How should converged IP networks evolve? This is a fascinating question that responds to how the Telecom typical bodies, network equipment providers, and the industry are generally moving. IMS is usually potentially one of these directions, plus it’s a possible direction if the organization’s case supports it. Many of us don’t need another WAP or 3G/UMTS hype again. Unlike baseball fields, when you build them, they no longer come. A world-famous large Mobile User stated in its annual record that it would take 19 years to make a return on the investment made on 3G/UMTS. Seventeen years!!!
Should Cell phones be part of this converged IP network evolution? It is part of it… particularly in the Core and Transport portions of the network and slowly and gradually in the Radio Access Networking (although I have seen several exciting developments from Estruendo in this area).
How can this kind of be achieved? Well, I do not think there is enough space here to get started on the discussion in detail. Still, it begins with an internal discussion in your company about cost savings, development and what you are trying to accomplish by this effort within the general business strategy of the organization.
For example, cost savings can be obtained by consolidating numerous IP/MPLS backbone networks within your organization, followed by the group operations and systems required to support and maintain this loan consolidation. Why? Due to M&A development in your company, it makes much more sense to have one combined IP/MPLS backbone and one combined operation than various individual ones. Of course, this is a simplified first start, but a first begin towards many more objectives that could have been discussed internally in your company on “why” as well as “what”, as mentioned earlier.
For many (successful) Carriers/Operators, it’s regarding innovation through enhanced abilities for the future while obtaining cost benefits through organisational consolidation accompanied by technology convergence.
I think individuals are too focused on the specialized side of converged IP networks when in my opinion, this is simply not that important. Still, the company transformation needed to deal with converged IP network evolution is ignored or forgotten. This is the hard part, where far more questions should be asked, as this is where the bulk of the difficulties and problems exist.
Initial, there’s the infrastructure competition. Carriers quickly notice the value of a packet-turned infrastructure over the traditional signal-switched architectures. For example, almost every carrier is, has, or ever will be converting from signal-switched ss7 to ss7 over IP. But the travelling factor isn’t so much the design development as it looks for cost-saving ways to apply the design. Similarly, while mobile carriers are starting to prevent services such as Skype, they may implement carrier-class Voice over internet protocol to connect their major changing centres to improve their existing technique circuits.
Second, another convergence going on is with the buyer data. The reason I independent these is the customer IP data, for the most part, is tunnelled through the wireless infrastructure. When routing of that data is happening, that routing is not based upon what data the customer is definitely. HTTP traffic and wap site visitors traverse the network similar to a wireless device. So, where is the convergence below? We’re just commencing to see carriers open up for you to evolve this part of the networking. An example of this type of convergence has been T-Mobile’s ‘hot spot with home’ offer, where your device can make voice calls around wifi from an accessible place at home or through the cell phone network. Taking the time for what is essentially still some sort of circuit-switched call to your VoIP gateway through the world wide web is a big step forward.
In a place where carriers make a penny or maybe more per minute of use, I believe it does not take carriers who think outside the box will lead the way. When they learn to use cheap outside IP solutions (wifi hotspots like the above) to bolster their costly network core, everyone can benefit.
The simple answer is that IP networks don’t worry about transport. SIP (session initiation protocol) and IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem) give way that transport companies such as telecoms, who formerly shunned application connectivity and APIs, can now incorporate an extensive range of applications as network-attached computers. In this context, the IMS coating knows who you are and what type of network-attached computer you use, whether it be a PC or a cellular handheld computer. User experience than can be delivered relative to the abilities of the device
3GPP and ETSI are working on a design called IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS). This architecture deals with network infrastructure in an engineering-agnostic way to provide a standard way provide services in addition to IP and other network technological innovations.
Think of it as the SS7/IN average, which allowed the development of complex services (number portability, non-geographic numbers etc … ) in addition to the standard telephony infrastructure.
Precisely what IMS will do is appropriately abstract out the network engineering from the perspective of the end-user applications.
Though IMS was developed by 3GPP… which is a mobile/cellular standards group….. it was quickly adopted by ETSI TISPAN for wireline purposes by tweaks. Both groups job closely now. IMS possesses gained a lot of interest through both wireless and wireline operators.
Consequently, it’s not necessary to be concerned so much about where IP convergence will go. The inspiration to standardise IP across the board was driven by the need to reduce complexity and gain consistent network solutions. IMS acts as an indifference layer and, thus, to a certain extent, deflects the drive for IP convergence. Having said that, the achievable cost savings and capacity benefits from a uniform network technologies platform are still powerful for car owners. The convergence will undoubtedly continue since IP is here and works well.
Once we have spent significant amounts of long-term facilities capital, there is a damping effect on change. The telephone system is a fine example of this – synchronous, remarkably optimized (channelized and compressed) and “service-ized” (it is more expensive to print and give the phone bill than also to provide the actual connection).
With that said, it is evident in converged IP networks can occur slowly as the travel operators realize positive aspects. For example, lots of backbone words traffic is carried on IP but done over a SONET infrastructure.
Following up on cellular rapid again, we have a considerable expense, international road maps, and vested interests. If we were just starting cellular deployment in 2007 (given Wireless and related technology), would we likely build it how it is? Probably not, but we now have an existing infrastructure that must perform.
The good side of this impact is that things like VoIP had thrashed out well before they were deployed (I’m not talking about Skype or Vonage here).
IP will usually rule. It is designed to function over just about anything (smoke indicators, anyone? ) and has a successful track record. I think the enhancements will come in the “routing” methods rather than the “routed” methods…. so there is plenty of space for innovation during intervals of broader convergence.
Read also: Seeking A Secure Proxy Hardware To Improve Your Security?