Fixed-Mobile Convergence – FMC
UMA-based dual-mode WiFi/cellular:
Positives:
· Is engineered from the ground up around "seamless" handover. This is both a positive and a negative.
· Phones and semiconductors becoming available
· Standardised & now adopted by 3GPP as GAN
· Reasonable range of infrastructure providers
· Relatively cheap to deploy at first
· Possible usage cases for MVNOs
· Good, cellular-grade security and authentication mechanisms. UMA may well be reincarnated as a security technology. Good way for operators to learn about FMC customer experience, marketing proposition, support etc.
Limitations:
· Limited and expensive range of handsets
· Not suitable for large enterprise
· Does not currently support 3G
· In practical deployment, requires operator-provided gateway
· Could be blocked by broadband operator in the network
· Potential for huge customer service & support costs
· Assumes that usage over WLAN should give the same "user experience" as over cellular - ie not intended for "bearer-aware" applicationsDoes not work well with multiple WLAN access points (no standards for connection management software)
IMS / VCC-based dual-mode Wi-Fi/cellular (VCC = voice call continuity):
Positives:
· Based around a clear vision of future IMS-based operator networks
· Significant levels of enthusiasm from major operators
· Exploits growing use of SIP in both handsets and networks
· Wide range of equipment vendors supplying pre-standard convergence solutions
· Some operators already skipping UMA and going straight to pre-IMS dual-mode
· May be flexible enough to allow handset applications to be "bearer aware" Will do "seamless" handover
Limitations:
· No "full IMS" handsets available yet; standardisation will take some time.
· VCC standards incomplete
· Not obvious how interoperability with enterprise IP-PBX systems will work. Mobile IP centrex is not the right answer here.
· May be dependent on uncertain timelines / success of IMS rollout
· Uncertain dependencies on in-home infrastructure (gateway, WLAN, PC etc)
· Hasn't yet got sufficient awareness to drive innovative 3rd-party developers etc. May suffer from UMA failure fallout
Non-IMS SIP-based dual-mode:
Positives:
· Less pre-occupation with "nice to have" seamless handover
· Puts the customer (or a "challenger" service provider) in control
· Takes advantage of the growing number of handsets with "naked SIP" functionality
· Can work in the enterprise with PBX-integrated mobility manager
· Should be suited for "least cost routing" applications
· Works OK in multi-access point environments Good solution for "challenger" operators like VoIP providers, ISPs, broadband firms, foreign mobile operators etc
Limitations:
· WiFi-enabled handsets still tend to be expensive, poor on battery life, limited in numbers & expensive
· Difficult to do low-latency handover
· Installation, configuration & support headaches for using 3rd-party software on phones
· Potential problems with user interface or application blocking on handsets which have been operator-customised or locked
· Requirement for solution provider to focus efforts on handset software development, integration, testing etc
· More difficult distribution / subsidy model for handsets Will work best in markets/segments with low operator involvement in handset supply
Cellular HomeZones (such as O2 Genion and Vodafone ZuHause):
Positives:
· Drives fixed-mobile substitution
· Possible to use dual numbers, fixed- and mobile
· Uses standard mobile numbers Homes still tend to want fixed connection for broadband, and maybe IPTV in future
Limitations:
· Works best in markets with low penetration of mobile outbound calls.
· Low cost" cell radius may be very wide, driving cannibalisation.
· Possible IPR issues
· May mean unacceptably high costs for inbound callers
· May need extra intelligence / infrastructure in the network Opportunity for bundling with "naked DSL" looks attractive if permitted
Cellular Picocells & Femtocells:
Positives:
· Picocells already proven to work in niche usage cases
· Need fewer picocells to cover an area than WLAN APs
· Adds network capacity in-building as well as just coverage
· Use normal cellphones rather than complex dual-mode ones
· Can be backhauled with a cheap IP/ADSL connections rather than a leased line
· Licensed spectrum so less risk of interference than using WiFi
· Proliferating number of picocell vendors, silicon suppliers, VARs / resellers and related switching / application providers
· Given a huge boost by recent Ofcom low-power spectrum auctions in the UK
· May well be driven by requirements for indoor use of HSDPA and UMTS Lots of interesting niche business cases
Limitations:
· Sub-$500 "Femtocells" for residential services still at prototype stage
· Possible complexities around spectrum management & RF planning if there are 1000's of picocells in a city
· Complexity dealing with IT / facilities management personnel on-site
· Security issues - is a picocell "genuine"?
· Enterprise PBX integration with cellular can be difficult at a practical level
· Some signs that operators will need to deploy overlay LANs
· May be problems with roaming agreements outside buildings
· May require end-user to manually re-select networks on handsets
· May be dependent on broadband provider
· Issues around gateway integration, support for residential customers on IT issues etc
Fixed + Mobile service bundling:
Positives:
· Much simpler than many FMC solutions
· Possible to gain good percentage of FMC financial benefits (customer lock-in, new services, family plans etc) with little technical investment
· Various enhancements like closed-user groups (call Family mobiles for free, etc) No need for expensive/complex dual-mode phones or on-handset custom software
Limitations:
· Only really suitable for hybrid fixed+mobile carriers, or MVNOs
· Doesn't improve indoor cellular coverage
· Limitations in future migration path (eg to IMS)
· May add complexity in sales / provisioning (eg transitioning multiple family members from existing services & numbers) Possibly difficult to tie-in prepay subscribers
VoIPo3G or VoIPoWiMAX:
Positives:
· Potential to replicate Skype or similar in the mobile domain
· Decouples access from service provider, improving competition & probably prices
· More spectrum becoming available
· Reduces need for WiFi in handsets
· Future coding schemes will improve radio resource efficiency above circuit-switched voice
· May be used initially as a "second line" eg VoIP for international calls
· Fits well with introduction of SIP-enabled handsets Likely to be embraced by operators in the long term (probably CDMA first with RevA/B)
Limitations:
· Data plans currently mitigate against use, especially when roaming
· Heavily dependent on cell capacity for guaranteed QoS
· Poor indoor coverage, esp for WiMAX >2.5GHz
· Few phone-type devices at present (only PDAs)
· At present, very inefficient way of using radio resource
· May be difficulties with handset integration (eg access to codecs, echo cancellation etc) Very early days in terms of devices, use experience, integration etc
Positives:
· Is engineered from the ground up around "seamless" handover. This is both a positive and a negative.
· Phones and semiconductors becoming available
· Standardised & now adopted by 3GPP as GAN
· Reasonable range of infrastructure providers
· Relatively cheap to deploy at first
· Possible usage cases for MVNOs
· Good, cellular-grade security and authentication mechanisms. UMA may well be reincarnated as a security technology. Good way for operators to learn about FMC customer experience, marketing proposition, support etc.
Limitations:
· Limited and expensive range of handsets
· Not suitable for large enterprise
· Does not currently support 3G
· In practical deployment, requires operator-provided gateway
· Could be blocked by broadband operator in the network
· Potential for huge customer service & support costs
· Assumes that usage over WLAN should give the same "user experience" as over cellular - ie not intended for "bearer-aware" applicationsDoes not work well with multiple WLAN access points (no standards for connection management software)
IMS / VCC-based dual-mode Wi-Fi/cellular (VCC = voice call continuity):
Positives:
· Based around a clear vision of future IMS-based operator networks
· Significant levels of enthusiasm from major operators
· Exploits growing use of SIP in both handsets and networks
· Wide range of equipment vendors supplying pre-standard convergence solutions
· Some operators already skipping UMA and going straight to pre-IMS dual-mode
· May be flexible enough to allow handset applications to be "bearer aware" Will do "seamless" handover
Limitations:
· No "full IMS" handsets available yet; standardisation will take some time.
· VCC standards incomplete
· Not obvious how interoperability with enterprise IP-PBX systems will work. Mobile IP centrex is not the right answer here.
· May be dependent on uncertain timelines / success of IMS rollout
· Uncertain dependencies on in-home infrastructure (gateway, WLAN, PC etc)
· Hasn't yet got sufficient awareness to drive innovative 3rd-party developers etc. May suffer from UMA failure fallout
Non-IMS SIP-based dual-mode:
Positives:
· Less pre-occupation with "nice to have" seamless handover
· Puts the customer (or a "challenger" service provider) in control
· Takes advantage of the growing number of handsets with "naked SIP" functionality
· Can work in the enterprise with PBX-integrated mobility manager
· Should be suited for "least cost routing" applications
· Works OK in multi-access point environments Good solution for "challenger" operators like VoIP providers, ISPs, broadband firms, foreign mobile operators etc
Limitations:
· WiFi-enabled handsets still tend to be expensive, poor on battery life, limited in numbers & expensive
· Difficult to do low-latency handover
· Installation, configuration & support headaches for using 3rd-party software on phones
· Potential problems with user interface or application blocking on handsets which have been operator-customised or locked
· Requirement for solution provider to focus efforts on handset software development, integration, testing etc
· More difficult distribution / subsidy model for handsets Will work best in markets/segments with low operator involvement in handset supply
Cellular HomeZones (such as O2 Genion and Vodafone ZuHause):
Positives:
· Drives fixed-mobile substitution
· Possible to use dual numbers, fixed- and mobile
· Uses standard mobile numbers Homes still tend to want fixed connection for broadband, and maybe IPTV in future
Limitations:
· Works best in markets with low penetration of mobile outbound calls.
· Low cost" cell radius may be very wide, driving cannibalisation.
· Possible IPR issues
· May mean unacceptably high costs for inbound callers
· May need extra intelligence / infrastructure in the network Opportunity for bundling with "naked DSL" looks attractive if permitted
Cellular Picocells & Femtocells:
Positives:
· Picocells already proven to work in niche usage cases
· Need fewer picocells to cover an area than WLAN APs
· Adds network capacity in-building as well as just coverage
· Use normal cellphones rather than complex dual-mode ones
· Can be backhauled with a cheap IP/ADSL connections rather than a leased line
· Licensed spectrum so less risk of interference than using WiFi
· Proliferating number of picocell vendors, silicon suppliers, VARs / resellers and related switching / application providers
· Given a huge boost by recent Ofcom low-power spectrum auctions in the UK
· May well be driven by requirements for indoor use of HSDPA and UMTS Lots of interesting niche business cases
Limitations:
· Sub-$500 "Femtocells" for residential services still at prototype stage
· Possible complexities around spectrum management & RF planning if there are 1000's of picocells in a city
· Complexity dealing with IT / facilities management personnel on-site
· Security issues - is a picocell "genuine"?
· Enterprise PBX integration with cellular can be difficult at a practical level
· Some signs that operators will need to deploy overlay LANs
· May be problems with roaming agreements outside buildings
· May require end-user to manually re-select networks on handsets
· May be dependent on broadband provider
· Issues around gateway integration, support for residential customers on IT issues etc
Fixed + Mobile service bundling:
Positives:
· Much simpler than many FMC solutions
· Possible to gain good percentage of FMC financial benefits (customer lock-in, new services, family plans etc) with little technical investment
· Various enhancements like closed-user groups (call Family mobiles for free, etc) No need for expensive/complex dual-mode phones or on-handset custom software
Limitations:
· Only really suitable for hybrid fixed+mobile carriers, or MVNOs
· Doesn't improve indoor cellular coverage
· Limitations in future migration path (eg to IMS)
· May add complexity in sales / provisioning (eg transitioning multiple family members from existing services & numbers) Possibly difficult to tie-in prepay subscribers
VoIPo3G or VoIPoWiMAX:
Positives:
· Potential to replicate Skype or similar in the mobile domain
· Decouples access from service provider, improving competition & probably prices
· More spectrum becoming available
· Reduces need for WiFi in handsets
· Future coding schemes will improve radio resource efficiency above circuit-switched voice
· May be used initially as a "second line" eg VoIP for international calls
· Fits well with introduction of SIP-enabled handsets Likely to be embraced by operators in the long term (probably CDMA first with RevA/B)
Limitations:
· Data plans currently mitigate against use, especially when roaming
· Heavily dependent on cell capacity for guaranteed QoS
· Poor indoor coverage, esp for WiMAX >2.5GHz
· Few phone-type devices at present (only PDAs)
· At present, very inefficient way of using radio resource
· May be difficulties with handset integration (eg access to codecs, echo cancellation etc) Very early days in terms of devices, use experience, integration etc
posted by So velvet blue @ 2:37 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home