Transcript SOS1_03_B Baraniv2_CEC - Docbox

Interoperability, Drivers
and Inhibitors
Bernard Barani
Attaché - DG INFSO-D
[email protected]
ETSI Workshop “S.O.S Interoperability”
Sophia Antipolis, 26 May 2005
NB: The views expressed herein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the European Commission
Interoperability
There is no “One Size fits all” definition for
Interoperability
 Framework Directive, service focus;
 Software Directive, focus on portability of codes across
various machines and environments;
 Copyright Directive;
 EICTA White Paper;
 DRM High Level Group
 ????

Not a new notion, but rapidly evolving and acquiring new
dimensions
Interoperability
What is changing
Once, a notion for ICT industry experts, e.g ATM/MPEG/IP/DVB coexistence or compatibility. But:

an exploding number of heterogeneous network infrastructures, context
dependent (still);
 a plethora of (web) services, with multiple combination/bundling
capabilities;
 a bombing of (networked) Consumer Electronic devices, with most of the
functionalities unknown to the user;
 Threats and vulnerability of IP based systems, compared to former TDM
based systems

With networked ICT becoming more and more pervasive,
consumers are becoming intuitively aware of what
“interoperability” means (e.g DVD regional codes, fairplay DRM on
i_pod…). This may be the real change, i.e where the pressure on
interoperable solutions may be expected
Interoperability, multifaceted
• At the Network/Device Level
– Wireless/Mobile/Fixed/Cable/ISP/Broadcasting
networks need to interoperate
• At the Service/application Level
– Services need to run across homogeneous or
heterogeneous networks
• At the Media/Content Level
– Different media formats must coexist
Interoperability is not an end in itself. It has to answer policy challenges:
- Ensuring smooth technological transitions
- Creating opportunities for disruption and innovation
- Contributing to setting the right collaborative standards and widest
market footprint
- Optimising for innovation through accrued competition
Interoperability & Convergence
Does convergence push the case for interoperability??
In principle Yes, but:
 In addition to the plethora of technologies, It introduces novel
elements of complexity: m_payments, regulation on contents, rights
holder…
 Untested and risky business models: more opportunities, but
more risk;
 Different sectors (CE, mobile, broadband, broadcast..), with
different logics: reducing customer churn and getting increased
revenues; mastering content distribution; keeping control of
established customer base; starting completely new « opportunity
driven » businesses (e.g Skype)

For some players interoperability, insofar as it implies large
scale convergence with significant levels of substitution, may mean
risk of disappearing.
Interoperability is it a natural trend?
Still in the context of convergence:
 Untested business models, risks, requirement to protect
investments may drive proprietary closed solutions, e.g music
download fragmentation of devices and technologies;
 Some do however believe that market forces are enough to break
the walls:
"If you were to ask me which mobile device will take top place for listening to
music, I'd bet on the mobile phone for sure. As good as Apple may be, I don't
believe the success of the iPod is sustainable in the long run,“ (Bill Gates, to
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung)
 Some other believe that technology may be used as gatekeeper, no real
incentive to move towards real interoperability and that legislative and
regulatory intervention is needed (e.g case of Digital content portability and
copy right)
 But delicate issue to regulate on nascent markets;
The Digital media formats maze
Imaging
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
BMP
CLP
DCX
DIB
FPX
GIF
IMG
JIF
JPEG
MAC
MSP
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Audio
PCT
PCX
PNG
PPM
PSD
PSP
RAW
RLE
TIFF
WPG
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
a2b
•
AAC
•
AC-3
•
ADPCM
•
AIFF
•
ATRAC3+•
AU
•
CDDA
DPCM •
•
EPAC
MP3
Video
MP4
•
MPEG Audio •
PCM
•
QuickTime
•
RealAudio
•
TAC
TwinVQ (VQF)•
•
u-law
Compression •
WAV
•
WMA
ASF
AVI
DAT
DivX
DV
FLC
FLI
FLX
GIF
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
MPEG-1
MPEG-2
MPEG-4
QuickTime
RM
UIS
WMV
Interoperability
Regulations and possible impacts (examples)
 e.g content download authorised on an national basis , as a
function of the rights acquired with the local Collecting society. (IP
address filtering). Putting restrictions to “fixed mobile
convergence”, on the basis of national market organisations?
 regulation for Home Gateway interconnection or routing of
regulated services provided though « foreign » IP platforms,
 example of DVB-H case, will probably depend from sectorial
regulations. It is convergent, interoperable (mobile, broadcast). May
depend from sectorial developed regulation: TV w/o frontiers, e
commerce directive, regulatory package, copyright directive, ….
( broadcast? Mobile?)
 regulation has a potentially high impact on how
“interoperable systems” are deployed.
Media and Home Delivery, finding
the right equilibrium
Consumers’
needs, wants,
willingness
to pay
Interoperability depends critically on cross industry
agreements and on associated regulation/contractual
framework
Technology
industry
defining what
is possible
Media
industry
defining what
is “allowed”
Interoperability & Standards
There is a wide spread agreement that interoperability
critically depends on standards. Yes but:
 It can not be the only answer;
 Standards and options
 Standardise what ?? Interfaces only or more? API’s?
 Standards are not neutral;
 Open Source has a role to play, but is more an implementation
issue Open std is not ≡ to Open Source
Standards form a key part of the picture, not
necessarily the complete answer.
Network
Services
Network
Services
Network
Services
Telecoms
Telecoms
Telecoms
Multimedia
applications
MM
Middle
ware
Mobiles
applications
Multimedia
applications
IT
Middle
ware
IT
applications
IT
applications
Mobile
Middle
ware
Convergence
Mobiles
applications
Software: the fuel of Interoperability
Middleware
Network Services (IP)
Telecoms
Telecoms
Source: ITEMS International - 2004
Telecoms
Turning to Software
Software oriented middleware has implication on
standards development process:
 Previous typical sequence: ex ante standard development,
stable standard, development, product, business development;
 “Software” standardisation model: R&D and product
development; product launch; ex post standardisation; further
business development.
 Race for time and being « on time to market »;
Interoperability depends on how easy it is to define ex
post interfaces between software modules and
components (e.g REL/ODRL trans-coding)
Source: ITEMS International - 2004
Vulnerability and Privacy
• Increased connectivity, diversity
of devices, global resource
sharing and richer applications $20 billion
increase complexity, amplifying
the vulnerability of the network
15
and escalating the privacy
concerns.
- 60% of all e-mail is spam
– 80% of all PCs infested with
malware
Annual losses
10
5
0
1995
’96
’97
’98
’99
’00
’01
’02
’03
‘04
Challenges:
- Pervasive connectivity will increase vulnerability and privacy concerns, requiring
2000 new
software solutions,
- Establishment of “trusted” devices, servers and gateways will be required to
accommodate dynamic network infrastructure and provide end-to-end security,
- Containing the damage caused to businesses by malware, including the cost of fixing
systems and lost revenue.
Interoperability vs Security ??
Interoperability has to be
addressed Globally
North America
• Research on systems beyond 3G e.g.
at Motorola, Nortel, Lucent etc.
China
Dominated by global IT industry
• IEEE activities in
•
•
•
•
•
IEEE 802.11a, b, g, h, n
IEEE 802.15
IEEE 802.16, a, d, e
IEEE 802.20
IEEE 802.21
Europe
Global
activities
• Claims from start-ups and IT companies
to provide 4G solutions
•
• Flarion (Fast Low Latency Access with
Seamless Handoff and OFDM)
• Arraycomm – advanced antenna technology
and SDMA
• Navini Networks – Advanced beamforming
technology for range & coverage
• IP Wireless – TD-CDMA with IP core network
• Aperto Networks – Fixed Broadband
Wireless Access vendor
• Redline Communications – Fixed BWA
• Airspan – Fixed BWA
• Alvarion – Fixed BWA
• Intel – Active in 802.16 development and its
promotion in WiMAX
Many activities are on short-range and WLAN
enhancements
• UMTS
• UMTS enhancements
• Research on systems
beyond 3G in FP6
• 3G licenses not yet granted
• Research on beyond 3G in 863
FuTURE Project
• Joint Research Center Shanghai
CJK – China, Japan, Korea
• Cooperation on government level, one
working group on mobile
communication
Globally
• Cooperation between SDOs
• ITU-R Framework
Recommendation
• WWRF, since 2001
Snapshot of Asian Roadmaps - mobile
Korea
CJK:
Collaboration among China,
Japan and Korea for B3G
international Standards
☆ WiBro (Wireless Broadband, Portable Internet)
- 2.3 GHz, 10 MHz Bandwidth, 0.5 - 50 Mbps,
< 60 km/h
CJK
China
☆ FuTURE
- Chinese National Project
- 4 Phases:
① Ramp up
② Specification (2003 - 2005)
③ Implementation (2007 - 2007)
④ Standardisation (2008 -)
Japan
☆ mITF
- Forum in Japan for 4G &
Mobile Commerce, since
2001
- Commercial introduction
target: 2010
☆ Field experiments for 4G
wireless access
- DoCoMo, 100 Mbps
transmission with outdoor,
1 Gbps with indoor (MIMO)
See also FCC and proactive approach towards global
“standards/regulations”, e.g UWB
For some, there is nothing to
“interoperate”
SAT + WLAN, CPL...
•Satellite DSL offer
•Wireless DSL offer
•ADSL offer
(20<x< 50 subs./site)
2 Way SAT
(< 20 subs./site)
< 5 km
x
WIP, WiMax,...
AAA
(100>x>20 subs./site)
< 15 km
BRAS
x
Agregation
x
WIP+WLAN, CPL,...
Remote
DSLAM
ADSL, ADSL2,... (> 100 subs. / site)
< 5 km
Rural “Would be” ICT users require access to technology
Interoperability & Availability
Infrastructure development
Broadband for all
More user friendly equipment
New applications
Applications that are useful to all
Market dynamisation
Solve the standards riddle
Promote and communicate new services
(Source:Telefonica) 3 fronts to address simultaneously, Metcalfe law
and value of network, very close to the i2010 concepts
Technology Platform/Industrial Initiatives:
Facilitating global scale interoperability
(Aeronautic ACARE example)
GoP
Vision
2020
The Report of the
Group of
Personalities
(2000-2001)
Trying to address
issues through their
multiple facets,
including standards
and deployment
How
ACARE
SRA
The Strategic
What
Research Agenda
(2001-2002)
Stakeholders
- Revision every 2 years -
Research
Programmes
NEM/e_Mobility..
Public (EU, National,
Eurocontrol, etc.)
And Private (Industry)
Research
Projects
Examples of Concrete Interoperability
actions supported by DG INFSO
Trough IST/FP6
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DVB-H, 3G, China and Brazil;
MPEG over DVB-H, SVC, MPEG 21;
IPv4 IPv6 evolution, double stack migration;
DRM MPEG 21 Framework;
DVB CPCM Framework;
Ad Hoc Home Networks, OSGI environments;
Enterprise interoperability, RFID based integrated
systems;
• Digital Business Ecosystems, Ad Hoc Entreprise
networks
• …….
Policy, i2010
• An umbrella policy initiative, currently in the making;
• In the context of a renewed commitment to the Lisbon Strategy
• Commission adoption, planned Early June 2005, presentation to
the Council end of June, Resolution end of year
• 3 Pillars: deployment, innovation, inclusion
• Salient features include
– ICT as engine for growth
– favourable environment for deployment :regs, stds, targeted actions on
interoperability;
– research;
– cutting red tape (SME’s..)
–
in the context of telecom-media convergence
– …..
• Complemented with Competitiveness and Innovation Programme
Conclusions, promoting interoperability
Δ Interoperability as targeted Ad Hoc issue rather than
through all encompassing definition and approach;
Δ Empowering Consumers;
Δ Addressing complementary fronts: standards, but also
deployment, applications..
Δ Clarifying applicable regulation to converged &
interoperable environments;
Δ Possible careful public intervention where market failure &
market size justify,
Δ Importance of international co-operation
Δ i2010, FP7, CIP are supporting instruments