be,” said Jonathan Hurd, vicepresident of broadband and media practices for Adventis.

While phone companies spend a lot oftime making sure that the �ber or copper isup to snu�, an old or badly connected homenetwork can stop the service in a �nger snap, and even a well-wired home is an added provisioning expense.

“We’restill lookingforcost-e�ectivemethodsto handle that,” said SureWest’s DeMuth, who’sbeen delivering IPTV so long he’s coined theterm IPTV-2 because “we’re at the secondgeneration of IPTV in my mind.”

Home phone lines could possibly havebeen installed when AT&T was “the phone company.” �ey work for phones and usually deliver adequate high-speed Internet tomodems that sit near computers that sitnear phone jacks. Video is another story; the television, unlike the computer, probablydoesn’t sit near the phone jack.

“If there’s old coax in the house, maybe we’lluse some devices to utilize that coax, but insome cases you’re going to have to rewire thehouse with Cat 5 wiring. �at gets expensive,either through additional labor or throughhardware,” DeMuth said, warning, “don’tunderestimate the time spent in the house.”

Larribeau agreed the home is a landmine.“It’s a reasonable guess to say that half the

calls to the telco center on IPTV are going to be related to problems in the home. Service providers need to look very seriously at what they can do to manage, or at least monitor,the home network so they can quicklyresolve these issues and possibly even anticipate them,” he said.

Besides that, Hurd said, while most people don’t think of the computer hooked tothe DSL network as the phone company’sresponsibility, a set-top box hooked to the television belongs to the telco.

“�e user might hook it up incorrectly or move it from one room to another ... andbreak it,” Hurd added. “�en there’s the connection from that set-top box to the TVwhere you get into things like ground loops and interference with other video that cancause degradation of the signal.”

Just as an overview, the network must beprovisioned to deliver top quality video

Continued on page 39

p18-20 Supp #14 5/19/06 12:44 PM Page 20

starting to throb: getting MPEG-4 content from satellite providers and mixing that with formatted o�-air signals. At the veryleast this is going to require several hundred thousand dollars of headend investment.

“We’re looking to NRTC (National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative) and SES Americom. �ey’re going to do all the

compression and converting the signals intoan IP signal then beam it up to the satellite,which is going to beam it down to ILECs in IP format,” Vergin said.

�e carriers must install an MPEG-4 headend to receive and retransmit the satellite signals then spend another chunk of change to translate local o�-air channels into MPEG-4 as well.

“�e cost of the headend is one of the majorbarriers to small telcos getting involved inthis,” Vergin said, pointing to an average cost

of around $300,000, about two-thirds of whichwould be to get the local o�-air channels andconvert them to MPEG-4.

While a grouping of disparate pieces, theheadend is driven by middleware that “sets upwhatchannelsthecustomergets,”saidBradEvans,CEO and chairman of Cavalier Telephone.

“We tied our middleware into our OSS system, so we’re going to have �ow-throughprovisioning, where it will automatically set up the channels the customer wants, �ow through to our DSL and loop orderings, and set up the phone features, Internet features and video features,” Evans said.

Middleware also drives Cavalier’s billing, tying everything back to the base POTSprovisioning infrastructure.

In the past, except for a few premium

channels, there wasn’t overwhelming demand for encryption, scrambling or other video content security. �at’s now becoming a hot button for telcos provisioning IPTV.

“Certainly we have encountered that on thevideo-on-demandplatform,[and]weareseeinga few more broadcasters beginning to ask aboutcontent security,” SaskTel’s Eltom said.

SaskTel is implementing a system proactively that will deliver across-the-boardsecurity for every channel — even thoughEltom thinks that’s overkill.

“Today, because it’s a closed IP network, we have some security and content controlsin place. We also have an audit process thatgoes on at the router points in the city wherethere’s a check that looks at what a customer’schannel subscription looks like and what channels they are accessing,” he said.

�e problem is, IP equates to Internet and

that throws a scare into content providers.“More and more content providers are

requiring encryption,” Cavalier’s Lobred said, suggesting that it’s a good idea to usean encryption so�ware provider that has a relationship with those who develop thecontent. “�at helps move through some ofthe hurdles with some of the content guys.”

Provisioning the home, everyone agreed, is the biggest IPTV hassle. With a number of new players getting into the set-top, cost shouldn’t be a big problem for a situation where every television set needs a box. Outside that, though, the home is a free-for-all battle zone.

“�e phone company can bring the IPsignal up to the household like they donow for DSL [but] can’t necessarily rely on

the inside wiring being as high quality as it needs to be,” said Jonathan Hurd, vicepresident of broadband and media practices for Adventis.

While phone companies spend a lot oftime making sure that the �ber or copper isup to snu�, an old or badly connected homenetwork can stop the service in a �nger snap, and even a well-wired home is an added provisioning expense.

“We’restill lookingforcost-e�ectivemethodsto handle that,” said SureWest’s DeMuth, who’sbeen delivering IPTV so long he’s coined theterm IPTV-2 because “we’re at the secondgeneration of IPTV in my mind.”

Home phone lines could possibly havebeen installed when AT&T was “the phone company.” �ey work for phones and usually deliver adequate high-speed Internet tomodems that sit near computers that sitnear phone jacks. Video is another story; the television, unlike the computer, probablydoesn’t sit near the phone jack.

“If there’s old coax in the house, maybe we’lluse some devices to utilize that coax, but insome cases you’re going to have to rewire thehouse with Cat 5 wiring. �at gets expensive,either through additional labor or throughhardware,” DeMuth said, warning, “don’tunderestimate the time spent in the house.”

Larribeau agreed the home is a landmine.“It’s a reasonable guess to say that half the

calls to the telco center on IPTV are going to be related to problems in the home. Service providers need to look very seriously at what they can do to manage, or at least monitor,the home network so they can quicklyresolve these issues and possibly even anticipate them,” he said.

Besides that, Hurd said, while most people don’t think of the computer hooked tothe DSL network as the phone company’sresponsibility, a set-top box hooked to the television belongs to the telco.

“�e user might hook it up incorrectly or move it from one room to another ... andbreak it,” Hurd added. “�en there’s the connection from that set-top box to the TVwhere you get into things like ground loops and interference with other video that cancause degradation of the signal.”

Just as an overview, the network must beprovisioned to deliver top quality video

Continued on page 39

p18-20 Supp #14 5/19/06 12:44 PM Page 20

personal preferences such as payment, billing features and services. �is creates unlimited opportunities to leveragethe customer experience to maximize value for both the service provider and the customer, particularly in the area of personalization.

Marrying IMS and IPTV to deliver bundled services in the future is perceived to deliver greater value and empowerment to the consumer.However, these technologies need tobe implemented and rolled out in the context of the BSS/OSS supportingcustomers. Consider that the majority of customers have had less than optimal bundling experiences. For example, aleading North American service provider recently o�ered a highly attractive service bundle that included �xed voice, wireless, satellite TV, and high-speed Internet witha common monthly bill. An independentsampling of this service found that for one customer, it took a total of three weeks toswitch from his existing service to this bundle. During this three-week period,the customer had over 21 interactions with the service provider, including four technician visits, more than six hours on the phone with CSRs and seven di�erent welcome letters!

�e problem: �e service provider operated along line of business silos in which the organization structures, business processes and front- and back-o�ce systems were all network-centric and operated in isolation. As a result,each line of business interacted separately with the customer to con�gure, provision

and support its service without insightor regard to the other services in the bundle, or the customer’s behaviors andpreferences. �is fragmented approach meant that the service provider had no insight into their customers and any customer experience was merely a by-product of the service provider’soperating activity.

From the customers’ perspective, even though they were actually only dealing with one service provider, their perceptionwas that they were dealing with at leastfour di�erent companies. Any perceived value of the bundle was negated by acustomer experience that was ine�cient, impersonal and extremely frustrating! As well, such a clearly disjointed process gives the customer the message that true convergence is a long, long way away.

Serviceprovidersarenotonlyrollingoutnewservices and capabilities based on enablingtechnologies like IPTV, IP convergenceand IMS, but they are also recognizingthe impacts on BSS and OSS, as part ofthe overall delivery of true convergence.Without this overarching strategy, ultimateconvergence will elude all parties.

Take the example outlined earlier – the consumer watching television. When the phone rings, they pick up and miss some(or all) of their show. In a truly converged environment, enabled by IMS, ubiquity will be achieved across the IP network, and an integrated customer management approach will deliver options to the consumer. Firstly, the consumer may

not even be watching their show in their living room. �ey could be watching from their laptop as they sit in a co�ee shop, connected via the local hot spot.When their “phone” rings, the person calling may have dialed the consumer’s home number, but the consumer is notthere. So follow-me functionality sends the call to the logged-in laptop on the advise of the consumer. �e consumer can then point and click to answer thephone, but at the same time select the option to have their show paused, or even recorded, to be resumed a�er they hangup from their conversation.

�e same consumer could have selected an option to send a message back to the caller “Hey, I’m chillin’, I’ll call you later.”So, now simply being well connected doesn’t just mean more ways to �nd the consumer, it means empowering the consumer to manage up-time and down-time on their own terms.

�econsumerisinfullcontrol. Aswehavealready seen in the market, it is not enoughto just rapidly bundle services together andpresent a common bill. To achieve marketleadership, service providers must undergoa signi�cant business transformation fromlegacy platforms and network-focusedbusiness models to an agile, customer-centric business model that facilitatesselling and buying in the supermarketof digital, multi-media services and anintentional customer experience at alltouch points – true integrated customermanagement.

Andrea Sorensen is marketing manager, Wireline & IP Convergence, at Amdocs

p22-23 Supp #13 5/19/06 12:46 PM Page 23

your phone ring when you areright in the middle of your favorite show, at that critical turning point in the show? You miss the show’s turning point, and when you hang up from your phone call, well, you’relost and don’t know what is going on, so youmay as well just turn the TV o� and go dothe dishes.

We are all increasingly busy, and perhaps our busy lifestyle is due in part to new communications tools that keep us connected. However, as consumers, weshould be happy to know that the plethora ofacronyms out there -- IPTV, IMS, SIP, FMC -- are also going to help us to relax and beentertained on our terms in the future.

�is provides excellent fodder for

service providers as they move beyond basic bundling and discounts and into the feature-rich o�erings that will come with IP convergence.

Traditional players in today’s telecom market are facing sti� competition fromall directions. Cable operators are focusing on the triple- and quadruple-plays, movingbeyond traditional TV services and into

voice, wireless and Internet. Search engines like Google and Yahoo! are becoming providers of converged o�erings. Even eBayhas jumped on the convergence bandwagonwith their acquisition of Internet-voice provider Skype. With all of these newentrants, how do the traditional wireline providers replace revenue and subscribers lost to these competitors?

Wireline service providers have a strong base to support not only the triple play andgrand slam o�erings, but they are suitablypositioned to be leaders in convergence.However, simply delivering these services is not enough to di�erentiate from the competition. Providers must deliver toconsumers what they want – a grand slam

bundle of fully integrated services tailored tomeet their speci�c needs.

IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem), a newnetwork abstraction layer based on a 3GPP standard, should enable service providers to do that and more. By ‘unhooking’ services from networks and devices, IMS will enable service providers to roll out a “killer environment” characterized by ubiquitous

access to blended voice-data-content service experiences no matter the network ordevice. Initially designed for wireless service providers, IMS has recently been adopted by the European TelecommunicationsStandards Institute (ETSI) and CableLabs. �ese announcements have signi�cantly strengthened IMS’ standing, practically converting it into the only available roadmapfor reaching the new frontier of ubiquitous communications and entertainment.

A vision of a future o�ering where IMS and IPTV interwork, and convergence has been achieved is shown in Figure 1.

Of course, the vision of IMS enabled IP convergence will not be easily achieved.Most analysts agree that real IMS will reach signi�cant adoption in three to �ve years. However, this is something that service providers can and are beginning to include in their planning.

�e journey to IMS and IP convergence has signi�cant challenges in the areas of marketing, organization/business process, and, of course, technology. One of the most signi�cant challenges is BSS/OSS. To ensuresuccessful delivery of the sophisticated services enabled by IMS, service providers must realign their business strategies tofocus on the customer and their speci�c needs – this is called adopting an integrated customer management strategy.

Figure2 isagoodrepresentationofintegrated customer management. By adopting an integrated customer management approach, a service providers’ resources are aligned around the customer, providing visibility across all services supported by the IP platform and insight into how and when customers use their services as well as their

Andrea Sorensen, Amdocs

Using IMS and IP convergence to deliver what the customer wants

p22-23 Supp #13 5/19/06 12:46 PM Page 22

personal preferences such as payment, billing features and services. �is creates unlimited opportunities to leveragethe customer experience to maximize value for both the service provider and the customer, particularly in the area of personalization.

Marrying IMS and IPTV to deliver bundled services in the future is perceived to deliver greater value and empowerment to the consumer.However, these technologies need tobe implemented and rolled out in the context of the BSS/OSS supportingcustomers. Consider that the majority of customers have had less than optimal bundling experiences. For example, aleading North American service provider recently o�ered a highly attractive service bundle that included �xed voice, wireless, satellite TV, and high-speed Internet witha common monthly bill. An independentsampling of this service found that for one customer, it took a total of three weeks toswitch from his existing service to this bundle. During this three-week period,the customer had over 21 interactions with the service provider, including four technician visits, more than six hours on the phone with CSRs and seven di�erent welcome letters!

�e problem: �e service provider operated along line of business silos in which the organization structures, business processes and front- and back-o�ce systems were all network-centric and operated in isolation. As a result,each line of business interacted separately with the customer to con�gure, provision

and support its service without insightor regard to the other services in the bundle, or the customer’s behaviors andpreferences. �is fragmented approach meant that the service provider had no insight into their customers and any customer experience was merely a by-product of the service provider’soperating activity.

From the customers’ perspective, even though they were actually only dealing with one service provider, their perceptionwas that they were dealing with at leastfour di�erent companies. Any perceived value of the bundle was negated by acustomer experience that was ine�cient, impersonal and extremely frustrating! As well, such a clearly disjointed process gives the customer the message that true convergence is a long, long way away.

Serviceprovidersarenotonlyrollingoutnewservices and capabilities based on enablingtechnologies like IPTV, IP convergenceand IMS, but they are also recognizingthe impacts on BSS and OSS, as part ofthe overall delivery of true convergence.Without this overarching strategy, ultimateconvergence will elude all parties.

Take the example outlined earlier – the consumer watching television. When the phone rings, they pick up and miss some(or all) of their show. In a truly converged environment, enabled by IMS, ubiquity will be achieved across the IP network, and an integrated customer management approach will deliver options to the consumer. Firstly, the consumer may

not even be watching their show in their living room. �ey could be watching from their laptop as they sit in a co�ee shop, connected via the local hot spot.When their “phone” rings, the person calling may have dialed the consumer’s home number, but the consumer is notthere. So follow-me functionality sends the call to the logged-in laptop on the advise of the consumer. �e consumer can then point and click to answer thephone, but at the same time select the option to have their show paused, or even recorded, to be resumed a�er they hangup from their conversation.

�e same consumer could have selected an option to send a message back to the caller “Hey, I’m chillin’, I’ll call you later.”So, now simply being well connected doesn’t just mean more ways to �nd the consumer, it means empowering the consumer to manage up-time and down-time on their own terms.

�econsumerisinfullcontrol. Aswehavealready seen in the market, it is not enoughto just rapidly bundle services together andpresent a common bill. To achieve marketleadership, service providers must undergoa signi�cant business transformation fromlegacy platforms and network-focusedbusiness models to an agile, customer-centric business model that facilitatesselling and buying in the supermarketof digital, multi-media services and anintentional customer experience at alltouch points – true integrated customermanagement.

Andrea Sorensen is marketing manager, Wireline & IP Convergence, at Amdocs

p22-23 Supp #13 5/19/06 12:46 PM Page 23

your phone ring when you areright in the middle of your favorite show, at that critical turning point in the show? You miss the show’s turning point, and when you hang up from your phone call, well, you’relost and don’t know what is going on, so youmay as well just turn the TV o� and go dothe dishes.

We are all increasingly busy, and perhaps our busy lifestyle is due in part to new communications tools that keep us connected. However, as consumers, weshould be happy to know that the plethora ofacronyms out there -- IPTV, IMS, SIP, FMC -- are also going to help us to relax and beentertained on our terms in the future.

�is provides excellent fodder for

service providers as they move beyond basic bundling and discounts and into the feature-rich o�erings that will come with IP convergence.

Traditional players in today’s telecom market are facing sti� competition fromall directions. Cable operators are focusing on the triple- and quadruple-plays, movingbeyond traditional TV services and into

voice, wireless and Internet. Search engines like Google and Yahoo! are becoming providers of converged o�erings. Even eBayhas jumped on the convergence bandwagonwith their acquisition of Internet-voice provider Skype. With all of these newentrants, how do the traditional wireline providers replace revenue and subscribers lost to these competitors?

Wireline service providers have a strong base to support not only the triple play andgrand slam o�erings, but they are suitablypositioned to be leaders in convergence.However, simply delivering these services is not enough to di�erentiate from the competition. Providers must deliver toconsumers what they want – a grand slam

bundle of fully integrated services tailored tomeet their speci�c needs.

IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem), a newnetwork abstraction layer based on a 3GPP standard, should enable service providers to do that and more. By ‘unhooking’ services from networks and devices, IMS will enable service providers to roll out a “killer environment” characterized by ubiquitous

access to blended voice-data-content service experiences no matter the network ordevice. Initially designed for wireless service providers, IMS has recently been adopted by the European TelecommunicationsStandards Institute (ETSI) and CableLabs. �ese announcements have signi�cantly strengthened IMS’ standing, practically converting it into the only available roadmapfor reaching the new frontier of ubiquitous communications and entertainment.

A vision of a future o�ering where IMS and IPTV interwork, and convergence has been achieved is shown in Figure 1.

Of course, the vision of IMS enabled IP convergence will not be easily achieved.Most analysts agree that real IMS will reach signi�cant adoption in three to �ve years. However, this is something that service providers can and are beginning to include in their planning.

�e journey to IMS and IP convergence has signi�cant challenges in the areas of marketing, organization/business process, and, of course, technology. One of the most signi�cant challenges is BSS/OSS. To ensuresuccessful delivery of the sophisticated services enabled by IMS, service providers must realign their business strategies tofocus on the customer and their speci�c needs – this is called adopting an integrated customer management strategy.

Figure2 isagoodrepresentationofintegrated customer management. By adopting an integrated customer management approach, a service providers’ resources are aligned around the customer, providing visibility across all services supported by the IP platform and insight into how and when customers use their services as well as their

Andrea Sorensen, Amdocs

Using IMS and IP convergence to deliver what the customer wants

p22-23 Supp #13 5/19/06 12:46 PM Page 22

an end-to-end customer engagementprocess that includes three critical pillars: services de�nition, reference solutions and integration services. Whereas a systems integrator focuses on closing the gaps between various systems, a services integrator focuses on the services provider’sservice and provides the critical resources, tools and experience to bring a strategic new service, such as triple play to market.

Rede�ning the end-user service experience with the right services de�nition includes:• Application development which focuses onpackaging the most important user attributes• Trend and service evolution analysis to describe and shape long term service requirements for reference solutiondevelopment•Market-entrystrategy(pricing,segmentation,business case modeling)• Technical service description or the translation of user requirements into viable solutions

Reference solutions that anticipate the services de�nition and network design relationship to deliver the right service experience comprise:• Flexible reference architectures• Product portfolio breadth to bring newtechnology, standards and economics together• Speci�c technical knowledge to ensure that the reference solution delivers on expectations• Technology ecosystem leadership to align partners around a common plan

Integration services accelerate and manage the reference solution implementation and include:• Program management (plan of record,technical requirements and speci�cations)• Vendor management and leadership(critical project deliverables, managed proactively)• Service delivery expertise that brings important implementation know-how to a project• Portfolio integration to ensure that the services integrator has leverage over important solution aspects

Combined, these critical elements de�ne the services integrator role making the services integrator the service provider’sfocal point for an end-to-end project.

Global triple play-driven IP transformationprojects demonstrate that traditional equipment vendors have many of the pieces

required to become a leading services integrator. • Services de�nition: Involvement in

de�ning the broadband industry and application development expertise provide a service evolution vision based on real world implementation experience.• Reference Solutions: Flexible architectures provide service providers with pre-validated solutions based on product solutions thatuse a mix of proven technologies and newtechnologies that can shi� the economics ofdelivering new services.• Integration Services:�e ability to provide the critical new technical skills necessary for new services, such as IPTV, along with assets requiredtotestandvalidate theentireend-to-end solution initially exist inside companies that invent, develop and implement thesenew products inside networks.

�e three pillars of the services integratorrole allow equipment vendors to engagecustomersearly inthedecisionprocessbefore

they de�ne the network transformationrequired to deliver a strategic new service. �isearlyengagementsavesserviceproviders valuable time and money. A services integrator o�ers foresight. While service providers imagine their services vision they can test these ideas against technical feasibility, they can prototype services withthe latest application development tools and they can model network costs to ensure the economics line up.

Product portfolio breadth and deepknowledge of key technologies enablevendors to tailor reference solutions thattarget service providers’ speci�c requirementsand concerns. A reference solutions architect

needs to understand the environmentaleconomics and conceptualize how a serviceprovider can operate services in a particularway. �e ability to bundle professionalservices with technology and products allowsvendors to partner much more closely withservice provider customers.

�e power of broadband to create newbusiness has never been more evident, but it’s up to service providers to shed the restraints of traditional telecommunicationsand network boundaries and deliver the most powerful user experience possible _ and deliver it fast.

Nowthatbroadbandnetworksarebecomingubiquitous worldwide, service providersrecognize that they must turn their attentionto moving up the value chain from being pureconnectivity and bandwidth providers; theymust also deliver value-added, user-centricbroadband applications and services such as

IPTV, Mobile TV and converged services.�ey must o�er a highly di�erentiated userexperience in order to establish a sustainablecompetitive advantage.

�e emerging services integrator roleprovides an end-to-end focal point forcritical transformation projects. And, to getthere, vendors can build on their triple playexperience of translating user experience intoreal network impacts, to help service providersbetter manage their resources by shi�ing theservice providers’ focus from their network totheir end-user customers.

JimWhite is a vice president of marketdevelopment inside Alcatel’s Global

Marketing organization.

p24-25 Supp #6 5/19/06 12:08 PM Page 25

is undergoing a broadband-powered competitive transformation. IPTVcompletely changes the competitive landscapefor the broadband household. Users demanda better, more empowered experience andservice providers must deliver it now or missthe opportunity to enter the market with acompelling service o�ering. But, the urgencyand complexity require a services integrationpartner who translates user expectationsinto game-changing services that are thefoundation for competitive transformation

and who can help shi� service providers’focus from managing networks to managingthe user experience and developing newbusiness models.

A services integrator is a partner who canmanage and implement a service provider’sservice-driven network transformation:consulting with the service provider aboutdetailed service de�nitions and referencesolution recommendations, and ensuring thatthe IP transformation is delivered on-timeand within budget via integration services.Triple play represents the �rst global telecomservice transformation that supports a real

services integrator approach where servicesde�nition, globally proven reference solutionsand integration services can accelerate thetransformation process.

Triple play represents both a mass-market opportunity and threat for service providers, completely rede�ning the residential communicationsbundleanddrivingstrategic decision-making. Any service provider with a revenue stream from either phone,Internet or TV must re-think their service o�ering to address this change. Many service providers now realize that their business will be completely di�erent in �ve years, and that their network must be transformed to drive a new business direction.

�e amount of associated change isdaunting and service providers are looking for help. �ey need: 1. A service transformation that changes the relationship service providers have with their residential customers, from service transaction-based (phone, Internet and TV) to a relationship where the service provider manages the communications and entertainment experience residential users experience at home and away;2. A new network that supports mass-market IP services, �xed and mobile services, customer speci�c con�gurations, lower operating costs and proactive service assurance;3. Business transformation that reduces innovative services deployment risks and allows new business models.

�e market urgency and complexity of

triple play implementation means service integrators need to demonstrate experience in implementing new technologies suchas IPTV, IP multimedia subsystem (IMS), broadband infrastructures; and �exible architectures that leverage installed assets and signi�cantly shorten time to market.

User-centric triple play services represent the �rst signi�cant opportunity for service integrators, but network transformations can also start in other ways. For instance,many service providers have taken their own strategic steps to be ready to make transformative network investments around strategic service opportunities such as �xed-mobile convergence and managed communication services for small, medium and enterprise businesses. Other service providers initiate network transformations as a prerequisite for new services by focusing their initial e�ort not on any speci�c service, but on achieving other strategic business objectives. For example, changing business cost structures in anticipation of regulatoryor market changes and enhancing business support systems (BSS).

�e services integrator engagement modelcan facilitate the development of theseopportunities as well by focusing customers’e�orts on their primary economic purpose,which is to provide services to users that addvalue. �e reference solution for each situationcan adjust to each speci�c customer situation.

In simple terms, services integration is

JimWhite, Alcatel

Helping service providers rede�ne the end-user service experience

p24-25 Supp #6 5/19/06 12:08 PM Page 24

an end-to-end customer engagementprocess that includes three critical pillars: services de�nition, reference solutions and integration services. Whereas a systems integrator focuses on closing the gaps between various systems, a services integrator focuses on the services provider’sservice and provides the critical resources, tools and experience to bring a strategic new service, such as triple play to market.

Rede�ning the end-user service experience with the right services de�nition includes:• Application development which focuses onpackaging the most important user attributes• Trend and service evolution analysis to describe and shape long term service requirements for reference solutiondevelopment•Market-entrystrategy(pricing,segmentation,business case modeling)• Technical service description or the translation of user requirements into viable solutions

Reference solutions that anticipate the services de�nition and network design relationship to deliver the right service experience comprise:• Flexible reference architectures• Product portfolio breadth to bring newtechnology, standards and economics together• Speci�c technical knowledge to ensure that the reference solution delivers on expectations• Technology ecosystem leadership to align partners around a common plan

Integration services accelerate and manage the reference solution implementation and include:• Program management (plan of record,technical requirements and speci�cations)• Vendor management and leadership(critical project deliverables, managed proactively)• Service delivery expertise that brings important implementation know-how to a project• Portfolio integration to ensure that the services integrator has leverage over important solution aspects

Combined, these critical elements de�ne the services integrator role making the services integrator the service provider’sfocal point for an end-to-end project.

Global triple play-driven IP transformationprojects demonstrate that traditional equipment vendors have many of the pieces

required to become a leading services integrator. • Services de�nition: Involvement in

de�ning the broadband industry and application development expertise provide a service evolution vision based on real world implementation experience.• Reference Solutions: Flexible architectures provide service providers with pre-validated solutions based on product solutions thatuse a mix of proven technologies and newtechnologies that can shi� the economics ofdelivering new services.• Integration Services:�e ability to provide the critical new technical skills necessary for new services, such as IPTV, along with assets requiredtotestandvalidate theentireend-to-end solution initially exist inside companies that invent, develop and implement thesenew products inside networks.

�e three pillars of the services integratorrole allow equipment vendors to engagecustomersearly inthedecisionprocessbefore

they de�ne the network transformationrequired to deliver a strategic new service. �isearlyengagementsavesserviceproviders valuable time and money. A services integrator o�ers foresight. While service providers imagine their services vision they can test these ideas against technical feasibility, they can prototype services withthe latest application development tools and they can model network costs to ensure the economics line up.

Product portfolio breadth and deepknowledge of key technologies enablevendors to tailor reference solutions thattarget service providers’ speci�c requirementsand concerns. A reference solutions architect

needs to understand the environmentaleconomics and conceptualize how a serviceprovider can operate services in a particularway. �e ability to bundle professionalservices with technology and products allowsvendors to partner much more closely withservice provider customers.

�e power of broadband to create newbusiness has never been more evident, but it’s up to service providers to shed the restraints of traditional telecommunicationsand network boundaries and deliver the most powerful user experience possible _ and deliver it fast.

Nowthatbroadbandnetworksarebecomingubiquitous worldwide, service providersrecognize that they must turn their attentionto moving up the value chain from being pureconnectivity and bandwidth providers; theymust also deliver value-added, user-centricbroadband applications and services such as

IPTV, Mobile TV and converged services.�ey must o�er a highly di�erentiated userexperience in order to establish a sustainablecompetitive advantage.

�e emerging services integrator roleprovides an end-to-end focal point forcritical transformation projects. And, to getthere, vendors can build on their triple playexperience of translating user experience intoreal network impacts, to help service providersbetter manage their resources by shi�ing theservice providers’ focus from their network totheir end-user customers.

JimWhite is a vice president of marketdevelopment inside Alcatel’s Global

Marketing organization.

p24-25 Supp #6 5/19/06 12:08 PM Page 25

is undergoing a broadband-powered competitive transformation. IPTVcompletely changes the competitive landscapefor the broadband household. Users demanda better, more empowered experience andservice providers must deliver it now or missthe opportunity to enter the market with acompelling service o�ering. But, the urgencyand complexity require a services integrationpartner who translates user expectationsinto game-changing services that are thefoundation for competitive transformation

and who can help shi� service providers’focus from managing networks to managingthe user experience and developing newbusiness models.

A services integrator is a partner who canmanage and implement a service provider’sservice-driven network transformation:consulting with the service provider aboutdetailed service de�nitions and referencesolution recommendations, and ensuring thatthe IP transformation is delivered on-timeand within budget via integration services.Triple play represents the �rst global telecomservice transformation that supports a real

services integrator approach where servicesde�nition, globally proven reference solutionsand integration services can accelerate thetransformation process.

Triple play represents both a mass-market opportunity and threat for service providers, completely rede�ning the residential communicationsbundleanddrivingstrategic decision-making. Any service provider with a revenue stream from either phone,Internet or TV must re-think their service o�ering to address this change. Many service providers now realize that their business will be completely di�erent in �ve years, and that their network must be transformed to drive a new business direction.

�e amount of associated change isdaunting and service providers are looking for help. �ey need: 1. A service transformation that changes the relationship service providers have with their residential customers, from service transaction-based (phone, Internet and TV) to a relationship where the service provider manages the communications and entertainment experience residential users experience at home and away;2. A new network that supports mass-market IP services, �xed and mobile services, customer speci�c con�gurations, lower operating costs and proactive service assurance;3. Business transformation that reduces innovative services deployment risks and allows new business models.

�e market urgency and complexity of

triple play implementation means service integrators need to demonstrate experience in implementing new technologies suchas IPTV, IP multimedia subsystem (IMS), broadband infrastructures; and �exible architectures that leverage installed assets and signi�cantly shorten time to market.

User-centric triple play services represent the �rst signi�cant opportunity for service integrators, but network transformations can also start in other ways. For instance,many service providers have taken their own strategic steps to be ready to make transformative network investments around strategic service opportunities such as �xed-mobile convergence and managed communication services for small, medium and enterprise businesses. Other service providers initiate network transformations as a prerequisite for new services by focusing their initial e�ort not on any speci�c service, but on achieving other strategic business objectives. For example, changing business cost structures in anticipation of regulatoryor market changes and enhancing business support systems (BSS).

�e services integrator engagement modelcan facilitate the development of theseopportunities as well by focusing customers’e�orts on their primary economic purpose,which is to provide services to users that addvalue. �e reference solution for each situationcan adjust to each speci�c customer situation.

In simple terms, services integration is

JimWhite, Alcatel

Helping service providers rede�ne the end-user service experience

p24-25 Supp #6 5/19/06 12:08 PM Page 24

providers (CSPs) worldwide are either evaluating or deploying IPTV to ful�ll several promising objectives. Regardless of whether the revenue strategy is exploiting billion dollar advertising opportunities, push video on demand (VoD) and personal video recorder/set-top box (PVR/STB) telescoping; recapturing residential voice customers, Internet access up-selling and service bundles; or improving ARPU withvideophone, gaming and personal music library premiums, the customer demand is real. While equipment suppliers and network operators race to identify winning feature functionalities, more than 1 million IPTV subscribers globally have alreadyvalidated demand-side opportunity with40 percent growth in the �rst half of 2005 alone. Research indicates revenue potential from services alone could reach $38 billion by 2009, which does not include infrastructure investment. Regardless of the individual operator’s motivation or medium (copper, �ber or air), each of these CSPs has something in common. Managing a complex network to provide capable and robust ’tripleplay’ video, data and voice presents key operational obstacles that must be overcome to keep customers subscribed.

Conventional television broadcasts delivered over a transmission network maturing over a span of 70 years have established viewerexpectations for near-perfect quality.Prospective subscribers will compare IPTV to the traditional delivery system and expect the challenger’s quality and availability to meet or surpass those associated with its predecessor. Further, IPTV research has shown that television viewers who encounter viewing hindrances typically lose interest immediately and switch providers rather

than report the incident, making churn aserious issue. Signi�cant operational factorswith the potential to negatively impact successful service management include:• Packet Loss. When IPTV networksbecome heavily congested, packet loss tends to be more problematic than jitter, as most receivers have 200 msec bu�er sizes su�cient for handling small variances in packet arrival times. �e resultant broadcast quality degradation is related to the transportprotocol mechanism in use. Solutionsimplementing UDP unicast or multicast with MPEG-2 encapsulation can experience signi�cant image disruption when entireframes of the video transmission aredropped. TCP can be ameliorative for lost and improperly ordered packets; however,its packet retransmission delay can causethe playout bu�er in a subscriber’s receivingSTB/PVR to pause video playback.• Bandwidth Availability. If a network nodeor router becomes congested, the outgoinginterface bu�er can over�ow and squeezethe bandwidth delivered to a DSL, �ber orcable access link. �e receiving STB/PVRwill generally be impacted and the customerexperience will then su�er. When variablerate codecs are used with a video broadcast,temporary spikes in the bandwidth requiredcan introduce bu�ering instability for networkelements at both the source and destination. Asa result, unfavorable over�ow and under�owconditions can materialize and cause theviewer to experience picture freeze, macroblocking or jerky playback symptoms.• Encrypted Content. �e IPTV architecture incorporates a Conditional Access (CA) element, which interacts with back-end systems to determine if and when to encrypt content and send keys to authenticated subscribers. Broadcasted content is o�en encrypted in real time to protect against unauthorized use whereas VoD takes place

before being stored on a VoD server and must be periodically re-encrypted to achieveheightened content security. �e variance in proprietary Digital Rights Management(DRM) implementations introduces performance complexity for di�erent areas of the IPTV network, and solutions with the ability to monitor encrypted streams andcorrelate the impact have not yet evolved.• Codec Impairments. �e di�culty ofisolating and measuring network and codec impairments in the IPTV environment is exacerbated by the variety of video encoders and decoders currently in use and planned for the future. While MPEG-2 TS is typical,video payloads can be delivered using UTP or RTP over UTP. MPEG-4 Part 10 (H.264/AVC) o�ers the promise of video payload compression and delivery of DVD and HD streams using less bandwidth. Each of these codecs dramatically alters the amountof time required to join multicast video streams and receive the initial image from a multicast group (‘Zap Time’) and will impact subscribers, particularly those who live far from the CO or headend.• End-to-End (E2E) Manageability. IPTV subscribers will expect service to work around the clock. For broadcasts to perform as expected, both the network infrastructure and service delivery equipment must becontinuously available and performing in accordance with speci�ed service levels. �e IP network itself is not the only potential impairment source. VoD and broadcast servers inadequately provisioned tosupport high densities of users during peak viewing times can become congested and lead to pauses in video playback a�er the subscriber’s decoder bu�ers have consumed all available stored data. �e widelyheterogeneous and diverse number ofelements, network devices and application resources complicates E2E manageability

�e traditional emphasis onmanaging networksmust change to provide the reliability, QoS and‘always-on’ bandwidth availability essential for on-demand, prime-time IPTV broadcasting

Sameh Yamany, Ph.D., Trendium

p26,28 Supp #8 5/19/06 12:48 PM Page 26

providers (CSPs) worldwide are either evaluating or deploying IPTV to ful�ll several promising objectives. Regardless of whether the revenue strategy is exploiting billion dollar advertising opportunities, push video on demand (VoD) and personal video recorder/set-top box (PVR/STB) telescoping; recapturing residential voice customers, Internet access up-selling and service bundles; or improving ARPU withvideophone, gaming and personal music library premiums, the customer demand is real. While equipment suppliers and network operators race to identify winning feature functionalities, more than 1 million IPTV subscribers globally have alreadyvalidated demand-side opportunity with40 percent growth in the �rst half of 2005 alone. Research indicates revenue potential from services alone could reach $38 billion by 2009, which does not include infrastructure investment. Regardless of the individual operator’s motivation or medium (copper, �ber or air), each of these CSPs has something in common. Managing a complex network to provide capable and robust ’tripleplay’ video, data and voice presents key operational obstacles that must be overcome to keep customers subscribed.

Conventional television broadcasts delivered over a transmission network maturing over a span of 70 years have established viewerexpectations for near-perfect quality.Prospective subscribers will compare IPTV to the traditional delivery system and expect the challenger’s quality and availability to meet or surpass those associated with its predecessor. Further, IPTV research has shown that television viewers who encounter viewing hindrances typically lose interest immediately and switch providers rather

than report the incident, making churn aserious issue. Signi�cant operational factorswith the potential to negatively impact successful service management include:• Packet Loss. When IPTV networksbecome heavily congested, packet loss tends to be more problematic than jitter, as most receivers have 200 msec bu�er sizes su�cient for handling small variances in packet arrival times. �e resultant broadcast quality degradation is related to the transportprotocol mechanism in use. Solutionsimplementing UDP unicast or multicast with MPEG-2 encapsulation can experience signi�cant image disruption when entireframes of the video transmission aredropped. TCP can be ameliorative for lost and improperly ordered packets; however,its packet retransmission delay can causethe playout bu�er in a subscriber’s receivingSTB/PVR to pause video playback.• Bandwidth Availability. If a network nodeor router becomes congested, the outgoinginterface bu�er can over�ow and squeezethe bandwidth delivered to a DSL, �ber orcable access link. �e receiving STB/PVRwill generally be impacted and the customerexperience will then su�er. When variablerate codecs are used with a video broadcast,temporary spikes in the bandwidth requiredcan introduce bu�ering instability for networkelements at both the source and destination. Asa result, unfavorable over�ow and under�owconditions can materialize and cause theviewer to experience picture freeze, macroblocking or jerky playback symptoms.• Encrypted Content. �e IPTV architecture incorporates a Conditional Access (CA) element, which interacts with back-end systems to determine if and when to encrypt content and send keys to authenticated subscribers. Broadcasted content is o�en encrypted in real time to protect against unauthorized use whereas VoD takes place

before being stored on a VoD server and must be periodically re-encrypted to achieveheightened content security. �e variance in proprietary Digital Rights Management(DRM) implementations introduces performance complexity for di�erent areas of the IPTV network, and solutions with the ability to monitor encrypted streams andcorrelate the impact have not yet evolved.• Codec Impairments. �e di�culty ofisolating and measuring network and codec impairments in the IPTV environment is exacerbated by the variety of video encoders and decoders currently in use and planned for the future. While MPEG-2 TS is typical,video payloads can be delivered using UTP or RTP over UTP. MPEG-4 Part 10 (H.264/AVC) o�ers the promise of video payload compression and delivery of DVD and HD streams using less bandwidth. Each of these codecs dramatically alters the amountof time required to join multicast video streams and receive the initial image from a multicast group (‘Zap Time’) and will impact subscribers, particularly those who live far from the CO or headend.• End-to-End (E2E) Manageability. IPTV subscribers will expect service to work around the clock. For broadcasts to perform as expected, both the network infrastructure and service delivery equipment must becontinuously available and performing in accordance with speci�ed service levels. �e IP network itself is not the only potential impairment source. VoD and broadcast servers inadequately provisioned tosupport high densities of users during peak viewing times can become congested and lead to pauses in video playback a�er the subscriber’s decoder bu�ers have consumed all available stored data. �e widelyheterogeneous and diverse number ofelements, network devices and application resources complicates E2E manageability

�e traditional emphasis onmanaging networksmust change to provide the reliability, QoS and‘always-on’ bandwidth availability essential for on-demand, prime-time IPTV broadcasting

Sameh Yamany, Ph.D., Trendium

p26,28 Supp #8 5/19/06 12:48 PM Page 26

Service Providers need to look beyond IPTV alone and bundle it as oneof many services. Adopting this strategy will help dramatically increasebroadband service revenue

Gary Southwell, Juniper Networks

providers facing competitive threats from multiple sources, IPTV promises to increase the averagerevenue per subscriber, helping o�set diminishing residential voice revenues and possible market share erosion. An IPTV service alone, however, will not di�erentiate one provider from another in the long run. Rather, the ability to o�er a range of �exible, customizable services will enable true di�erentiation, opening up the opportunity to potentially double service provider revenue.

By deploying a �exible, intelligent networkinfrastructurefromthestart,serviceproviderswill be able to o�er IPTV immediatelywithout compromising the ability to o�er arange of �exible and customizable servicesin the future. A shortsighted architecturaldecision may be acceptable for IPTV, but willlimit di�erentiation and hinder future servicedevelopment opportunities in the long term.

Network architecture decisions can minimize the risk associated with implementing and o�ering IPTV alone and also potentially double revenue byincreasing service choice; improve time to market; decrease cost; and reduce customer churn—all without resorting toprice competition.

A �exible, customizable service bundle begins with a broad menu of broadcast TV tiers and on-demand options. Combining this with VoIP services and high-speed data provides a solid foundation upon which new services can be added. Unfortunately, if the provider stops here, their service bundle is not going to be signi�cantly di�erent from

other Provider o�erings, leaving price as the only possible di�erentiator.

It is the combination of services and the ability for the subscriber to createa customized bundle that appeals toeach consumer and provides true di�erentiation. �ese services can be broadcast television tiers and packages, enhanced services such as video on demand (VOD), integrated services suchas Caller ID on TV, or brand new services such as video telephony and on-line gaming (See Figure 1).

In addition, new services targeting speci�c market segments can also be a strong di�erentiator and strategy for growing service revenues. For example, hosted gaming services and video-telephony services o�en appeal to the twenty-something crowd, while integrating home security and monitoringcan appeal to the traveler. Quality cellularbackhaul over WiFi appeals to the growing segment of users ready to “cut the wire”and go with only a mobile phone. Tens ofmillions of small businesses and SOHOworkers are connecting through high-speed Internet connections today. What’s unique is that these users are accessing mission-critical applications that rely onconsistent timely delivery.

From ERP to on-line collaborationand web services, to secure commerce transactions, these users need moregranular data services that work withhigher consistency and reliability thantoday’s best-e�ort data services.

By segmenting the market, providers will�nd a large mix of currently underservedcustomers to target. Yet to maximizepro�tability, any service o�ering must also

support these highly sought-a�er customerson the same infrastructure.

Ensuring the best user experience requires a multiservice network infrastructure that can dynamically adapt to eachsubscriber. Adding this intelligence withIP routing enables the network to ensurethat enough bandwidth is available for each service and that critical informationreceives preferential treatment.

�e intelligence can be controlled in the Point-of-Presence (POP) or it can be distributed further into the network.

Based on the requirements to implement theformer, theBroadbandServicesRouter (BSR) has emerged, which manages all services for all users. As an alternative, IP DSLAMs or so-called intelligent Ethernet switches can attempt to evolve to provide these intelligent routing functions in a distributed fashion in the access and aggregation network.

p29-30 Supp #12 5/19/06 12:50 PM Page 29

troubleshooting and impedes CSPs’ ability to isolate root causes and network hot spots.

Unrelenting subscriber demand is catalyzingCSP awareness of IPTV’s hybrid blend ofengineering-centric and viewer-centric servicemeasurements: an evolution of OperationalIntelligence (see Figure 1).

Traditional QoS network monitoringsolutions tend to be operations-oriented andfocus on important network parameters suchas delay, jitter and throughput. While certainlycritical to network health, these metrics havelittle meaning to the average television viewer.For this reason, increasing emphasis hasbeen placed on a higher-level measurementabstraction commonly referred to as qualityof experience (QoE). Signi�cant QoEmeasurements might include the time neededto switch IPTV channels, change ElectronicProgram Guide listings, load a web page on anon-PC device with an IPTV display or view along-form ad pushed to a PVR/STB.

IPTV networks must be able to monitorfundamental network parameters like delay,jitter and loss rate, as well as server parameterssuch as memory, CPU, I/O and general health

states. �ere is a growing need for high-volumeinfrastructure performance data collectionengines with the ability to extract service andperformance data from all IPTV infrastructureincluding STBs/PVRs, home gateways (TR-069 enabled), DSLAMs, LAN/WAN switches,

VoD servers, active and passive probes, andapplications,toallowfordeeppacketinspectionand statistical tra�c analysis. �ese servicemanagement platforms should be vendor-agnostic and capable of normalizing SNMP,TL1 or XML outputs to compute trends andestimates of key QoE performance indicators.TomanageIPTVnetworks,operatorswillneedfuture-proof service management solutionscapable of summarizing lower layer transportkey quality indicators (KQI) across higher IPlayers to predict and produce aggregated KQIsat the higher level.

To match subscriber claims of poor quality to the source of the problem, CSPs will require intelligent root-cause analysis across layers of the E2E service hierarchy throughintuitive GUIs that assist operators withpinpointing the actual cause of impairments in real time and provide a historical perspective. To apply valuable insightwhere traditional service management falls short of IPTV expectations, this impactanalysis must be relationship-aware in that itexamines the nature of network relationships before determining how the impairment at a speci�c layer in the network hierarchyimpacts the service or application residing at other layers of the hierarchy.

Data collection and analysis sequencesyield genuine value only if a means exists tointegrate these immenseoutputsanddisplaythe �ndings in meaningful and intuitive

ways. Practical systems should demonstratefuture-proof support for adapting to every NMS interface in order to generate reportsmeasuring TCP Application Response Timeanalysis, EPG selection intervals, Zap Timemeasurements for live channel join/leaveand UDP multicast/unicast packet arrivaltiming analysis. Reporting capabilitiesshould incorporate integrated fault andperformance depiction, with a uni�edview of impairments combining eventsgathered from fault management systemssuch as fault correlation and consolidation.Customized user speci�c and self-updatingheat charts should be displayed graphicallyto empower the CSP to rapidly isolate theservice degradation and correct networkhealth before trouble ticket call volumesaccelerate.

Operational Intelligence functionalities are emerging as critical components forCSPs who recognize the inherent ROI fromreducing the time and cost needed to scale IPTV service to thousands of subscribersper day while reducing wasteful capital expenditures tied to over-provisioning bandwidth-intensive video service. �e ultimate goal is to reduce customer churn by assuring QoE and satisfyingviewer expectations. Achieving this goal mandates that CSPs have tools in place capable of reducing costly outages and service degradations, minimizing trend Mean Time to Detect (MTTD), loweringtrend Mean Time to Repair (MTTR), and isolating and removing hotspots. �e ITPV adoption curve is accelerating due to acon�uence of factors: video compression advancements, increased �ber availability,greater a�ordability for access solutions likeDSL and PON, computational and storage technology advancements, and STBs/PVRs that have validated VoD business models. Fully unleashing the hidden revenue potential of increasingly complex IPTV networks requires changes in the service management paradigm. �e era ofOperational Intelligence promises to deliver monumental advancements in rapid root-cause analysis, relationship-aware impactanalysis and the multi-protocol network infrastructure layering capabilities essential for triple play deployment stability.

Sameh Yamany, Ph.D., is senior vicepresident product management andcorporate CTO for Trendium, Inc.

p26,28 Supp #8 5/19/06 12:48 PM Page 28

Service Providers need to look beyond IPTV alone and bundle it as oneof many services. Adopting this strategy will help dramatically increasebroadband service revenue

Gary Southwell, Juniper Networks

providers facing competitive threats from multiple sources, IPTV promises to increase the averagerevenue per subscriber, helping o�set diminishing residential voice revenues and possible market share erosion. An IPTV service alone, however, will not di�erentiate one provider from another in the long run. Rather, the ability to o�er a range of �exible, customizable services will enable true di�erentiation, opening up the opportunity to potentially double service provider revenue.

By deploying a �exible, intelligent networkinfrastructurefromthestart,serviceproviderswill be able to o�er IPTV immediatelywithout compromising the ability to o�er arange of �exible and customizable servicesin the future. A shortsighted architecturaldecision may be acceptable for IPTV, but willlimit di�erentiation and hinder future servicedevelopment opportunities in the long term.

Network architecture decisions can minimize the risk associated with implementing and o�ering IPTV alone and also potentially double revenue byincreasing service choice; improve time to market; decrease cost; and reduce customer churn—all without resorting toprice competition.

A �exible, customizable service bundle begins with a broad menu of broadcast TV tiers and on-demand options. Combining this with VoIP services and high-speed data provides a solid foundation upon which new services can be added. Unfortunately, if the provider stops here, their service bundle is not going to be signi�cantly di�erent from

other Provider o�erings, leaving price as the only possible di�erentiator.

It is the combination of services and the ability for the subscriber to createa customized bundle that appeals toeach consumer and provides true di�erentiation. �ese services can be broadcast television tiers and packages, enhanced services such as video on demand (VOD), integrated services suchas Caller ID on TV, or brand new services such as video telephony and on-line gaming (See Figure 1).

In addition, new services targeting speci�c market segments can also be a strong di�erentiator and strategy for growing service revenues. For example, hosted gaming services and video-telephony services o�en appeal to the twenty-something crowd, while integrating home security and monitoringcan appeal to the traveler. Quality cellularbackhaul over WiFi appeals to the growing segment of users ready to “cut the wire”and go with only a mobile phone. Tens ofmillions of small businesses and SOHOworkers are connecting through high-speed Internet connections today. What’s unique is that these users are accessing mission-critical applications that rely onconsistent timely delivery.

From ERP to on-line collaborationand web services, to secure commerce transactions, these users need moregranular data services that work withhigher consistency and reliability thantoday’s best-e�ort data services.

By segmenting the market, providers will�nd a large mix of currently underservedcustomers to target. Yet to maximizepro�tability, any service o�ering must also

support these highly sought-a�er customerson the same infrastructure.

Ensuring the best user experience requires a multiservice network infrastructure that can dynamically adapt to eachsubscriber. Adding this intelligence withIP routing enables the network to ensurethat enough bandwidth is available for each service and that critical informationreceives preferential treatment.

�e intelligence can be controlled in the Point-of-Presence (POP) or it can be distributed further into the network.

Based on the requirements to implement theformer, theBroadbandServicesRouter (BSR) has emerged, which manages all services for all users. As an alternative, IP DSLAMs or so-called intelligent Ethernet switches can attempt to evolve to provide these intelligent routing functions in a distributed fashion in the access and aggregation network.

Entertainment Productivity / Reference Communications

Voice (VoIP)SECURITYAnti-VirusFirewallSPAM

URL Filtering

ONLINE GAMINGDownloads

Real-Time playMultiplayer hosting

Streaming music

Streaming AudioRadio

Concerts

VIDEOIP/PC TV

Video on DemandPay per View

Digital Video Recording

INFO SERVICESSports, Games, hobbies

Home Monitoring

INFO SERVICESFinancial, News, travel

Distributed PrintingPhotos, Etc

PERSONAL STORAGEImages, Video, data

Dinamic BandwidthUpgrades

Tiered VPN

Personal Video

Email

Fax Services

InstantMessaging

Video Telephony

Online Collaboration

Wireless Backhaul

p29-30 Supp #12 5/19/06 12:50 PM Page 29

troubleshooting and impedes CSPs’ ability to isolate root causes and network hot spots.

Unrelenting subscriber demand is catalyzingCSP awareness of IPTV’s hybrid blend ofengineering-centric and viewer-centric servicemeasurements: an evolution of OperationalIntelligence (see Figure 1).

Traditional QoS network monitoringsolutions tend to be operations-oriented andfocus on important network parameters suchas delay, jitter and throughput. While certainlycritical to network health, these metrics havelittle meaning to the average television viewer.For this reason, increasing emphasis hasbeen placed on a higher-level measurementabstraction commonly referred to as qualityof experience (QoE). Signi�cant QoEmeasurements might include the time neededto switch IPTV channels, change ElectronicProgram Guide listings, load a web page on anon-PC device with an IPTV display or view along-form ad pushed to a PVR/STB.

IPTV networks must be able to monitorfundamental network parameters like delay,jitter and loss rate, as well as server parameterssuch as memory, CPU, I/O and general health

states. �ere is a growing need for high-volumeinfrastructure performance data collectionengines with the ability to extract service andperformance data from all IPTV infrastructureincluding STBs/PVRs, home gateways (TR-069 enabled), DSLAMs, LAN/WAN switches,

VoD servers, active and passive probes, andapplications,toallowfordeeppacketinspectionand statistical tra�c analysis. �ese servicemanagement platforms should be vendor-agnostic and capable of normalizing SNMP,TL1 or XML outputs to compute trends andestimates of key QoE performance indicators.TomanageIPTVnetworks,operatorswillneedfuture-proof service management solutionscapable of summarizing lower layer transportkey quality indicators (KQI) across higher IPlayers to predict and produce aggregated KQIsat the higher level.

To match subscriber claims of poor quality to the source of the problem, CSPs will require intelligent root-cause analysis across layers of the E2E service hierarchy throughintuitive GUIs that assist operators withpinpointing the actual cause of impairments in real time and provide a historical perspective. To apply valuable insightwhere traditional service management falls short of IPTV expectations, this impactanalysis must be relationship-aware in that itexamines the nature of network relationships before determining how the impairment at a speci�c layer in the network hierarchyimpacts the service or application residing at other layers of the hierarchy.

Data collection and analysis sequencesyield genuine value only if a means exists tointegrate these immenseoutputsanddisplaythe �ndings in meaningful and intuitive

ways. Practical systems should demonstratefuture-proof support for adapting to every NMS interface in order to generate reportsmeasuring TCP Application Response Timeanalysis, EPG selection intervals, Zap Timemeasurements for live channel join/leaveand UDP multicast/unicast packet arrivaltiming analysis. Reporting capabilitiesshould incorporate integrated fault andperformance depiction, with a uni�edview of impairments combining eventsgathered from fault management systemssuch as fault correlation and consolidation.Customized user speci�c and self-updatingheat charts should be displayed graphicallyto empower the CSP to rapidly isolate theservice degradation and correct networkhealth before trouble ticket call volumesaccelerate.

Operational Intelligence functionalities are emerging as critical components forCSPs who recognize the inherent ROI fromreducing the time and cost needed to scale IPTV service to thousands of subscribersper day while reducing wasteful capital expenditures tied to over-provisioning bandwidth-intensive video service. �e ultimate goal is to reduce customer churn by assuring QoE and satisfyingviewer expectations. Achieving this goal mandates that CSPs have tools in place capable of reducing costly outages and service degradations, minimizing trend Mean Time to Detect (MTTD), loweringtrend Mean Time to Repair (MTTR), and isolating and removing hotspots. �e ITPV adoption curve is accelerating due to acon�uence of factors: video compression advancements, increased �ber availability,greater a�ordability for access solutions likeDSL and PON, computational and storage technology advancements, and STBs/PVRs that have validated VoD business models. Fully unleashing the hidden revenue potential of increasingly complex IPTV networks requires changes in the service management paradigm. �e era ofOperational Intelligence promises to deliver monumental advancements in rapid root-cause analysis, relationship-aware impactanalysis and the multi-protocol network infrastructure layering capabilities essential for triple play deployment stability.

Sameh Yamany, Ph.D., is senior vicepresident product management andcorporate CTO for Trendium, Inc.

p26,28 Supp #8 5/19/06 12:48 PM Page 28

�e ability to provide real-time, �exible billing, provisioningsolutions will be critical to the success of many service providers as they enter new markets

Renata Silva, Siemens

service providers throughout the worldare o�ering IPTV services and other homeentertainment content to stand out fromthe competition, boost revenues and retaincustomers. �e pressure for new revenueopportunities is at a fever pitch as cablecompanies are now o�ering competitivetelephone services in addition to expandingcable entertainment packages.

IPTV, according to telecommunication experts, is the new battle�eld for gaining the residential customer base of the future. More interactive entertainment and communication options – pay-per-view, high-de�nition programming, video conferencing and distance

learning, for example – will surely capture consumer attention. However, the real winners of the new residential services dollar will not likely be the operatorswith the swankiest technology o�erings, but those who can deliver and interact with customers without hitches. In other words, the smooth provisioning and billing of services.

�is will be particularly challengingfor IPTV services, especially when the greatest value proposition of IPTV is consumer choice -- putting an end toone-size-�ts-all entertainment packages of the past. �is will put tremendous emphasis on support applications. While entertainment and communication

choices grow, home users will continue towant simple provisioning procedures and easy-to-follow billing rules. Along with more choices, they will expect to be able to activate and deactivate new services – perhaps even on a daily basis.

Servicesproviders,ontheotherhand,mustassure the correct delivery of services withminimal internal complexities. �ere are anumber of considerations service providersshould make when exploring the back-o�ce so�ware applications that supportsubscriber and service provisioning andcharging, and manage other componentssuch as IPTV set-top boxes.

Providers are already loaded down with plenty of things to do in setting up new

p31-32 Supp #10 5/19/06 12:53 PM Page 31

�e challenges of a distributed architecture are:• Managing numerous distributed devicesin every CO (instead of having fewer BSRscentralized at Metro POPs) signi�cantlyincreases complexity to plan, provision andoperatethenetwork.Forexamplecustomizingeach device, capturing network usagestatistics, and assigning QoS parameters foreach service is far simpler when performed infewer devices in fewer locations.• Adding the required intelligence to every DSLAM and switch adds considerable cost and complexity to con�gure new subscribers or modify the services packages to which they subscribe.• Most “smart” DSLAMs will take years to mature to provide the advanced service management functionality.• Any intelligent IP DSLAM and aggregationswitch solutions require proprietary ESS/OSS systems for provisioning and management. �is locks providers into single-vendor solutionsthat prohibit mixing best-of-breed access and aggregation products.

A network that centralizesservice and subscribercontrol into carrier-grade BSRs avoids theabove-mentioned issues of a distributedarchitecture. BSRs become the service controlpoints where service policy can be set on aper-service, per-subscriber basis. �e devicesfeature a built-in, scalable queuing systemthat applies policy, marks the packets andshapes the service dynamically to �t throughthe access network local loop to deliver eachservice with consistent quality.

BSRs can better react to service activations and reshape services on-the-�y to �t the de�ned service policy. �e bene�t is thatat any moment, all available bandwidth canbe allocated to any active service(s). When TVs are o�, all bandwidth can be madeavailable to the high-speed data services and further prioritize the VPN services versus instant messaging and peer-to-peer �le transfers. Time-of-day policies can be set per subscriber, where the home o�ce users can prioritize particular applicationsduring the day and change priorities to

entertainment services at night. �e centralized BSR approach makes

such service segmentation possible and manageable, as the policy is applied at fewer points rather than at thousands of DSLAMs. �e BSR, by queuing each subscriber separately, can keep subscribers from interfering with each other.

�e dynamic bandwidth managementcapability of the intelligent BSR approachdi�ers from today’s more simplisticdistribution overlay approaches that treateach service separately and force the carvingout of bandwidth to support each priorityservice. �is limits the number of o�eredpriority services to just a few, limiting therevenue-per-subscriber potential and forcingall subscribers to take a “one-size-�ts-all”

service bundle with no means to customize.With an intelligent centralized approach,

access activity of DSLAMs and aggregationswitches entails fewer functions. Servicescan be shaped to �t into existing ATMinfrastructures, thereby allowing providers tomove into the market quickly and selectivelyupgrade the access network. Providers alsocanimplementsimplerEthernetDSLAMsandswitches today, as opposed to waiting for morecomplex intelligent DSLAMs to be ready forproduction. �e savings and reduction in riskof a centralized architecture can be substantial.TCO actually can come in at a fraction of thatassociated with a distributed model becauseof the delayed capital expenditure and thelarge operational savings characteristic of thecentralized model.

�e open architectural approach also applies to service applications. Customer

satisfaction requires a consistent level ofservice delivery to ensure a high quality experience. O�ering a broad mix of services, in which many services can have a high desired priority, can cause problems when multiple high priority services contend forthe same limited bandwidth. When services of similar priority contend for limited bandwidth, the BSR may not have enoughlow priority services running to a particularsubscriber to accommodate additional capacity. �is condition impacts all services to that subscriber.

�e industry recognizes this trend,and network vendors are working with application vendors to solve this problem. �e result, shown in Figure 2, is anopen service policy manager that allows

applications to query the policy manager beforesetting up a service request. Openness requires a published set of APIs and useof standards-based message exchange such as SOAP. �e policy manager tracks the statusofeachapplicationby interacting withthe BSRs as to whatservices are active at any time and how much bandwidth is availableto every subscriber. �epolicy manager then

can allow or block the application from setting up a new service connection,

An open, centralized, intelligent infrastructure solves the long-term service bundle di�erentiation dilemma, enabling subscribers to select the desired service mix in their service bundle and prioritize those services via a self-provisioning, web-based service portal. �e centralized BSR provides choices in the access network and timing of required net upgrades, lowering TCO and reducing customer churn. �e combinationof the BSR and the service policy manager creates a means of consistent service deliveryeven in conditions of similar service priority overload that can double the potential number of revenue generating services sold per subscriber.

Gary Southwell is the director of the IPTVProgram O�ce at Juniper Networks.

p29-30 Supp #12 5/19/06 12:50 PM Page 30

�e ability to provide real-time, �exible billing, provisioningsolutions will be critical to the success of many service providers as they enter new markets

Renata Silva, Siemens

service providers throughout the worldare o�ering IPTV services and other homeentertainment content to stand out fromthe competition, boost revenues and retaincustomers. �e pressure for new revenueopportunities is at a fever pitch as cablecompanies are now o�ering competitivetelephone services in addition to expandingcable entertainment packages.

IPTV, according to telecommunication experts, is the new battle�eld for gaining the residential customer base of the future. More interactive entertainment and communication options – pay-per-view, high-de�nition programming, video conferencing and distance

learning, for example – will surely capture consumer attention. However, the real winners of the new residential services dollar will not likely be the operatorswith the swankiest technology o�erings, but those who can deliver and interact with customers without hitches. In other words, the smooth provisioning and billing of services.

�is will be particularly challengingfor IPTV services, especially when the greatest value proposition of IPTV is consumer choice -- putting an end toone-size-�ts-all entertainment packages of the past. �is will put tremendous emphasis on support applications. While entertainment and communication

choices grow, home users will continue towant simple provisioning procedures and easy-to-follow billing rules. Along with more choices, they will expect to be able to activate and deactivate new services – perhaps even on a daily basis.

Servicesproviders,ontheotherhand,mustassure the correct delivery of services withminimal internal complexities. �ere are anumber of considerations service providersshould make when exploring the back-o�ce so�ware applications that supportsubscriber and service provisioning andcharging, and manage other componentssuch as IPTV set-top boxes.

Providers are already loaded down with plenty of things to do in setting up new

p31-32 Supp #10 5/19/06 12:53 PM Page 31

�e challenges of a distributed architecture are:• Managing numerous distributed devicesin every CO (instead of having fewer BSRscentralized at Metro POPs) signi�cantlyincreases complexity to plan, provision andoperatethenetwork.Forexamplecustomizingeach device, capturing network usagestatistics, and assigning QoS parameters foreach service is far simpler when performed infewer devices in fewer locations.• Adding the required intelligence to every DSLAM and switch adds considerable cost and complexity to con�gure new subscribers or modify the services packages to which they subscribe.• Most “smart” DSLAMs will take years to mature to provide the advanced service management functionality.• Any intelligent IP DSLAM and aggregationswitch solutions require proprietary ESS/OSS systems for provisioning and management. �is locks providers into single-vendor solutionsthat prohibit mixing best-of-breed access and aggregation products.

A network that centralizesservice and subscribercontrol into carrier-grade BSRs avoids theabove-mentioned issues of a distributedarchitecture. BSRs become the service controlpoints where service policy can be set on aper-service, per-subscriber basis. �e devicesfeature a built-in, scalable queuing systemthat applies policy, marks the packets andshapes the service dynamically to �t throughthe access network local loop to deliver eachservice with consistent quality.

BSRs can better react to service activations and reshape services on-the-�y to �t the de�ned service policy. �e bene�t is thatat any moment, all available bandwidth canbe allocated to any active service(s). When TVs are o�, all bandwidth can be madeavailable to the high-speed data services and further prioritize the VPN services versus instant messaging and peer-to-peer �le transfers. Time-of-day policies can be set per subscriber, where the home o�ce users can prioritize particular applicationsduring the day and change priorities to

entertainment services at night. �e centralized BSR approach makes

such service segmentation possible and manageable, as the policy is applied at fewer points rather than at thousands of DSLAMs. �e BSR, by queuing each subscriber separately, can keep subscribers from interfering with each other.

�e dynamic bandwidth managementcapability of the intelligent BSR approachdi�ers from today’s more simplisticdistribution overlay approaches that treateach service separately and force the carvingout of bandwidth to support each priorityservice. �is limits the number of o�eredpriority services to just a few, limiting therevenue-per-subscriber potential and forcingall subscribers to take a “one-size-�ts-all”

service bundle with no means to customize.With an intelligent centralized approach,

access activity of DSLAMs and aggregationswitches entails fewer functions. Servicescan be shaped to �t into existing ATMinfrastructures, thereby allowing providers tomove into the market quickly and selectivelyupgrade the access network. Providers alsocanimplementsimplerEthernetDSLAMsandswitches today, as opposed to waiting for morecomplex intelligent DSLAMs to be ready forproduction. �e savings and reduction in riskof a centralized architecture can be substantial.TCO actually can come in at a fraction of thatassociated with a distributed model becauseof the delayed capital expenditure and thelarge operational savings characteristic of thecentralized model.

�e open architectural approach also applies to service applications. Customer

satisfaction requires a consistent level ofservice delivery to ensure a high quality experience. O�ering a broad mix of services, in which many services can have a high desired priority, can cause problems when multiple high priority services contend forthe same limited bandwidth. When services of similar priority contend for limited bandwidth, the BSR may not have enoughlow priority services running to a particularsubscriber to accommodate additional capacity. �is condition impacts all services to that subscriber.

�e industry recognizes this trend,and network vendors are working with application vendors to solve this problem. �e result, shown in Figure 2, is anopen service policy manager that allows

applications to query the policy manager beforesetting up a service request. Openness requires a published set of APIs and useof standards-based message exchange such as SOAP. �e policy manager tracks the statusofeachapplicationby interacting withthe BSRs as to whatservices are active at any time and how much bandwidth is availableto every subscriber. �epolicy manager then

can allow or block the application from setting up a new service connection,

An open, centralized, intelligent infrastructure solves the long-term service bundle di�erentiation dilemma, enabling subscribers to select the desired service mix in their service bundle and prioritize those services via a self-provisioning, web-based service portal. �e centralized BSR provides choices in the access network and timing of required net upgrades, lowering TCO and reducing customer churn. �e combinationof the BSR and the service policy manager creates a means of consistent service deliveryeven in conditions of similar service priority overload that can double the potential number of revenue generating services sold per subscriber.

Gary Southwell is the director of the IPTVProgram O�ce at Juniper Networks.

p29-30 Supp #12 5/19/06 12:50 PM Page 30

Telecom providers with rich IPTV service creation platforms will be the masters of their own fate

Phil�ompson, mPhase Technologies

history, the telecom industryweathered a great many upheavals. Everynew technology brought new competitiveplayers to the market, challengingincumbent operators and driving changein core networks and business models. We are now living through a new periodof change in the telecom industry.Convergence of networks led to blending of telecommunications, media, content, information and entertainment. Telcos are facing eroding average revenues per user (APRU), aggressive competition, and increased subscriber churn. Cable,satellite operators, and even utilities companies are o�ering voice services and Internet access, in addition to their traditional services. New VoIP operatorslike Vonage and Skype are driving prices further down. Everyday innovative products combined with novel network services are being introduced satisfying the consumer’s demand for content: Google Video, personal video players, video broadcasting on the web. What does it take to succeed in this new world? What lessons can we draw from the past? What worked elsewhere inthe world? Early attempts to deliver real-time streaming video over �xed networks date back to late 1990s. Backthen, a few companies o�ered solutionsfor di�erent network infrastructures. �ese deployments were motivated by extending reach of a cable provider toserve DSL customers, or experiments in delivering additional services. �e �rst prototypes of Telco TV systems wereproprietary central o�ce platforms that o�en required special network interface installations and wiring at subscriber

premises. Existing access technologies barely supported necessary bandwidth for video delivery. To deliver a high-quality user experience, the technology at the time was extended by each vendor in a di�erent way. Remember, this was the time before multicast was built into theDSLAM, QoS was barely being discussed,

DSL line impairments were not well understood, and some vendors were still delivering CAP-based systems!

During this time, data equipment vendors did not recognize the demand of delivering hundreds of UDP streamsto thousands of customers, reliably.Business cases were thrown away as the deployments became frustrating lessonsin system integration, video processing and network engineering. �e center of activity was with the engineering sta�.

It almost seemed like magic that any ofthese systems actually worked. As the urgency to �nd new revenue heated up, service provider disparately sought newservices. IPTV held great promise. Better service support than the cable companywould be the ticket! And all the vendorswere o�ering a vast array of applications,

open toolkits, custom user interfaces, and integration with voice services. While the technology issues were understood,the challenges remained, as equipment vendors were still learning. In addition, service providers suddenly needed new skills, like acquiring and protectingcontent. �e early e�orts were niche successes and failures, due to limitations of existing technologies, and lack of technical, market and business synergy. But the experiences of pioneer telcos

p33-34 Supp #11 5/19/06 12:55 PM Page 33

customers for services. For example, they need to con�gure bandwidth for subscribers, put in place set-top boxes in customer homes, set up the in-home cabling, provide and manage the necessary gateways and provision the package of services selected bythe subscriber.

To simplify the process, providers shouldbe able to manage subscriber, service andset-top box provisioning from a single APItoward the IPTV solution, so they don’t haveto deal with several work�ow provisioningprocesses in di�erent network elements.�is way, providers can easily assure theconsistency between their IPTV o�erings andtheir Operational Support Systems/BusinessSupport Systems (OSS/BSS) databases.

One way to achieve this simpli�cation is to have the middleware back-o�ce application as theunique homeentertainmentsubscriber provisioning point. �e advantage to this approach is that it gives the service provider a single interface that is easy to integrate with its OSS/BSS. �is single API, when supporting all provisioning �elds, enables the service provider to do everything it can do manually using its own OSS system. Another advantage is that the provider does not need to change its provisioning process each time the solution is upgraded. �is interface must support several provisioning scenarios including manual, self-provisioning and mass provisioning.

In fact, the self-provisioning featureis becoming more and more important, as it enables a subscriber to activate anddeactivate services by logging on to a self-service Web portal on his television screen and make selections with a simple click.�e screen would show which services are available and how much they cost.

Automating the provisioning function in this way can save the service provider time and money. It can boost service usage as well, as users are able to easily try newfeatures without having to pass a complex

subscription process.Set-top boxes also need to be simple to

con�gure. Set-top-box auto-provisioning is an increasingly relevant feature as it enables the subscriber to activate automatically all his services with the �rst STB connection, without manual intervention from theservice provider’s customer care assistants.

A�er the box is installed at a subscriber’s home, the subscriber is able to immediatelyaccess services on his TV a�er inserting a personal identi�cation number (PIN) using the remote control. �e subscriber canuse the PIN number issued by the serviceprovider to automatically provision the set-top box, but also to rent movies, set parental controls for TV programs and movie ratings,and perform other personal con�gurations.

When problems arise with the set-top box, the service provider must be able to perform diagnostics and, if possible, �x the problems remotely using a so�ware tool that performsthis function. �is eliminates the need for the service provider to retrieve the box froma subscriber home, make the necessaryrepairs and then return the box to the subscriber each time a problem comes up.Set-top box remote diagnostics and repairscan help providers keep operational costs extremely low and simultaneously provide better customer service.

Billing for home entertainment services is another critical issue for service providers. Charging for home entertainment such as on-demand content is quite di�erent from the current pricing models for voice communications or Internet access. Voice services are usually based on per-minute charging; for example, �ve cents per minute.Internet service generally involves �at fees.

Home entertainment, on the other hand, o�en involves charging on a per-use basis, such as when a subscriber accesses a pay-per-view program. A service provider’sbilling system needs to support the most appropriate charging models associatedwith each kind of content, whether it’s subscription-based fees (mainly for basic IPTV service, premium channels, Internet access); or event charging (video on demand,pay-per-view, walled-garden content).

�e billing system should support post-paid and prepaid charging, and real-time price information between the subscriber and service provider for event-based services such as video-on-demand is a must.

For example, when a subscriber selects avideo, the provider immediately shows the subscriber information on the associated charges and requests authorization and authentication(PINnumber).�esubscriber accepts the charge and enters a PIN number, the service provider begins streaming the video, and the system generates a transaction record. �is is all done in real time so thatthe billing process and prepaid charging canbe performed e�ciently.

Not all the service provider’s billing systems available today support this kind of interaction. For instance, many of the legacy billing systems used by providers are not equipped to support real-time charging forevent programming such as pay-per-view.

Service providers must ensure that their billing system is capable of real-time interaction, and that it allows them to adaptpricing to a particular target audience. Many service providers will charge di�erent prices depending on the content, or use di�erent pricing models for the same contentdepending on the subscriber.

When the subscriber base achieves acritical mass, owning a �exible rating system will also enable service providers to set promotional fees depending on the time-of-day, content type or even by content characteristics such as movie director or main actor. �e IPTV/home entertainment charging system has to be able to supportthat level of �exibility.

�e ability to provide real-time, �exible billing solutions will be critical to the success of many service providers as they enter new markets such as IPTV. As subscriberschange services through self-service portals operated by service providers, they will wantto view billing trends and see what impactchanging services will have on billing.

�e provisioning and billing functionsare vital for service providers looking tolaunch new home entertainment services. How well providers handle these functions will go a long way toward determining howsuccessful they are in these exciting new business opportunities.

�roughsimpli�edback-o�ceapplicationsthat enable a variety of provisioning optionssuch as self-provisioning, and real-time,�exible billing, service providers will enjoy lower total cost of ownership and a higher return on investment.Renata Silva is product line manager, homeentertainment, at Siemens. She specializes in

OSS/BSS issues.

p31-32 Supp #10 5/19/06 12:53 PM Page 32

Telecom providers with rich IPTV service creation platforms will be the masters of their own fate

Phil�ompson, mPhase Technologies

history, the telecom industryweathered a great many upheavals. Everynew technology brought new competitiveplayers to the market, challengingincumbent operators and driving changein core networks and business models. We are now living through a new periodof change in the telecom industry.Convergence of networks led to blending of telecommunications, media, content, information and entertainment. Telcos are facing eroding average revenues per user (APRU), aggressive competition, and increased subscriber churn. Cable,satellite operators, and even utilities companies are o�ering voice services and Internet access, in addition to their traditional services. New VoIP operatorslike Vonage and Skype are driving prices further down. Everyday innovative products combined with novel network services are being introduced satisfying the consumer’s demand for content: Google Video, personal video players, video broadcasting on the web. What does it take to succeed in this new world? What lessons can we draw from the past? What worked elsewhere inthe world? Early attempts to deliver real-time streaming video over �xed networks date back to late 1990s. Backthen, a few companies o�ered solutionsfor di�erent network infrastructures. �ese deployments were motivated by extending reach of a cable provider toserve DSL customers, or experiments in delivering additional services. �e �rst prototypes of Telco TV systems wereproprietary central o�ce platforms that o�en required special network interface installations and wiring at subscriber

premises. Existing access technologies barely supported necessary bandwidth for video delivery. To deliver a high-quality user experience, the technology at the time was extended by each vendor in a di�erent way. Remember, this was the time before multicast was built into theDSLAM, QoS was barely being discussed,

DSL line impairments were not well understood, and some vendors were still delivering CAP-based systems!

During this time, data equipment vendors did not recognize the demand of delivering hundreds of UDP streamsto thousands of customers, reliably.Business cases were thrown away as the deployments became frustrating lessonsin system integration, video processing and network engineering. �e center of activity was with the engineering sta�.

It almost seemed like magic that any ofthese systems actually worked. As the urgency to �nd new revenue heated up, service provider disparately sought newservices. IPTV held great promise. Better service support than the cable companywould be the ticket! And all the vendorswere o�ering a vast array of applications,

open toolkits, custom user interfaces, and integration with voice services. While the technology issues were understood,the challenges remained, as equipment vendors were still learning. In addition, service providers suddenly needed new skills, like acquiring and protectingcontent. �e early e�orts were niche successes and failures, due to limitations of existing technologies, and lack of technical, market and business synergy. But the experiences of pioneer telcos

p33-34 Supp #11 5/19/06 12:55 PM Page 33

customers for services. For example, they need to con�gure bandwidth for subscribers, put in place set-top boxes in customer homes, set up the in-home cabling, provide and manage the necessary gateways and provision the package of services selected bythe subscriber.

To simplify the process, providers shouldbe able to manage subscriber, service andset-top box provisioning from a single APItoward the IPTV solution, so they don’t haveto deal with several work�ow provisioningprocesses in di�erent network elements.�is way, providers can easily assure theconsistency between their IPTV o�erings andtheir Operational Support Systems/BusinessSupport Systems (OSS/BSS) databases.

One way to achieve this simpli�cation is to have the middleware back-o�ce application as theunique homeentertainmentsubscriber provisioning point. �e advantage to this approach is that it gives the service provider a single interface that is easy to integrate with its OSS/BSS. �is single API, when supporting all provisioning �elds, enables the service provider to do everything it can do manually using its own OSS system. Another advantage is that the provider does not need to change its provisioning process each time the solution is upgraded. �is interface must support several provisioning scenarios including manual, self-provisioning and mass provisioning.

In fact, the self-provisioning featureis becoming more and more important, as it enables a subscriber to activate anddeactivate services by logging on to a self-service Web portal on his television screen and make selections with a simple click.�e screen would show which services are available and how much they cost.

Automating the provisioning function in this way can save the service provider time and money. It can boost service usage as well, as users are able to easily try newfeatures without having to pass a complex

subscription process.Set-top boxes also need to be simple to

con�gure. Set-top-box auto-provisioning is an increasingly relevant feature as it enables the subscriber to activate automatically all his services with the �rst STB connection, without manual intervention from theservice provider’s customer care assistants.

A�er the box is installed at a subscriber’s home, the subscriber is able to immediatelyaccess services on his TV a�er inserting a personal identi�cation number (PIN) using the remote control. �e subscriber canuse the PIN number issued by the serviceprovider to automatically provision the set-top box, but also to rent movies, set parental controls for TV programs and movie ratings,and perform other personal con�gurations.

When problems arise with the set-top box, the service provider must be able to perform diagnostics and, if possible, �x the problems remotely using a so�ware tool that performsthis function. �is eliminates the need for the service provider to retrieve the box froma subscriber home, make the necessaryrepairs and then return the box to the subscriber each time a problem comes up.Set-top box remote diagnostics and repairscan help providers keep operational costs extremely low and simultaneously provide better customer service.

Billing for home entertainment services is another critical issue for service providers. Charging for home entertainment such as on-demand content is quite di�erent from the current pricing models for voice communications or Internet access. Voice services are usually based on per-minute charging; for example, �ve cents per minute.Internet service generally involves �at fees.

Home entertainment, on the other hand, o�en involves charging on a per-use basis, such as when a subscriber accesses a pay-per-view program. A service provider’sbilling system needs to support the most appropriate charging models associatedwith each kind of content, whether it’s subscription-based fees (mainly for basic IPTV service, premium channels, Internet access); or event charging (video on demand,pay-per-view, walled-garden content).

�e billing system should support post-paid and prepaid charging, and real-time price information between the subscriber and service provider for event-based services such as video-on-demand is a must.

For example, when a subscriber selects avideo, the provider immediately shows the subscriber information on the associated charges and requests authorization and authentication(PINnumber).�esubscriber accepts the charge and enters a PIN number, the service provider begins streaming the video, and the system generates a transaction record. �is is all done in real time so thatthe billing process and prepaid charging canbe performed e�ciently.

Not all the service provider’s billing systems available today support this kind of interaction. For instance, many of the legacy billing systems used by providers are not equipped to support real-time charging forevent programming such as pay-per-view.

Service providers must ensure that their billing system is capable of real-time interaction, and that it allows them to adaptpricing to a particular target audience. Many service providers will charge di�erent prices depending on the content, or use di�erent pricing models for the same contentdepending on the subscriber.

When the subscriber base achieves acritical mass, owning a �exible rating system will also enable service providers to set promotional fees depending on the time-of-day, content type or even by content characteristics such as movie director or main actor. �e IPTV/home entertainment charging system has to be able to supportthat level of �exibility.

�e ability to provide real-time, �exible billing solutions will be critical to the success of many service providers as they enter new markets such as IPTV. As subscriberschange services through self-service portals operated by service providers, they will wantto view billing trends and see what impactchanging services will have on billing.

�e provisioning and billing functionsare vital for service providers looking tolaunch new home entertainment services. How well providers handle these functions will go a long way toward determining howsuccessful they are in these exciting new business opportunities.

�roughsimpli�edback-o�ceapplicationsthat enable a variety of provisioning optionssuch as self-provisioning, and real-time,�exible billing, service providers will enjoy lower total cost of ownership and a higher return on investment.Renata Silva is product line manager, homeentertainment, at Siemens. She specializes in

OSS/BSS issues.

p31-32 Supp #10 5/19/06 12:53 PM Page 32

who ventured into unknown IPTV territorywere extremely bene�cial in pinpointing the crucial issues for the success of future deployments.

Despite all challenges, early technology adopters warranted the future of IPTV.Today telecom providers can deploy interactive TV subscriber services quickly and cost e�ectively.1. Evolution of technologyWe are now at an in�ection point in technology adoption. �e technology works: encoding rate and access networks can deliver a quality user experience. �e embedded processors in set-top boxes arefast enough to deliver an engaging user presentation with advanced features. Backend systems leverage the proven technology to provide full time system availability at assured service level.

But even today technology can represent a

major hurdle. Video can place high demands on network infrastructure, especially as the number of channels and subscribers grow over a large geographical area. Each technology decision a�ects the total system performance. Don’t jump to use unproven technology, no matter how “cool” it mightbe. �e best deployments are those that start with a small step, with mature technology,and build on a solid base. 2. Making a Business CaseStarting with a business case is important, though it may prove to be challenging. Cost estimates vary dramatically from $500 toover $2,000 per subscriber. Each new service can add expenses, such as per-subscriber licensing fees, which have to be traded o�with the possible revenue. Some carriers, reporting on their experiences, indicate that a minimum of 10,000 to 20,000 subscribers are needed to make a business case. But there are deployments as few as 2,000 that

have stemmed the revenue loss for a small telco competing against a cable company. Inparts of the world, IPTV is being deployed to raise company valuations as they moveinto private ownership.3. Design it for Everyone DSL, Internet access, email, hosting services target an audience of pretty savvysubscribers. It is tempting to focus on this group with computer-like user interfaces onTV, sophisticated content search and sorttools, toolbars, noti�cations, and menu-driven designs. While good for the “geek”in the family, watching TV is a universal experience.Avoidthetemptationofthrowing technology at subscribers; deliver content the way they want to access it. Design for the Living Room Experience. 4. Content is King�e Internet owes its success to availability and diversity of content. Luckily for telcos, the availability of digitized media and entertainmentcontentexplodedoverthat last decade. Telecoms can extend the notion ofcontent to include “infotainment” channels. Telcos should expect to invest in producing local content, even if it is as simple as localweather, school lunch menus, or high schoolsporting events. Telcos should examine local demographics for communities of interest that have content they would like to share.Such unique service o�er is a powerful source of di�erentiation for telcos. 5. �e Focus Shi�sGood technology is an essential component to building a system, but it is only one component. Excellent sales and marketingcan create a whirlwind sales behavior, building sales quickly by word of mouth. Telcos should consider special o�ers and discounts to spur service use. If allowed by the content provider, consider hosting community events demonstrating IPTV.�e focus is shi�ing from technology being a barrier to success to a service provider becoming an entertainment company withgreat marketing.6. Open StandardsWhen selecting an IPTV system, it is essential to take a close look at the internalarchitecture and communications protocols. O�en providers are looking to redesign the user interface, or develop new features themselves. Open standards are the keyto rapidly creating highly personalized and compelling services for premium subscribers. Many vendors build their systems on standard platforms: HTML,

XML, SOAP, WDSL, J2EE, AJAX, andJDBC. Telcos who expect to build ontop of these platforms must be preparedto think through user scenarios, featureinteractions, and invest in tools andtesting. Sometimes it is better to start o�by building specialized portal content forcustom services, than by redesigning theEPG, which is already optimized.7. InteroperabilityOne thing that remained unchanged sincethe days of early IPTV deployments is the factthat end-to-end systems are complex. Fromhead-end, to middleware, to access, to set-topbox – they combine hardware and so�warefrom multiple vendors, who adhere tomultiple standards. Internal interoperabilitytesting of separate IPTV components’performance for seamless video deliveryis technically challenging, expensive andprohibitively time consuming. �e solutioncomes in pre-tested, certi�ed con�gurationsfrom selected vendors. Vendors’ experienceand knowledge of telecom requirements isessential for successful integration of IPTV.8. Start Small, Align, and GrowIPTV services are more likely to succeed when telcosstart small, alignwithsubscriber requirements, and then grow. �is approach allows service providers to quickly determine the winning mix of potential service package variations to maximize pro�tability of future deployments. Some companies now begin to o�er pre-packaged, complete IPTV starter system kits for up to 1000 subscribers, designed to help telecom providers jump-start the market for revenue-rich video services while minimizing capex risks. �esea�ordable, scalable pre-con�gured single-cabinet IPTV systems are thoroughly tested and certi�ed, and designed for immediatedeployment and rapid time to revenue.

Change is inevitable. �e telecom industryhas morphed in the past and now mustmorph again. �e operators who embracenew developments, will gain the chanceto in�uence and control the way thosedevelopments a�ect them. Operators whoequip themselves to quickly meet changingcustomer needs will be the winners.Telecom providers with rich IPTV servicecreation platforms will be the masters oftheir own fate.Phil �ompson is Executive Vice President,

Product Management, mPhase Technologies.

p33-34 Supp #11 5/19/06 12:55 PM Page 34

who ventured into unknown IPTV territorywere extremely bene�cial in pinpointing the crucial issues for the success of future deployments.

Despite all challenges, early technology adopters warranted the future of IPTV.Today telecom providers can deploy interactive TV subscriber services quickly and cost e�ectively.1. Evolution of technologyWe are now at an in�ection point in technology adoption. �e technology works: encoding rate and access networks can deliver a quality user experience. �e embedded processors in set-top boxes arefast enough to deliver an engaging user presentation with advanced features. Backend systems leverage the proven technology to provide full time system availability at assured service level.

But even today technology can represent a

major hurdle. Video can place high demands on network infrastructure, especially as the number of channels and subscribers grow over a large geographical area. Each technology decision a�ects the total system performance. Don’t jump to use unproven technology, no matter how “cool” it mightbe. �e best deployments are those that start with a small step, with mature technology,and build on a solid base. 2. Making a Business CaseStarting with a business case is important, though it may prove to be challenging. Cost estimates vary dramatically from $500 toover $2,000 per subscriber. Each new service can add expenses, such as per-subscriber licensing fees, which have to be traded o�with the possible revenue. Some carriers, reporting on their experiences, indicate that a minimum of 10,000 to 20,000 subscribers are needed to make a business case. But there are deployments as few as 2,000 that

have stemmed the revenue loss for a small telco competing against a cable company. Inparts of the world, IPTV is being deployed to raise company valuations as they moveinto private ownership.3. Design it for Everyone DSL, Internet access, email, hosting services target an audience of pretty savvysubscribers. It is tempting to focus on this group with computer-like user interfaces onTV, sophisticated content search and sorttools, toolbars, noti�cations, and menu-driven designs. While good for the “geek”in the family, watching TV is a universal experience.Avoidthetemptationofthrowing technology at subscribers; deliver content the way they want to access it. Design for the Living Room Experience. 4. Content is King�e Internet owes its success to availability and diversity of content. Luckily for telcos, the availability of digitized media and entertainmentcontentexplodedoverthat last decade. Telecoms can extend the notion ofcontent to include “infotainment” channels. Telcos should expect to invest in producing local content, even if it is as simple as localweather, school lunch menus, or high schoolsporting events. Telcos should examine local demographics for communities of interest that have content they would like to share.Such unique service o�er is a powerful source of di�erentiation for telcos. 5. �e Focus Shi�sGood technology is an essential component to building a system, but it is only one component. Excellent sales and marketingcan create a whirlwind sales behavior, building sales quickly by word of mouth. Telcos should consider special o�ers and discounts to spur service use. If allowed by the content provider, consider hosting community events demonstrating IPTV.�e focus is shi�ing from technology being a barrier to success to a service provider becoming an entertainment company withgreat marketing.6. Open StandardsWhen selecting an IPTV system, it is essential to take a close look at the internalarchitecture and communications protocols. O�en providers are looking to redesign the user interface, or develop new features themselves. Open standards are the keyto rapidly creating highly personalized and compelling services for premium subscribers. Many vendors build their systems on standard platforms: HTML,

XML, SOAP, WDSL, J2EE, AJAX, andJDBC. Telcos who expect to build ontop of these platforms must be preparedto think through user scenarios, featureinteractions, and invest in tools andtesting. Sometimes it is better to start o�by building specialized portal content forcustom services, than by redesigning theEPG, which is already optimized.7. InteroperabilityOne thing that remained unchanged sincethe days of early IPTV deployments is the factthat end-to-end systems are complex. Fromhead-end, to middleware, to access, to set-topbox – they combine hardware and so�warefrom multiple vendors, who adhere tomultiple standards. Internal interoperabilitytesting of separate IPTV components’performance for seamless video deliveryis technically challenging, expensive andprohibitively time consuming. �e solutioncomes in pre-tested, certi�ed con�gurationsfrom selected vendors. Vendors’ experienceand knowledge of telecom requirements isessential for successful integration of IPTV.8. Start Small, Align, and GrowIPTV services are more likely to succeed when telcosstart small, alignwithsubscriber requirements, and then grow. �is approach allows service providers to quickly determine the winning mix of potential service package variations to maximize pro�tability of future deployments. Some companies now begin to o�er pre-packaged, complete IPTV starter system kits for up to 1000 subscribers, designed to help telecom providers jump-start the market for revenue-rich video services while minimizing capex risks. �esea�ordable, scalable pre-con�gured single-cabinet IPTV systems are thoroughly tested and certi�ed, and designed for immediatedeployment and rapid time to revenue.

Change is inevitable. �e telecom industryhas morphed in the past and now mustmorph again. �e operators who embracenew developments, will gain the chanceto in�uence and control the way thosedevelopments a�ect them. Operators whoequip themselves to quickly meet changingcustomer needs will be the winners.Telecom providers with rich IPTV servicecreation platforms will be the masters oftheir own fate.Phil �ompson is Executive Vice President,

Product Management, mPhase Technologies.

p33-34 Supp #11 5/19/06 12:55 PM Page 34

content is king, and it’s pretty clearcontent delivery is a major focus of providers developing new revenue, of equipment vendors justifying new deployments, and of content providers trying to gain access to new markets.

While it’s reassuring that content seemsto be the darling of these groups, it’s alsotroubling because content might become the victim of competing agendas.

With content, the network is the middleman, a mechanism to deliver an

experience whose value the consumer must set, based on material generated by a groupof producers who may have other content delivery strategies to balance.

For this reason, we must take a dualistic view of content, from the top and from the bottom, to see if the perspectives meetusefully in the middle.

Visualcontent(e.g., television,video,movies) has been a rage with consumers since the days of Edison. Sight is the most powerful of all senses, capable of introducing the richest

experience into our brains. But the days when a �ickering silent movie could shakeour emotions (at least in a positive way) are gone forever. Even television is changing under pressure from:• Time-shi�ed viewing;• Mobile content;• Personalized content; and• A la carte channel subscription.

�e FCC’s latest report on television competition shows that viewing hours haveincreased, but more homes are equipped with personal video recording capability andare exercising it to “time shi�” viewing.

Time shi�ing not only undermines the notion of broadcast, it undermines traditional advertising as a revenue streamby letting users skip ads. Some advertisersand agents are already changing their formats so the ads still get a message across when they’re played in fast forward.

�e popularity of mobile content, both in the form of download-and-store formats (e.g., the iPod) and the streaming-to-a-mobile-phone form promoted by Verizon and others, shows consumers are pulling content out of the traditional in-home rutand taking it on the road.

A user on the road is obviously not hometo view traditional content, and the ability to consume content while mobile could reduce audience size by creating other options.

Increased sales by DVD rental companies such as Net�ix and increased popularity ofcable video-on-demand services seems to show a shi� from reliance on broadcast forcontent to personalized content.

As network performance improves and movie download times are reduced, it’svery possible more users will defect from broadcast to a form of personal when-and-what-you-want video.

Pressure from the FCC to consider a la carte channel subscription by consumers is threatening cable companies and the less popular channels at the same time byeliminating the cross-subsidization of special interest programming by more generally popular material.

This could reduce the numberof channels available for selection,undermining the channel multiplicationmechanism of competition that hasdeveloped between cable companies andsatellite TV providers.

�ese consumption issues are creatingtheir counterparts on the productionside, largely in relation to how marketsare expanded, how current channels ofdistribution are protected, and how to payfor content.

�e “where’s the money come from” pointis perhaps the most pivotal for contentproviders. In a recent panel discussion by content moguls at the IPSphere Forum meeting in California, industry executives told providers that content creation was expensive and there had to be some assurance of a return on investment.

In the past, video was largely multi-syndicated and there were many ways a content producer could hope to pro�t.

In the age of personalization, will content providers be pressured to grant exclusive

�e real lesson for service providers is evolution — and pricing

TomNolle, CIMI Corp

p36,38 Supp #16 5/19/06 12:10 PM Page 36

content is king, and it’s pretty clearcontent delivery is a major focus of providers developing new revenue, of equipment vendors justifying new deployments, and of content providers trying to gain access to new markets.

While it’s reassuring that content seemsto be the darling of these groups, it’s alsotroubling because content might become the victim of competing agendas.

With content, the network is the middleman, a mechanism to deliver an

experience whose value the consumer must set, based on material generated by a groupof producers who may have other content delivery strategies to balance.

For this reason, we must take a dualistic view of content, from the top and from the bottom, to see if the perspectives meetusefully in the middle.

Visualcontent(e.g., television,video,movies) has been a rage with consumers since the days of Edison. Sight is the most powerful of all senses, capable of introducing the richest

experience into our brains. But the days when a �ickering silent movie could shakeour emotions (at least in a positive way) are gone forever. Even television is changing under pressure from:• Time-shi�ed viewing;• Mobile content;• Personalized content; and• A la carte channel subscription.

�e FCC’s latest report on television competition shows that viewing hours haveincreased, but more homes are equipped with personal video recording capability andare exercising it to “time shi�” viewing.

Time shi�ing not only undermines the notion of broadcast, it undermines traditional advertising as a revenue streamby letting users skip ads. Some advertisersand agents are already changing their formats so the ads still get a message across when they’re played in fast forward.

�e popularity of mobile content, both in the form of download-and-store formats (e.g., the iPod) and the streaming-to-a-mobile-phone form promoted by Verizon and others, shows consumers are pulling content out of the traditional in-home rutand taking it on the road.

A user on the road is obviously not hometo view traditional content, and the ability to consume content while mobile could reduce audience size by creating other options.

Increased sales by DVD rental companies such as Net�ix and increased popularity ofcable video-on-demand services seems to show a shi� from reliance on broadcast forcontent to personalized content.

As network performance improves and movie download times are reduced, it’svery possible more users will defect from broadcast to a form of personal when-and-what-you-want video.

Pressure from the FCC to consider a la carte channel subscription by consumers is threatening cable companies and the less popular channels at the same time byeliminating the cross-subsidization of special interest programming by more generally popular material.

This could reduce the numberof channels available for selection,undermining the channel multiplicationmechanism of competition that hasdeveloped between cable companies andsatellite TV providers.

�ese consumption issues are creatingtheir counterparts on the productionside, largely in relation to how marketsare expanded, how current channels ofdistribution are protected, and how to payfor content.

�e “where’s the money come from” pointis perhaps the most pivotal for contentproviders. In a recent panel discussion by content moguls at the IPSphere Forum meeting in California, industry executives told providers that content creation was expensive and there had to be some assurance of a return on investment.

In the past, video was largely multi-syndicated and there were many ways a content producer could hope to pro�t.

In the age of personalization, will content providers be pressured to grant exclusive

�e real lesson for service providers is evolution — and pricing

TomNolle, CIMI Corp

p36,38 Supp #16 5/19/06 12:10 PM Page 36

entrants are not only capturing mindsharein the marketplace, they are gaining �rst-hand experience about the realities of this important competitive transformation. Canyou a�ord to be le� behind?

One way to move fast is to select a complete IPTV service delivery platform thatincorporates all of the required elements ofa TV delivery solution. By having one IPTV platform, service providers can quickly roll out services that are integrated and secured from the point of content acquisition todelivery on consumers’ TV sets.

Moving fast can be done by leveraginginstalled assets and partnering with service integrators who have implemented the IPTV solution. Experience and understanding of the service experience and network transformation can make all the di�erence to get to market fast and e�ectively.

Choose an IPTV system based on open standards so you have the �exibility to build or incorporate next-generation hardware, applications and services from a variety of vendors over time. Having an open standardsenvironment will ensure that innovation can proceed rapidly, further di�erentiating IPTV from legacy video services on the market. When that happens, consumers will be the best IPTV marketers by spreading the message via word of mouth.

As popular as TV is today, it remains anunconnected island of technology in the home.For the better part of a century, the images onour television screens have been chosen for usand broadcast into our homes on a one-waybasis. But that is about to change.

IP, the same technology that changed the

value and function of the PC, will have the same impact on the TV screen. In fact, IP networking and so�ware technology will help spark more revolutionary change fortelevision in the next �ve years than we’ve seen in the previous 50 combined.

You will be able to bring the world to yourcustomers’ living rooms in new ways, and they will be able to take their living rooms to the world. If you’re a service provider, you can be on the leading edge of this newmarket opportunity and transform your business in the process. Now is the time tothink big, get started and move fast to ensureyour business is not le� behind in the biggest opportunity to hit the services industry since the Internet.

Christine Heckart is general manager ofmarketing for the Microso� TV division.

Carl Rijsbrack is vice president of marketing

In the future, consumers who have IPTV via their service provider, could enjoy multiple camera angles of a sporting event at once

From page 20

Jim Barthold is senior editor of Telecommunications® magazine.

From page 17

p39 Supp #7 & 14 5/19/06 12:13 PM Page 39

distribution? If so, the exclusive distributor may have to front some money to covercosts or guarantee a minimum revenue stream. Obviously that means �guring outhow revenue can be generated.

The industry has had two distinctmodels of revenue generation for content:the pay-as-you-go model and the ad-subsidized model.

Motion pictures traditionally have followed the former strategy and television the latter, though both groups have shi�ed somewhatover time into the alternative space (e.g., HBO’s popular Sopranos series and studio release of �lms to broadcast television, paid by ad revenues).

For the pay-as-you-go producers, the keyissue is getting in front of more potential payers: �at means getting more service providers to o�er for-fee content delivery or more use of the Internet as a means ofgetting content downloaded.

What the content providers would like tosee is a war between cable and carrier, with

both sides di�erentiating their services bymore video on demand or store-for-play downloads.

For this group, the challenge is digital rights management, because the producers are looking for additional market conduits and not to replace the ones they have now.

Fortunately, the IPSphere panel and other industry developments, such as the DirecTVo�ering of broadband video downloading directly to a PVR, seem to show that thecontent producers are getting comfortable with the notion of video downloading or IP delivery of video.

�e ad-based model of content funding could actually bene�t from personalizationbecause ad value is highest where the ad can be targeted at the speci�c market segment most likely to consume the product.

The problem with the broadcastparadigm is that everyone sees everything,and consumers who become accustomedto tuning out irrelevant ads may becomeadept at tuning out all ads.

The issue of how to insert a targetedad in on-demand material isn’t as easyas it seems. You can’t just stick the ad inwith the content, or you lose the customtargeting benefit.

If the ad has to be tuned to the consumer,how do you decide who sees what, andhow is the ad linked directly to the restof the content?

�ere are a variety of emerging strategies where ad links are embedded in contentand the speci�c content is then inserted as the content is delivered, but not only is this a more complex approach to content/ad mixing, it may be impacted by issues ofconsumer privacy.

How do you target an ad withoutknowing your audience, and how do youdo that with so many watchdogs trying torestrict what consumer information can becollected and stored?

A �nal issue on the revenue side is the simple matter of who gets paid. Content delivererspay content providers, presumably. �e consumer pays content deliverers.

Where does the network �t in? Most people who want content today likely will

seek it from either their television provider (e.g., cable, satellite or LEC) or from a portal player such as Google or Yahoo.

If the broadcast model is in danger, does that mean the momentum shi�s to the portal guys? If so, what happens to the network?

How can carriers help bring these sidestogether into a single business model?The IPSphere panel seemed to show thatthe content and network worlds weren’tthat far apart.

In fact, some content producersadvocated a walled garden approach,telling the service providers they shouldn’tget hemmed into a pure transport-and-connection role. �at position wouldcertainly resonate with the carriers, but itdoesn’t cover all the necessary bases.

It may be that the biggest issue for thenetwork content delivery is the net neutrality debate. �e FCC’s position is that DSL is an information service and not subject to wholesaling or unbundling, the same status enjoyed by the cable companies for their broadband data service.

So far, neither group has done anythingto impede other players’ access to Internet

consumers, but there is a general view thatif common carriers are going to deploy thehigh-quality, high-bandwidth networksneeded for streaming video delivery, they’dcertainly want to charge for it independently.

�at’s the real lesson, and issue, of content. Consumer demand is still evolving. Content provider attitudes are still evolving.

�e access providers will have to deploy billions of dollars in equipment to modernize their networks to support even standard-de�nition video in streaming form. Will they do that without a clear return?

No more than the content producers will produce the stu� without such an assurance.Remember, content providers said they wanted ROI. So will content deliverers.

�e problem is that there’s a tightropeto be walked here. Even if the FCC andCongress permitted access providers to either withhold premium bandwidth from competitors or charge a signi�cant premium for it (say 25 percent or 50 percent), the likely result would be to induce competing players like the Yahoos and Googles to shi�to a store-for-play download video strategy that doesn’t require additional QoS — which could cut the carriers out of the wholecontent pie.

Maybe nobody visits your walled garden. Onthe other hand, if carriers charge no premiumfor premium bandwidth, those Yahoos andGoogles will turn them into plumbing.

�e content lesson seems simple: extremes won’t work. You can’t expect investment without return, but you can’t expect return without some pretty tricky pricing policies.

In the long run, the question forproviders may be whether it’s easier tofind the sweet spot in QoS pricing or tosimply become a portal player of suchimportance that you control user eyeballsyourself...or to buy one.

�e FCC may take the next critical step in itsdeliberationovertheproposedAT&T/BellSouthdeal. In the past, the FCC has used these mergersto get providers to agree on conditions thatwould otherwise be di�cult to enforce.

We’ll have to watch how the deliberationsplay out to see if recent mergers andacquisitions will impact the future of content.

Tom Nolle is the founder andpresident of CIMI Corp.

�is article was reprintedfrom the April 2006 issue of

Telecommunications® Magazine

p36,38 Supp #16 5/19/06 12:10 PM Page 38

entrants are not only capturing mindsharein the marketplace, they are gaining �rst-hand experience about the realities of this important competitive transformation. Canyou a�ord to be le� behind?

One way to move fast is to select a complete IPTV service delivery platform thatincorporates all of the required elements ofa TV delivery solution. By having one IPTV platform, service providers can quickly roll out services that are integrated and secured from the point of content acquisition todelivery on consumers’ TV sets.

Moving fast can be done by leveraginginstalled assets and partnering with service integrators who have implemented the IPTV solution. Experience and understanding of the service experience and network transformation can make all the di�erence to get to market fast and e�ectively.

Choose an IPTV system based on open standards so you have the �exibility to build or incorporate next-generation hardware, applications and services from a variety of vendors over time. Having an open standardsenvironment will ensure that innovation can proceed rapidly, further di�erentiating IPTV from legacy video services on the market. When that happens, consumers will be the best IPTV marketers by spreading the message via word of mouth.

As popular as TV is today, it remains anunconnected island of technology in the home.For the better part of a century, the images onour television screens have been chosen for usand broadcast into our homes on a one-waybasis. But that is about to change.

IP, the same technology that changed the

value and function of the PC, will have the same impact on the TV screen. In fact, IP networking and so�ware technology will help spark more revolutionary change fortelevision in the next �ve years than we’ve seen in the previous 50 combined.

You will be able to bring the world to yourcustomers’ living rooms in new ways, and they will be able to take their living rooms to the world. If you’re a service provider, you can be on the leading edge of this newmarket opportunity and transform your business in the process. Now is the time tothink big, get started and move fast to ensureyour business is not le� behind in the biggest opportunity to hit the services industry since the Internet.

Christine Heckart is general manager ofmarketing for the Microso� TV division.

Carl Rijsbrack is vice president of marketing

In the future, consumers who have IPTV via their service provider, could enjoy multiple camera angles of a sporting event at once

From page 20

Jim Barthold is senior editor of Telecommunications® magazine.

From page 17

p39 Supp #7 & 14 5/19/06 12:13 PM Page 39

distribution? If so, the exclusive distributor may have to front some money to covercosts or guarantee a minimum revenue stream. Obviously that means �guring outhow revenue can be generated.

The industry has had two distinctmodels of revenue generation for content:the pay-as-you-go model and the ad-subsidized model.

Motion pictures traditionally have followed the former strategy and television the latter, though both groups have shi�ed somewhatover time into the alternative space (e.g., HBO’s popular Sopranos series and studio release of �lms to broadcast television, paid by ad revenues).

For the pay-as-you-go producers, the keyissue is getting in front of more potential payers: �at means getting more service providers to o�er for-fee content delivery or more use of the Internet as a means ofgetting content downloaded.

What the content providers would like tosee is a war between cable and carrier, with

both sides di�erentiating their services bymore video on demand or store-for-play downloads.

For this group, the challenge is digital rights management, because the producers are looking for additional market conduits and not to replace the ones they have now.

Fortunately, the IPSphere panel and other industry developments, such as the DirecTVo�ering of broadband video downloading directly to a PVR, seem to show that thecontent producers are getting comfortable with the notion of video downloading or IP delivery of video.

�e ad-based model of content funding could actually bene�t from personalizationbecause ad value is highest where the ad can be targeted at the speci�c market segment most likely to consume the product.

The problem with the broadcastparadigm is that everyone sees everything,and consumers who become accustomedto tuning out irrelevant ads may becomeadept at tuning out all ads.

The issue of how to insert a targetedad in on-demand material isn’t as easyas it seems. You can’t just stick the ad inwith the content, or you lose the customtargeting benefit.

If the ad has to be tuned to the consumer,how do you decide who sees what, andhow is the ad linked directly to the restof the content?

�ere are a variety of emerging strategies where ad links are embedded in contentand the speci�c content is then inserted as the content is delivered, but not only is this a more complex approach to content/ad mixing, it may be impacted by issues ofconsumer privacy.

How do you target an ad withoutknowing your audience, and how do youdo that with so many watchdogs trying torestrict what consumer information can becollected and stored?

A �nal issue on the revenue side is the simple matter of who gets paid. Content delivererspay content providers, presumably. �e consumer pays content deliverers.

Where does the network �t in? Most people who want content today likely will

seek it from either their television provider (e.g., cable, satellite or LEC) or from a portal player such as Google or Yahoo.

If the broadcast model is in danger, does that mean the momentum shi�s to the portal guys? If so, what happens to the network?

How can carriers help bring these sidestogether into a single business model?The IPSphere panel seemed to show thatthe content and network worlds weren’tthat far apart.

In fact, some content producersadvocated a walled garden approach,telling the service providers they shouldn’tget hemmed into a pure transport-and-connection role. �at position wouldcertainly resonate with the carriers, but itdoesn’t cover all the necessary bases.

It may be that the biggest issue for thenetwork content delivery is the net neutrality debate. �e FCC’s position is that DSL is an information service and not subject to wholesaling or unbundling, the same status enjoyed by the cable companies for their broadband data service.

So far, neither group has done anythingto impede other players’ access to Internet

consumers, but there is a general view thatif common carriers are going to deploy thehigh-quality, high-bandwidth networksneeded for streaming video delivery, they’dcertainly want to charge for it independently.

�at’s the real lesson, and issue, of content. Consumer demand is still evolving. Content provider attitudes are still evolving.

�e access providers will have to deploy billions of dollars in equipment to modernize their networks to support even standard-de�nition video in streaming form. Will they do that without a clear return?

No more than the content producers will produce the stu� without such an assurance.Remember, content providers said they wanted ROI. So will content deliverers.

�e problem is that there’s a tightropeto be walked here. Even if the FCC andCongress permitted access providers to either withhold premium bandwidth from competitors or charge a signi�cant premium for it (say 25 percent or 50 percent), the likely result would be to induce competing players like the Yahoos and Googles to shi�to a store-for-play download video strategy that doesn’t require additional QoS — which could cut the carriers out of the wholecontent pie.

Maybe nobody visits your walled garden. Onthe other hand, if carriers charge no premiumfor premium bandwidth, those Yahoos andGoogles will turn them into plumbing.

�e content lesson seems simple: extremes won’t work. You can’t expect investment without return, but you can’t expect return without some pretty tricky pricing policies.

In the long run, the question forproviders may be whether it’s easier tofind the sweet spot in QoS pricing or tosimply become a portal player of suchimportance that you control user eyeballsyourself...or to buy one.

�e FCC may take the next critical step in itsdeliberationovertheproposedAT&T/BellSouthdeal. In the past, the FCC has used these mergersto get providers to agree on conditions thatwould otherwise be di�cult to enforce.

We’ll have to watch how the deliberationsplay out to see if recent mergers andacquisitions will impact the future of content.

Tom Nolle is the founder andpresident of CIMI Corp.

�is article was reprintedfrom the April 2006 issue of

Telecommunications® Magazine

p36,38 Supp #16 5/19/06 12:10 PM Page 38

mid-to-late 1990s, the promise oftechnology to and in the home created high expectations about what form and function the home network of the future would take.

It’s safe to say there existed some fairlyheady expectations that the in�ux ofbroadband Internet and other services into the home would spur a renaissance in development of a wide variety of connected in-home solutions.

Spanning home computers andentertainment devices, in addition to whitegoods and home systems, the home networkwas going to bring Metcalfe’s Law into clearfocus for the average consumer. �e value ofdata and content coming into the home wouldbe magni�ed as more devices, platforms, andhome and mobile systems could access it.

To date, the uptake of home-networkingsolutions has re�ected the value consumers haveassigned to the connectivity of devices at home— with a twist. A key takeaway from the rapidadoption of home data-networking equipmentsince 1998 — from 2.5 million households tonearly 25 million at the end of 2005 (see Figure

1) — is the very pragmatic purpose theseconnectivity solutions have and continue to o�erfor the vast majority of U.S. households.

Although the industry is quite keen tosell next-generation, home-networking equipment to link home computers toconsumer electronics platforms (i.e., multimedia networks), the main bene�t to consumers remains the ability to access broadband Internet from multiple locationsin and around the home.

�e use of a home network largely as a

broadband sharing mechanism is just the�rst of several stages in the evolution ofhome networking. Both consumers andbroadband and applications carriers will use connectivity for such applications beyond shared Internet.

For consumers, shared multimedia content(e.g., music, photos, video) from both home computers and other storage platforms will drive adoption of digital media adapters, either stand-alone or integrated with another platform such as a set-top box.

For the carriers, the deployment of home networks is seen now as a service di�erentiator and a means to promotecustomer loyalty. However, carriers will seek to monetize their CPE deployments by tyingthem into additional services, notably voice and multimedia. Expect to see them deploy residential gateways as part and parcel of their next-gen voice services and multi-room video applications.

As the telcos in particular become moreaggressive in o�ering music and video services to supplement their broadband and voice o�erings, they will seek residential gateways that support multi-room

distribution of this content. Beyond attracting new customers and

retaining their existing customer bases,broadbandISPsareinvestingsigni�cantresearchand development dollars to determine howconnectivity inside the home can be leveragedfor services other than data connectivity.

�e move away from simple (though not full-proof) data networking solutions is leading theservice provider community to consider therequirements for next-gen, home-networkingsolutions based on some key applications.

ISPs are investigating connectivity for entertainment applications (i.e., streamed

video from a set-top box to multiple televisions inside the home) and multimedia applications, which involve streamed content (e.g., audio, video, images) among home computers and consumer electronics platforms (PC-to-stereo for distributed music; PC-to-TV for displaying digital photographs, videos and other content).

Finally, voice services, including VoIP, and the integration of mobile telephony into the service mix likely will dictate the types ofCPE and home-networking solutions thatare employed.

For example, service providers must consider if and/or how they will integrate voice applications with home-networking equipment. Furthermore, they will haveto consider the requirements for home-networking solutions, including factorssuch as throughput, QoS and coverage. In other words, will the solutions in place today provide for a user experience that is as close to headache-free as possible?

�e demands by service providers (including players in telephony, broadband, and television services) for networking solutionsthat can meet today’s needs for data networksand their plans to provide a host of services totheir customers will dictate a move to hybridnetworking solutions that incorporate both wired and wireless components.

Speci�cally, service providers are demandingthat the home-networking solutions theydeploy meet the following parameters:• Consistent throughput;• Consistent coverage; and• QoS.

Service providers are spending a great deal of time developing market requirement plans that will dictate their home networkingplans. Some convey very speci�c needs fornetworking throughput, indicating that (consistent) speeds of at least 25 Mbps are

For service providers and OEM players, hybrids will deliver more reliability and fewercustomer service calls, having a signi�cant impact on customer satisfaction and brand loyalty.

Kurt Scherf, Parks Associates

p40,42 Supp #15 5/19/06 12:57 PM Page 40

mid-to-late 1990s, the promise oftechnology to and in the home created high expectations about what form and function the home network of the future would take.

It’s safe to say there existed some fairlyheady expectations that the in�ux ofbroadband Internet and other services into the home would spur a renaissance in development of a wide variety of connected in-home solutions.

Spanning home computers andentertainment devices, in addition to whitegoods and home systems, the home networkwas going to bring Metcalfe’s Law into clearfocus for the average consumer. �e value ofdata and content coming into the home wouldbe magni�ed as more devices, platforms, andhome and mobile systems could access it.

To date, the uptake of home-networkingsolutions has re�ected the value consumers haveassigned to the connectivity of devices at home— with a twist. A key takeaway from the rapidadoption of home data-networking equipmentsince 1998 — from 2.5 million households tonearly 25 million at the end of 2005 (see Figure

1) — is the very pragmatic purpose theseconnectivity solutions have and continue to o�erfor the vast majority of U.S. households.

Although the industry is quite keen tosell next-generation, home-networking equipment to link home computers toconsumer electronics platforms (i.e., multimedia networks), the main bene�t to consumers remains the ability to access broadband Internet from multiple locationsin and around the home.

�e use of a home network largely as a

broadband sharing mechanism is just the�rst of several stages in the evolution ofhome networking. Both consumers andbroadband and applications carriers will use connectivity for such applications beyond shared Internet.

For consumers, shared multimedia content(e.g., music, photos, video) from both home computers and other storage platforms will drive adoption of digital media adapters, either stand-alone or integrated with another platform such as a set-top box.

For the carriers, the deployment of home networks is seen now as a service di�erentiator and a means to promotecustomer loyalty. However, carriers will seek to monetize their CPE deployments by tyingthem into additional services, notably voice and multimedia. Expect to see them deploy residential gateways as part and parcel of their next-gen voice services and multi-room video applications.

As the telcos in particular become moreaggressive in o�ering music and video services to supplement their broadband and voice o�erings, they will seek residential gateways that support multi-room

distribution of this content. Beyond attracting new customers and

retaining their existing customer bases,broadbandISPsareinvestingsigni�cantresearchand development dollars to determine howconnectivity inside the home can be leveragedfor services other than data connectivity.

�e move away from simple (though not full-proof) data networking solutions is leading theservice provider community to consider therequirements for next-gen, home-networkingsolutions based on some key applications.

ISPs are investigating connectivity for entertainment applications (i.e., streamed

video from a set-top box to multiple televisions inside the home) and multimedia applications, which involve streamed content (e.g., audio, video, images) among home computers and consumer electronics platforms (PC-to-stereo for distributed music; PC-to-TV for displaying digital photographs, videos and other content).

Finally, voice services, including VoIP, and the integration of mobile telephony into the service mix likely will dictate the types ofCPE and home-networking solutions thatare employed.

For example, service providers must consider if and/or how they will integrate voice applications with home-networking equipment. Furthermore, they will haveto consider the requirements for home-networking solutions, including factorssuch as throughput, QoS and coverage. In other words, will the solutions in place today provide for a user experience that is as close to headache-free as possible?

�e demands by service providers (including players in telephony, broadband, and television services) for networking solutionsthat can meet today’s needs for data networksand their plans to provide a host of services totheir customers will dictate a move to hybridnetworking solutions that incorporate both wired and wireless components.

Speci�cally, service providers are demandingthat the home-networking solutions theydeploy meet the following parameters:• Consistent throughput;• Consistent coverage; and• QoS.

Service providers are spending a great deal of time developing market requirement plans that will dictate their home networkingplans. Some convey very speci�c needs fornetworking throughput, indicating that (consistent) speeds of at least 25 Mbps are

For service providers and OEM players, hybrids will deliver more reliability and fewercustomer service calls, having a signi�cant impact on customer satisfaction and brand loyalty.

Kurt Scherf, Parks Associates

p40,42 Supp #15 5/19/06 12:57 PM Page 40

an absolute necessity. Other service providers haven’t yet de�ned

their throughput requirements, other than to indicate that a home-networking solution should be able to handle multiple streams of data, voice and video.

Because service providers are still uncertain about the order in which their next-gen services will be deployed (at whatpoint, for example, do telephone service providers deploy IP-based multi-channel video o�erings?), the home-networking solutions they o�er will have to be scalable.

Service providers want assurance that content can be accessed from multiple areas of the home. �ey are skeptical about relyingentirely on a wireless solution that may not provide this consistency of coverage and have indicated that hybrids of wireless and wired networks hold a great deal of attraction.

Service providers do not want to be the primary point of contact for customers upset that video on the television is of poor qualityor that voice transmissions are choppy.

�e home-networking solution(s) thatservice providers embrace will have toaccount for QoS for many di�erent kinds of content. Given the overhead that wired solutions provide in terms of throughput capabilities, they are seen as a necessary partof a home networking con�guration.

No single home networking solution is going to prevail as computer manufacturers, consumer electronics players, and service providers deploy next-gen content

applications and platforms.Parks Associates found a single-

mindedness among industry leaders in broadband and television services, chipset development, consumer electronics and advanced CPE to adopt hybrid solutions:

wireless and wired solutions combined in a single system. As one major service provider put it succinctly: “Don’t box us in” by forcing us to choose only one networking solution.

Over the past two years, Wi-Fi has emerged as the networking standard of choice. In early 2005, Wi-Fi products constituted roughly two-thirds of networking sales and a signi�cant base of the home-networking products deployed to date.

To consumers, the bene�ts of Wi-Finetworking products are self-evident: �eyallow home computers to access broadbandInternet connections and shared resourceswithout collocating the PC directly next to therouter or modem.

In addition, the cost of Wi-Fi networkingequipmentcontinuesitsdeclineasthetechnologymatures in an expanding consumer market.

�e market for providing next-gen, home-networking solutions is wide open, and Parks Associates is evaluating the prospects of a number of di�erent solutions, both wired and those with “no new wires” that are vyingfor market share as backbone solutions.

�e wired solutions include the highquality, reliable cabling systems beinginstalled in newly built and renovated homesas structured wiring systems (which typically

use, at minimum, Category 5 UTP cabling forvoice and data tra�c and RG-6 quad-shieldedcoaxial cabling for video signals).

Structured wiring as a backbone is growingin prominence, particularly for new home construction. U.S. home builders report that signi�cant percentages of their homes are being pre-wired with structured wiringsystems, and Parks Associates estimates thatmore than 10 million U.S. households will have a structured wiring infrastructure in place by the end of 2008.

�at total is somewhere around 10 percent oftheprojectedexistingbaseofallU.S.households,but that �gure will grow signi�cantly as bothconsumers and home builders alike recognizethe bene�ts of pre-installed, robust home-networking infrastructure.

Each of the three wired backbone contenders — coax, phone line and power line — has a signi�cant opportunity for success. For example, coaxial solutions arebeing positioned for multi-room, video distribution solutions that take advantage of the in�ux of DVR set-top boxes that cable and satellite TV service providers are using as key di�erentiators.

With the advent of IPTV services, video distribution in the home will become mainstream in just a few years.

Service providers have also shown a partiality toward twisted-pair phone line solutions in the home, because they arefamiliar with them. Not only will phone line backbones be considered for applicationssuch as distributed data and voice, they arealso under serious consideration as a video networking backbone.

Finally, power line solutions have become far more reliable, and they will be touted fortheir performance and ease of use.

Hybrid networks are promising solutionsbecause they o�er end users a great deal of�exibility, performance, and signi�cantly enhance their data, voice, multimedia and entertainment applications.

For service providers and OEM players, hybrids will deliver more reliability and fewer customer service calls, having a signi�cant impact on customer satisfactionand brand loyalty.

Kurt Scherf is principal analyst and vicepresident of Parks Associates.

(www.parksassociates.com) �is article was reprinted from the April

2006 issue of Telecommunications® magazine

p40,42 Supp #15 5/19/06 12:57 PM Page 42

an absolute necessity. Other service providers haven’t yet de�ned

their throughput requirements, other than to indicate that a home-networking solution should be able to handle multiple streams of data, voice and video.

Because service providers are still uncertain about the order in which their next-gen services will be deployed (at whatpoint, for example, do telephone service providers deploy IP-based multi-channel video o�erings?), the home-networking solutions they o�er will have to be scalable.

Service providers want assurance that content can be accessed from multiple areas of the home. �ey are skeptical about relyingentirely on a wireless solution that may not provide this consistency of coverage and have indicated that hybrids of wireless and wired networks hold a great deal of attraction.

Service providers do not want to be the primary point of contact for customers upset that video on the television is of poor qualityor that voice transmissions are choppy.

�e home-networking solution(s) thatservice providers embrace will have toaccount for QoS for many di�erent kinds of content. Given the overhead that wired solutions provide in terms of throughput capabilities, they are seen as a necessary partof a home networking con�guration.

No single home networking solution is going to prevail as computer manufacturers, consumer electronics players, and service providers deploy next-gen content

applications and platforms.Parks Associates found a single-

mindedness among industry leaders in broadband and television services, chipset development, consumer electronics and advanced CPE to adopt hybrid solutions:

wireless and wired solutions combined in a single system. As one major service provider put it succinctly: “Don’t box us in” by forcing us to choose only one networking solution.

Over the past two years, Wi-Fi has emerged as the networking standard of choice. In early 2005, Wi-Fi products constituted roughly two-thirds of networking sales and a signi�cant base of the home-networking products deployed to date.

To consumers, the bene�ts of Wi-Finetworking products are self-evident: �eyallow home computers to access broadbandInternet connections and shared resourceswithout collocating the PC directly next to therouter or modem.

In addition, the cost of Wi-Fi networkingequipmentcontinuesitsdeclineasthetechnologymatures in an expanding consumer market.

�e market for providing next-gen, home-networking solutions is wide open, and Parks Associates is evaluating the prospects of a number of di�erent solutions, both wired and those with “no new wires” that are vyingfor market share as backbone solutions.

�e wired solutions include the highquality, reliable cabling systems beinginstalled in newly built and renovated homesas structured wiring systems (which typically

use, at minimum, Category 5 UTP cabling forvoice and data tra�c and RG-6 quad-shieldedcoaxial cabling for video signals).

Structured wiring as a backbone is growingin prominence, particularly for new home construction. U.S. home builders report that signi�cant percentages of their homes are being pre-wired with structured wiringsystems, and Parks Associates estimates thatmore than 10 million U.S. households will have a structured wiring infrastructure in place by the end of 2008.

�at total is somewhere around 10 percent oftheprojectedexistingbaseofallU.S.households,but that �gure will grow signi�cantly as bothconsumers and home builders alike recognizethe bene�ts of pre-installed, robust home-networking infrastructure.

Each of the three wired backbone contenders — coax, phone line and power line — has a signi�cant opportunity for success. For example, coaxial solutions arebeing positioned for multi-room, video distribution solutions that take advantage of the in�ux of DVR set-top boxes that cable and satellite TV service providers are using as key di�erentiators.

With the advent of IPTV services, video distribution in the home will become mainstream in just a few years.

Service providers have also shown a partiality toward twisted-pair phone line solutions in the home, because they arefamiliar with them. Not only will phone line backbones be considered for applicationssuch as distributed data and voice, they arealso under serious consideration as a video networking backbone.

Finally, power line solutions have become far more reliable, and they will be touted fortheir performance and ease of use.

Hybrid networks are promising solutionsbecause they o�er end users a great deal of�exibility, performance, and signi�cantly enhance their data, voice, multimedia and entertainment applications.

For service providers and OEM players, hybrids will deliver more reliability and fewer customer service calls, having a signi�cant impact on customer satisfactionand brand loyalty.

Kurt Scherf is principal analyst and vicepresident of Parks Associates.

(www.parksassociates.com) �is article was reprinted from the April

2006 issue of Telecommunications® magazine

p40,42 Supp #15 5/19/06 12:57 PM Page 42