Transcript APT Workshop on NGN

NGN : the real future technology?
APT Workshop on NGN
Hyderabad, India, 4 Aug.2004
Mr.Pansak Arpakajorn
TOT ,Thailand
Agenda
Objective
Definition
Lesson from the past
Why do operators need NGN?
Where TOT is headed?
Major concerns on NGN implementation
Conclusion
Objective
The main objective of this paper is to share
information/opinions with APT participants
who have been involved in NGN activities
Definition
A Next Generation Network (NGN) is
● a packet-based network
● able to provide services including telecommunication
services
● able to make use of multiple broadband
● QoS-enable transport technologies
● service-related functions are independent from
underlying transport –related technologies
● Offer unrestricted access by users to different service
providers
● Support generalized mobility which will allow consistent
and ubiquitous provision of services to users
Source: ITU-T SG 2 : COM2-D-164-E
Lessons from the past(1)
In 1907, Manual system was installed in Thailand
In 1935 ,SXS switch was first installed in Thailand
In 1956,X-Bar switch was first introduced in Thailand
In 1983, 47 years after SXS, Stored Program Control
(SPC) system was first introduced in Thailand
In 1998 , all X-bar switches had fully been replaced with
digital switching technology (SPC)
• At present, the first generation of SPC switch is still in
use with some modifications e.g. SS No.7, V.5.2 (the
replacement of the first generation SPC will be based on
soft switch technology instead of TDM)
Lessons from the past(2)
►Life cycle of technologies in the past longer than
today's’?
Switching Technology Life Cycle
2004
NGN
2000 -P re se n t
IP
2002 -P re se n t
ATM
1993 -P re se n t
ISDN
1983 -P re se n t
SPC
1 9 5 9 - 1 9 9 8 (3 9 y r s .)
CROSS BAR
1 9 3 5 - 1 9 7 6 (4 1 y r s .)
SXS
1 9 0 7 - 1 9 7 9 (7 2 y r s .)
Manual
1 8 8 6 - 1 9 0 7 (2 1 y r s .)
Magneto
1875
1900
1925
1950
1975
2000
Lessons from the past(3)
The emergence of ISDN was seen to be the first step in a
“telecom evolution” in the existing legacy telephone
networks
• How many countries have succeeded in the
implementation of 64 Kbit/s ISDN ?
•How much did telecom operators benefit from investing
in ISDN?
•How many years had we spent for ISDN activities?
•How often do we use Fax.G4?
Lessons from the past(4)
Broadband ISDN was also seen to be the next step of
future technology as a result of ISDN evolution
• B-ISDN standards : ITU-T vs ATM Forum e.g.B-ISUP vs
ATM NNI
• Today, have you ever heard the term B-ISDN
commercially? The term B-ISDN is only used in the ITU
Study Group for reference and study
► What went wrong with the above ISDN technologies?
Technological innovation fails ?
We are an early adopter?
We are the late adopter?
Lessons from the past(5)
“ ISDN was invented more than a decade ago, but with
out PC-applications demand almost no one needed it. It
‘s amazing that phone companies invested enormous
sums in switches to handle ISDN with very little idea of
how it would be used.”
BILL GATE : The Road Ahead,1995
Lessons from the past(6)
FACT ABOUT FAX
Fax was invented in 1843 by Alexander Bain
The diffusion of fax began in 1983
The diffusion of fax occurred after await of 150 years!
while the technology was shaped into its present form
►Many innovations eventually came good sometimes
after decades or centuries !!
Why do operators need NGN?
The only one reason is “ technological innovation”- TDM
technology is technically obsolete and IP-based network is seen
as the future technology for telecommunication and information
• Is the above sentence true for us?: Clear for today/Unclear for
tomorrow
• Do we need time and money to prove this? : Yes, but no one can
guarantee our success! Technology is unpredictable!
• Are we ready to adopt NGN as the future technology? : Unclear
•Are we using all technologies efficiently ? : No, Technology life
cycle is shorter than before and many technologies do not meet
the market needs
Where TOT is headed(1)
Operators Dilemma : Circuit switch (PSTN) based on TDM or
Packet-based technology (Soft switch) would be the best
solution for today and tomorrow: No choice-NGN oriented has
been chosen
Availability of products in the open markets ?: Widely available
from world class vendors
Availability of world recognized standards? : Many
organizations e.g. ITU,IETF,ATIS,ETSI,3GPP and OECD are
playing active role in NGN activities
Where TOT is headed?(2)
Applications and services require by customers : Focus mainly on
voice and data (Internet access). Many other applications/services under
NGN concept are still unclear
Network concept(1) : Fully NGN or Pre-NGN concept ?:Pre- NGN
concept has been chosen for new subscriber lines extension project. A
small scale fully NGN project is being considered for the niche markets
Network concept(2): As Pre- NGN concept has been chosen, Soft
switches are therefore required as the core network where access
networks are still based on traditional DLC with V.5.2 Interface.
Interoperability between vendors: As the protocols between soft
switches have not been finalized, under multi-vendor environment
traditional SS No.7 is required for interoperability among soft witches
Where TOT is headed ?(3)
Site references are strongly required from vendors to ensure
that each vendor has actively been involved in NGN technology in
terms of commercial products, experience, system performance
etc.
Acquisition process is based on international bidding process,
technical and price evaluation have been performed as standard
procedure
Nine bidders (product owners : USA, France,Germany,
Sweden, and China) have been involved in the TOT’s NGN project
Acquisition of NGN is now in the process of technical
evaluation
Major concerns on NGN implementation
TOT’s views
Network management : Requires new platform or Upgrading of the
existing platform to serve NGN requirements?
Interoperability: SIP-SIP (different vendors), SIP-ISUP conversion, MGSoft switch with H.248(under multi vendors)? , SS No.7 over IP (under multi
vendors)? , IN-NGN? , MGC-MGC:BICC vs SIP?
Signalling Gateway: Carrying SS No.7 (MSU) over IP protocol ?
Applications and services :Easy to use and understand by users?
Standardization: Standards have been finalized? Which standards are
required?
QoS : As good as TDM?
Migration of existing PSTN to NGN : How we safely migrate from
PSTN/ISDN to NGN ?
Can the ITU-FGNGN help us on time regarding the above concerns?
Conclusion
If NGN is considered as telecom innovation, Does the NGN comply with
the following characteristics?
• Relative advantage: Do people (users/adopters) think it is an
improvement over what already exists?
• Compatibility: Is it consistent with the values, experiences and needs of
the people (users/adopters) who might adopt it?
• Complexity: Will potential users find it easy to use and understand?
•Observalibility: How easy is it for people (users/adopters) to see its
results?
•Trialability: Can users/adopters experiment with the innovation before
deciding to adopt it?
Should the above characteristics be judged by the users and adpoters
/not innovator?
Source: Adapted from “Why innovation fails, Carl Franklin , Spiro press 2003
RIGHT
TECHNOLOGY
with
WRONG DECISION, at
WRONG
PLACE,
W R O N G
and
T I M E
LOOSES A TON OF MONEY !!