Rick ThompsonSenior Analyst, Heavy Reading

The Evolution of Triple Play:VOIP, IMS, FMC, WiMAX, IPTV

Triple Play Symposium 2006

Dallas, Boston, Paris

Heavy Reading Research• Heavy Reading has published numerous research reports, analyzing the

current state of the technology & expected market development for topics including IPTV, VOIP, IMS, FMC, Carrier Ethernet, IP DSLAMs, ROADMs, Pseudowires, AdvancedTCA, Next-Gen SONET, etc.

• Heavy Reading next-gen broadband/IPTV research 2005 and 2006:• IPTV and the Future of Telecom Video Network Architectures (6/05)

• IP DSLAMs: A Heavy Reading Competitive Analysis (8/05)

• MSAPs: A Heavy Reading Competitive Analysis (10/05)

• IP Video and the New Broadband Edge (12/05)

• DSL Gateways: Beyond the Router (2/06)

• Multimedia Whole-Home Networking: Solving the IPTV Distribution Dilemma (4/06)

• The Future of Internet TV: Emerging “Over-the-Top” Internet Video Services (planned Summer 2006)

• Heavy Reading conducted interviews with hundreds of technology suppliers, service providers & investors with a direct interest in telecom-related topics.

Wireless Backhaul

Beyond Triple Play: Flexibility Is the Killer APP

Online Collaboration

Video Telephony

Info ServicesSports, Games, Hobbies

VideoIP/PC TV

Video on DemandPay Per View

Digital Video Recording

Streaming AudioRadio

Concerts

Streaming Music

InstantMessaging

Fax Services

Email

Dynamic BandwidthUpgrades

Personal StorageImages, Video, Data

Distributed PrintingPhotos, Etc.

Info ServicesFinancial, News, Travel

Home Monitoring

Entertainment Productivity/Reference Communications

Personal Video

Tiered VPN

SecurityAnti-VirusFirewallSPAM

URL Filtering

Voice (VoIP)On-Line GamingDownloads

Real-Time PlayMultiplayer Hosting

Incumbent Dilemmas, 2005• British Telecom

• Retail revenues down 2.5%• Retail profits down 10%

• Deutsche Telecom• Domestic revenues down 1.6%• Broadband/fixed revenues down 3.6%

• France Telecom• Domestic residential revenues down 1.2%• Domestic enterprise revenues down 5.4%

• KPN• Fixed network revenues down 4%• Business revenues down 9%

Major Themes• VOIP will be the dominant wireline telephony technology

within five years– situation is less certain on the wireless side • IMS has won near-universal support among service

providers, and is driving RFPs for NGNs• WiFi, WiMax and IP could disrupt the mobile telephony cartel,

with major long-term consequences• Multimegabit broadband networks will spread rapidly in the

next five years, with telcos moving increasingly to FTTx after 2008

• This transition is being driven by the need to provider high-quality video content, including HDTV and online gaming

• This in turn is having a major impact on home technologies, where the market is wide open to innovation

By 2007, VOIP Will DominateWhen do you expect to see more than 50% of voice traffic

carried over IP on your network?

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Core

Access

Percentage of respondents

Already is Within 1 year 1-2 years More than 2 years away Never

Source: Heavy Reading Survey of Service Provider Attitudes to VOIP, August 2005. Base: 125 Service Providers

Mainstream VOIP Is a Reality

• Service provider VOIP deployment plans • VOIP versus Internet voice

Source: The Future of VOIP: A Heavy Reading Service Provider Study, September 2005

There Are Still Technical Barriers

On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is "not an obstacle" and 5 is "a major obstacle," please rate the effect of the following factors in preventing or hindering the

deployment of VOIP in your company

2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6

Lack of user interest, or real demand

Might cannibalize existing revenues

Problems controlling or reducing opex

Lack of attractive devices or terminals

Problems integrated with legacy infastructure

Difficulties making a clear business case

Regulatory barriers

Initial costs of (subsidizing) CPE

No clear or interoperable standards

911, wiretapping and related issues

Difficulties controlling call quality

Network security and reliability concerns

Lack of agreed QoS across net boundaries

Lack of vendor interoperability, vendor lock-in

Average score

IMS Research Findings• The 2006-2007 time period will be the most important period in FMC, IMS and

NGN technology and service development.

• For service providers, IMS's main appeal is its ability to provide more applications faster and at lower cost.

• Fixed/mobile convergence is an important secondary motivator.

• Although IMS is seen primarily as a mechanism for deploying revenue-generating applications, there is little agreement about which applications should be deployed first, and this lack of consensus may delay carrier implementations.

• IMS is a complex specification, and there are gaps in the standards, especially around policy control and service creation.

• There are strong parallels and linkages between IMS and two other emerging industry standardization movements: service delivery platforms and AdvancedTCA.

When IMS?

Source: Heavy Reading Fall 2005 Survey of Service Provider Technology Deployment Plans

When do you expect to see widespread deployment of IMS in your company's networks?

0 10 20 30 40 50

Don't know/not sure

Never

After 2008

In 2007-2008

By the end of 2006

Percentage of Respondents

Why IMS?• Layered architecture

• Separates transport, control and applications• “We can buy best of breed at every layer!”

• Access-agnostic• Simpler convergence of fixed and mobile networks• “Services no longer tied to access network technology!”

• IP applications • With QoS, security, charging• “A means to fight IP applications leakage to the Internet!”

• New kinds of applications• Blended together • “Higher ARPU, lower churn!”

• More applications, much more quickly, at much lower cost• But controlled, supplied and billed by service provider • “No need to rely on a few killer apps!”

Apps and Services Drive IMSWhat is the most important factor driving IMS

deployment in your company?

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Converge fixed and mobile services

Environment to enable quick and easylaunch of new services

Deliver applications that combine voice,data and video

Reduce service and applicationsdevelopment costs

Percentage of Respondents

Source: Heavy Reading 2006 Survey of Service Provider Plans for IMS. Base: 93 Service Providers

Service Providers Buy The FMC Vision

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Agree

Disagree

Don't know/Notsure

“Within the next de cade, the first link in every network will always be wireless -cellular, WiFi, WiMax, UWB, and so on -and devices will automatically choose the most appr o-priate type of wireless link based on loc ation, price, and bandwidth. ”

Source: Heavy Reading Survey of Service Provider Attitudes to Fixed-Mobile Convergence, November 2004. Base: 109 Service Providers

Expect FMC to Transform the Industry

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Agree

Disagree

Don't know/Notsure

"Within the next de cade, fixed-mobile convergence will gradually eliminate the border between wireline and wireless car riers and service providers. A new breed of supercarrier that uses any appr opriate network technology to serve its customers will have emerged."

Source: Heavy Reading Survey of Service Provider Attitudes to Fixed-Mobile Convergence, November 2004. Base: 109 Service Providers

FMC Is A Higher Priority For European Service Providers

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

NA

Europe

AsiaPac

Top Priority Important Less Important

Obstacles To FMC Progress

What is the biggest obstacle at present to FMC?

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Don't know/ not sure

Badly designed services or interfaces

Security and authentication

Lack of attractive handsets

Lack of real demand

Legacy infrastructure

Inability to ensure QoS across network/service boundaries

Poor coordination between wired/wireless service providers

Percentage of respondents

Source: Heavy Reading Fall 2005 Survey of Service Provider Technology Deployment Plans

WiMAX Deployment Plans

• Network operators are overwhelmingly positive about theimpact WiMax will have on networks

• WiMax enthusiasm cuts across all types of carriers and across all geographic regions

• The next 12 to 18 months will be critical in determining carrier investment in WiMax

• More than 80 percent of survey respondents expect to see WiMax deployments by the end of 2007

• Network operators are surprisingly open to deploying WiMax using unlicensed spectrum, but interest in pre-standard WiMax products is slight

• Carriers expect to use WiMax to bolster delivery of voice, data, and even triple-play services, but there’s less interest in WiMax for wireless backhaul

WiMAX Product Maturity

WiMAX Deployment Plans

Mobile or Fixed WiMAX?

Mobile WiMAX• The first Mobile WiMax services will launch in Korea in mid

2006, using Samsung equipment; U.S. service launches will follow, possibly as soon as 2007

• Stealth chipset startups are attempting to leapfrog the market and go directly to Mobile WiMax; names in the frame include Beecem, SiWave, Cygnus, Runcom

• Adaptix claims to have already demonstrated system-level mobility based on scaleable OFDMA

• A market for 802.16e line cards and software will emerge alongside demand for smart antenna software suites, as major fabs and OEMs catch on to Mobile WiMax's potential

• Initial services will offer handoff performance suitable for data, but unsuitable for VOIP services

IPTV: Telecom Meets Entertainment

• TV delivery is moving from HFC-based broadcast to IP-based multicast/unicast

• Telcos: IPTV, Telco TV, Telco Video (different names, same thing)• MSOs: SDV initiatives; NGNA (many IPTV-like concepts)

• “Internet TV” is organically evolving in parallel• Google, Yahoo, Apple, YouTube, MLB.com, major broadcast channels,

etc.• Technology platforms: Brightcove, Narrowstep, thePlatform, Veoh, etc.• Network technologies: DPI, Policy Control, granular QoS• Video search engines, P2P video file sharing, etc.• Competitive or complimentary to IPTV?

• Regardless of the model, multimedia content is driving telecom• Wireline• Wireless

Technology Shifts Impacting Market Evolution

• Compression & format: MPEG2 MPEG4; SD HD• More channels, lower bit rates

• Access network: 1.5-3 Mbit/s 20-30+ Mbit/s; ATM Ethernet/IP• Combination xDSL/FTTx

• Aggregation network: ATM GigE/10GigE, IP multicast, QOS• Right amount of aggregation layer intelligence?

• IP edge: High density/capacity, Ethernet-centric, per-service QOS, unicast/multicast scale, integrated B-RAS, high-availability edge

• Transport network: static/legacy reconfigurable/multiservice• Services evolve: Broadcast TV VOD PVR/nPVR integrated &

interactive services• Mobile & IMS?• Internet TV?

IPTV Inflection Points

Su

bscri

ber

Scale

Inte

gra

ted

Serv

ices

Integrated Communication,Information, Entertainment

Focus on scaling number of IPTV subscribers and

introducing “integrated services.”

Also includes potential IMS Integration.

Phase III: 2008 – 2010 Service Differentiation

Basic Broadcast TV(IP Multicast)

Initial, Limited VOD

Focus on initial network & service

layer infrastructure. Modest, controlled service rollouts.

Basic service offerings.

Phase I: 2004 - 2005Technical Viability

PVR, nPVRMPEG-4 HD

Portfolio Expansion:More HD, VOD, PVR

Focus on service assurance and QoE

for existing services and continue adding

new services: enhanced channel

package, additional HD content,

additional VOD content, subscription VOD, time-shifting.

Phase II: 2006 – 2007Quality of Experience

Multicast to Unicast Service Mix

IPTV Market Evolution

End-to-End IPTV: A Brief Overview

Video Serving Office (VSO)

Broadband Access Network Infrastructure

Broadband Aggregation Network Infrastructure

Broadband Routing Network Infrastructure

Super Head-End Office (SHO)

Copper

Metro Transport

RG

IP STBDSLAM

OLT/ONU

Video Hub Office (VHO)

Multimedia Home Network

Video Content Acquisition

Broadcast Video

VOD ServerComplex

Head-End System

Middleware,CA/DRM

Edge Router/B-RAS

Gigabit EthernetAggregation

Regional/LH Transport

Content Providers

20th Century FoxGeneral Electric

News Corp.Sony

Time WarnerViacom

Walt DisneyEtc.

National Video Head-End Office

TELECOM OPERATORResidential Subscriber

Core Router an/.or Edge

Router/B-RAS

Live and On Demand Content Acquired From

Multiple Satellite and Terrestrial

Broadcast Programming

Sources.

Edge Encoders

Numerous Regional VHOs Receive

National Content from SHOs and

Ingest & Distribute Regional Content

and IP VOD.

Local VSOs Receive &

Distribute Content from Upstream. Local Channels and Distributed

VOD Also Served From VSO.

Various Copper- and Fiber-based

Access Networks In Place To Deliver

IPTV to the Residential Subscriber.

SP Controlled Subscriber Premise:

ONT/NID, Residential Gateway, IP

STB/DVR, PC, VoIP, In-Home Distribution

Network

Redundant National SHOs Ingest &

Distribute IP-based Video Content.

Centralized VOD Libraries May Exist.

PC

VoIP

End-to-End Policy Control

Content Owner/Aggregator

Fiber

OLT ONU

ONT

IPTV Bandwidth Requirements

• Video • IPTV with MPEG2 compression

• Standard Definition 3.5Mbps• High Definition 19.3Mbps

• IPTV with MPEG4 compression• Standard Definition 2.0Mbps• High Definition 8.0Mbps

Centralized Architectures?

BroadbandAccess Network

BroadbandAggregation Network

BroadbandEdge Network

Residential Gateway

n HomesBroadband

AccessNodes

Broadband Aggregation

Switches/Routers

Broadband Edge Router

Policy Control Server

Voice

IP/MPLS Core

B’cast Video

VOD

HSI

Distributed Architectures?

Broadband Access Network

BroadbandAggregation Network

Broadband Edge Network

Residential Gateway

n Homes Broadband AccessNodes

Broadband Aggregation

Switches/Routers

Broadband Edge Router

Policy Control Server

Voice

Regional/LocalVideo Content

IP/MPLS Core

B’cast Video

VOD

HSI

Broadband Access

BroadbandAggregation

Broadband Edge

Residential Gateway

n Homes AccessNodes

GigE/10GigE Aggregation

Switches/Routers

EdgeRouter

•Centralized Policy Management•Video CAC•Topology Intelligence•Quality Measurement

Voice

Distributed Policy Enforcement

Regional/LocalVideo Content

B’cast Video

VOD

HSI

1 2 3 4

VoIP

IPTV

HSI First Mile:Aggregatebandwidthneeded forall services

VOD

B’cast

Second Mile:Concurrent VOD sessions

Non-blockingMulticast TV channels

Third Mile:Max. concurrentVoD sessions

Fourth Mile: Link bandwidth equals server capacityVOD controller limits total amount of streams

VOD

B’cast

Network Dimensioning Is Critical

QOE Measurement•Accurate measurement of:

• Overall video service quality• Usage per channel and viewer

density• VoD concurrency, channel

changes• User Quality of Experience

Is essential to: Monitor SLAs and troubleshoot issues Dimension capacity and tune VoD CAC

“IPTV2”: SureWest

• Improved integration• Emerging standards• Next-Gen STBs• Improved compression• Improved QoS• Improved security• Interactive features

IPTV Work in Progress

• Home networking solutions• Ability to utilize existing home wiring• Wireless

• Next-Gen STBs• SD, HD, PVR, Gateways

• Content• Interactive applications

Multimedia Home Networking Taxonomy

AccessNetwork

Copper and/or Fiber Infrastructure: ADSL2plus, VDSL2, FTTx(Home Networking WAN Interfaces Integrated into NID and/or ONT)

EthernetCable

(CAT-5,6)

CoaxialCable

(RG6, RG59)

Twisted PairPhoneline

ElectricalPowerline

Air

IEEE802.3

HPNAv3MoCA

ProprietaryHPNAv3

HomePlug AVProprietary (UPA)

IEEE802.11x

Network Connected Multimedia CPE: IP STB, DVR, Home Gateway, Media Bridges, PC/Laptop, Media Server, Gaming Console, Etc.

(Other Critical Technologies: MPEG-4 Decoders, DRM S/W)

Multimedia CPE UI Technologies: IPTV Browser, EPG, TV/PC Web Browser, Video Search and Navigation

TR-064: LAN side CPE MgmtTR-064: LAN

side CPE Mgmt

WT-111: Remote Mgmt of home devices

(TR-069 pass-thru)

WT-111: Remote Mgmt of home devices

(TR-069 pass-thru)

TR-069: WAN-side CPE Mgmt

TR-069: WAN-side CPE Mgmt

WT-135: STB Object modelWT-135: STB Object model

PhysicalMedium

Standard/Technology

HomeDevices

RemoteMgmt.

UserInterface

Thank You!

Q&A