Titan against Titan: What Technology will Win? John Waclawsky Ph. D. From: Heavily

Titan against Titan:

What Technology will Win?

From: Heavily Centralized Control Paradigms

To: An Increasing Decentralized World via Internet and Web Technology

John Waclawsky Ph. D.

Services Architecture and Governance

Motorola, Inc.

Agenda

 Commonality vs. Competition

 Some Innovation Chemistry

 Chemistry Migration Lessons

 Innovation Eco-systems Model and Area of Common Benefit

 Goals and Results

 Technology Comparisons

 Some Challenges …Always Something

New!

 Lessons Learned

Technology Trends: Titan vs. Titan

MOTOROLA and the Stylized M Logo are registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office. All other product or service names are the property of their respective owners. © Motorola, Inc. 2007.

2

Competition and Commonality

Standards vs. De facto

ISO

IETF

ETSI

3GPP

W3C

A Key Standards Perspective:

Common mechanisms are good …for applications too?

1.

Some applications can leverage standards …billing etc.

2.

Belief: Common control into the application space will facilitate interoperability, easier application creation, more application utility and numerous new applications will emerge by extending commonality. This is a common perspective of IMS/SIP advocates



BUT: has IMS/SIP led to any new applications?

“differentiation IS the game”....

Geoffrey Moore



3

Competition and Commonality

(continued)

Standards vs. De facto de facto: Un-commonality is standard for applications

• Standards typically commoditize products tend to make products and services look more or less alike

• Standards may be giving competitors some control or even veto power

• Applications don't want to “talk” to each other for business reasons

• Innovators always look beyond standards for ways to lead

Smell Test: Will competition stop?

…a single solution /application / signaling / control / format / data protocol, or any other common way to serve customers in a non-competitive manner…

Applications drive technology usage, not the selection of some common protocol or standard .

4 Technology Trends: Titan vs. Titan


Where is Innovation Thriving?

…and what is driving it, …as if we didn’t know!

Consider the extended OSI model as “semi-permeable membrane for innovation molecules”!

…a part of the Four Area Innovation Model

Technology Trends: Titan vs. Titan 5


“extended”

The upper three layers are mainly about competitive issues

L10 - Technology Religion

L9 - Politics

L8 - Revenue and Profit

L7 - Applications

L6 - Presentation

L5 - Session

L4 - Transport

L3 - Network

L2 - Data Link

L1 - Physical

Model extended because:

•Accelerating technology changes

•Disruptions and redefinition

•Relentless on-going innovation

•Business decisions are colored by:

•Politics/Ideology,

•Financial considerations

•Technology religion (driven aspects of a company’s or even an individual’s personality).



Restricted Competition

1- System-Based

Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10

Politics

L9

Open Competition

3 – Component-Based

Telco / Cable co

TITAN s

Finance

L8

L7

L6

Internet Technology

TITAN s

L5

L4

L3

L2


2 – Connectivity Innovation L1

4 – Connectivity Innovation


RESULTS: Innovation Movement: Mostly “FROM” the Internet


Environment: Telco/Cableco

Open Internet

Environment

L10 - Religion

OSI

L9 - Politics

L8 - Finance

ISDN

SMS

PARLAY

Parlay-X

}

CAMEL/IN

SIP-3GPP

L7 - Applications

L6 - Presentation

L5 - Session

?

L4 - Transport

GSM/GPRS

ATM, DSL

X.25

DWDM, EDFA


L3 - Network

L2 - Data Link

L1 - Physical


Layering

}

Web

IM, eMail

VoIP

SIP-IETF

TCP/UDP

Network

Management

IP

Ethernet

8

Innovation Migration Lessons

1. Telco/Cable co's physical connectivity

2. Internet services

3. Upper layers: highlight the Telco/Cable co struggle at services.

4. Lower Layers: Telecom industry innovation has been centered on basic transmission technologies

(e.g., DWDM, EDFA, DSL, GSM)

5. Sometimes innovation stays within an eco-system and can be quite successful within it: SMS (what about IM), SIP (what about non-SIP)

6. Things change over time.

E-mail -> AOL -> Gmail

Internet is willing to eat its own children as well as the children of others. It isn’t apparent that any telco/cableco’s innovations are eating any Internet children.

L10

Layering

OSI

L9

SMS

SIP-3GPP

L8 ISDN

LTE

GSM/GPRS

IM, eMail

L7

L6

}

Web

VoIP

SIP-IETF

L5

?

WiMAX

L3

TCP/UDP

Network

Management

IP

X.25

Ethernet

L2

ATM, DSL

DWDM,

EDFA

L1




1- System-Based

Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion L10

Politics L9


Internet Technology is becoming increasingly

Finance

IP, TCP, Web…etc

L5

L7 competition environment” by providing access to and

L6 interacting with the incredible number of web

Benefit by following

Benefit by following L4 Benefit by following

L3

Area of Common Benefit!

(although unrecognized by some)


L2

L1


10

Early / Obvious Model Conclusions

 Everyone needs the bottom four layers of the

OSI model

The split is over how to exploit the top of the extended OSI model

 Incentive to follow successful lower layer standards and, as a result, allow networkconnected products and services to enjoy access to the widest audience

 Create new standards to extend connectivity when new technologies emerge or provide ways to better leverage the internet, such as WiMAX

“connectivity is its own reward” was often echoed by the early

Internet participants, and is embodied in Metcalfe’s law




Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10


Politics

GOALS:

•Standardizing communications including: Finance

•Interoperability between applications in their respective vertical markets,

• Centralized design for end-user control

• Total control of application behavior .

L9

L8

L7

GOALS:

• Standardize basic building blocks of communication, NOT application behavior or control of end users .

• Everyone to benefits from connectivity.

RESULTS:

Meeting goals rooted in existing thinking about networking

•A highly-controlled, but muchreduced experimentation environment

•Depressed innovation activity

•From our innovation migration lessons, it is becoming more apparent the trend is that the Internet is the

L5

L6

L4

L3

L2

RESULTS:

• Experimentation for new applications, services and technology exploded

•Innovation breeding ground spawning numerous high-market capitalization companies: Amazon, Google, eBay…

•Enormous wealth engine - February 6th

2006 SIP Forum [1] presentation that concluded “ The Internet is responsible for the largest creation of shareholder value in the shortest time in history.”

[1] http://www.sipforum.com/

12

L1



Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion L10


A recent example is SIP

Politics L9

Will SIP cross-over?

Finance L8

L7

IMS possibilities?

IMS

L5

L6

Moving this way?

Defacto



Benefit by leading


The standardized lower levels have also helped solve the bootstrap problem for innovators. These layers facilitate the spread of new, unconventional products and services at the higher layers of the protocol stack. Via existing standardized lower such new innovations driving concepts such as social networking. That's a key reason




System-Based Innovation

Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10


Component-Based Innovation

System technologies about control :

Politics

L9

Consider an evolution about relationships

• IMS

• Quality of Service (QoS)

• Deep Packet Inspection (DPI)

• RST Injection for TCP protocol

Finance

• Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)

• Digital Rights Management (DRM)

Control technologies are mainly desired by companies in the restrictive competition eco-system but have little value for the end-user customers .

L5

L8

L7

L6

L4

• Mashup’s

P2P

• Encryption

• People technology

• Creating: Blogs, user generated content, podcasts

• Connecting: Social networks, virtual worlds

• Collaborating: Wikis and Open Source

• Reacting to others: Forums, Ratings, Reviews

• Organizing content: Tags

• Staying aware: RSS, widgets and Twitter

• Cloud computing (XMPP)

• Traffic Scattering

• Network coding

Other related issues:

1.

Infrastructure costs!

2.

Privacy concerns!

3.

Missing services/functions?

L3

L2

Many of these technologies have demonstrated considerable end-user value (for example, Bit Torrent, Skype, etc.) but many are

“ perceived” to provide little or no value to the restrictive competition eco-system.

14

L1



Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10


Application vs. No Application

Politics

Centralized: delivered and controlled by a server

Finance

L5

L8

L7

L6 e.g. IMS and SIP technologies are designed around an application infrastructure supporting paradigm

L4

L3

Distributed: Built on demand, distributed and controlled by the end user devices

Mashup’s and P2P technologies about applications becoming obsolete?


L1


P2P

(edge to edge)

Anyone can offer a service to anyone else!

Mainly Involves:



Sharing of resources by direct exchange

(NO man in the middle!),



Ability to self organize

(NO control from the middle!),



Deal with intermittent connectivity

(NO state maintained or master data base in the middle!),

…of the peers, for the peers, by the peers



16


Networking

Protocol Layers


Religion

L10

Control: of What? …and How?

Politics

L9

Centralized: IMS

Finance

and SIP

L8

L7

Distributed: P2P and IM

L5

L6

L4

L3

We are moving from an early technology world where we had to talk to machines in their language to an emerging world

Technology Trends: Titan vs. Titan where machines will talk to us in our language 17



Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10


L9

What about Lawful Interception (LI)?

Centralized: Circuit Finance

BTW: this is all true for any kind of traffic

L8

L7

Distributed: VoIP

 IP provides numerous methods to ensure data security.

 Data network: Session

Border Controller (SBC)* as

L5 the point of convergence for VoIP packets.

L6

 no standardized manner to distinguish voice packets

Implementing LI on SBC is the VoIP equivalent of wire tapping on a circuit switched network.

L4

 no telling which path the

IP packet will take

L3

 what headers get added.

*SBC is typically a VoIP session aware device that governs the manner in which VoIP calls are initiated, conducted and terminated in a network.

Decentralization is effecting LI too!


L2

L1


18



Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10




Politics

L9


• IMS




Finance



L8

L7

L6

• Mashup’s

• P2P

• Encryption










L5

L4

• Network coding


1.

Infrastructure costs

2.

Missing services/functions

3.

Privacy concerns

L3

L2

Many of these technologies have demonstrated considerable end-user value (for example, Bit Torrent, Skype, etc.) but many provide little or no value to the restrictive competition eco-system.

19

L1


What could end-users see?

Bluetooth(R)

802.11a

802.11b/g

GSM/GPRS

CDMA

IR

RFID

GPS

UWB

WiMAX

UMTS

802.20

TV / Radio

NFC

Etc.

Cable TV

Internet

Digital

Rabbit ears

Satellite TV

TV/Radio

GSM/GPRS

CDMA

UWB

WiMAX

UMTS

802.20

NFC

Etc.



What could

STB’s see?

20



Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10




Politics

L9


• IMS




Finance



L5

L8

L7

L6

• Mashup’s

• P2P

• Encryption











L4


1.


2.


3.

Privacy concerns

L3

L2


L1


21

Network Coding

• Network coding is a field of information theory and coding theory and is a method of attaining maximum information flow in a network

• The core notion of network coding is to allow and encourage mixing of data at intermediate network nodes .

• In contrast to traditional ways to operate a network that try to avoid collisions of data streams as much as possible

• A receiver sees these data packets and deduces from them the messages that were originally intended for the data sink.

• This is an elegant principle that implies a plethora of surprising results http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci1267914,00.html

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=breaking-network-logjams&SID=mail

Is current core network controlled thinking about packets becoming obsolete?





Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10




Politics

L9


• IMS




Finance




L5

L8

L7

L6

L4

• Mashup’s

• P2P

• Encryption










• Network coding


1.


2.


3.

Privacy concerns

L3

L2


L1


23

QoS

How can QoS work today and in the future?

….when you consider…

• Emerging future: overlay techniques (P2P), mashup’s, traffic scattering, network coding.

• Encryption or use packet-obfuscation

Lowest prioritization for all encrypted traffic? – Privacy is systematically discriminated against.

• Most of the time the SERVERS ARE SLOW and NOT the network.

• Low Utilization is a fundamental part of network design

Redundancy for reliability. Capacity for peak loads. What does it mean to run a link/box at 10%?

• Race with Moore's Law

Link queue can empty faster than you can run instructions to make QoS decisions.

• QoS adds complexity

Fiber capacity shifts bottlenecks from pipes to nodes and because of the enormous fiber speeds available, adding node queues to the mix of things that need to be QoS configured and managed doesn't appear to simplify the QoS challenges.

• Where is the ROI?

• etc.

QoS is NOT an adequate substitute for capacity and potentially makes a bad situation much worse





Networking

Protocol Layers

Religion

L10



Why this fixation about control ?

Politics

L9

Evolution driven by Moore’s Law

• It is rooted in scarcity concerns Finance about the capacity of the physical layer infrastructure.

• This results in a quest to “manage all the traffic” at the higher layers to prevent network resource depletion

To avoid a network wide meltdown

•Irrational fear? – I see this perspective hidden in the term

“ Network Management ” which is a code word for control

L5

L8

L7

L6

•Twisted light: excess of 560 Gbps on a single wavelength in a DWDM system today

• In the near future it is expected that data rates in excess of 1000

Gbps per wavelength will be possible

•Optical Orbital Angular Momentum (OOAM) has the potential to add an almost infinite number of phase states to the modulated signal and further increase the capacity to thousands of terabits.

•The number of wavelengths (colors) on a fiber is currently around 80 and climbing

•The number of fibers between Internet peering points is approx 200.

L4

OK …you do the math! …looks like the optical to electronic bottleneck makes it impractical to practice

“network management” in the core network


1.


L3

L2

Is the real challenge managing scarcity? …or simply keeping up with technology’s ability to satisfy growing demand.

2.


3.

Privacy concerns

L1

25 http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1367-2630/9/9/328/njp7_9_328.html#nj250899s1 http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=04388855 http://www.networkworld.com/news/2007/021507-dont-expect-video.html


At the Heart of the thing known as

“The Internet”

• It’s an environment that fosters experimentation

Clearly "the place" for innovation of communication services

Seems to be about the absence of impediments

The lack of impediments seen in one eco-system and not the other appears to be making a huge difference in where innovation (and the associated wealth it generates) will be most successful.

• More experimentation then more luck! More $$$!

A major part of innovation is what we can call unexpected usage (or luck).

However, the luck seems to be on the Internet side these days.

• Application-independent,

TCP/IP or UDP are the backbones of the end-to-end nature of the Internet.

If history is any guide, a betting man would probably look for the next large market cap company to be about services and come from the Internet eco-system.



A Major Challenge for the Restricted ecosystem Technology….

How can any technology which relies on extensive core network control and takes an application focus and consider packet information invariant, adapt to overlay techniques found in P2P networks, traffic scattering, network coding, the increasing use of encryption, the emergence of cloud computing, as well as trends related to dynamically composed and instantiated concoctions (formally known as applications) at the edge of the network?

The web is becoming “THE” programming development platform. Now, many view the web as the ultimate programming platform that helps all of humankind



27

Reality Summary

 Early, half-baked is rewarded better

 striving for perfect is the enemy of good, and doing so is very time consuming, very expensive, and easily by-passed

 Everyone wants to differentiate their products

 People always dream of reaching de facto nirvana

 Lock in your customers

 mine your customer set with derivative products and advertising;

 Politics (or group affiliation) overrides many choices

 Economic incentives to succeed in the market are the major goals tied to differentiation strategies

 Technology religion (personality preferences) will override the benefits of standards to product developers and people running companies focused on success.



Conclusions

Which Titan is winning??

Restricted vs. Open – this debate is still being waged on the technology battlefield

…The Internet eco-system has spawned great wealth, a massive number of jobs and even helped governments to grow tax revenues across the planet.

Understanding competition dynamics on innovation is critical for any company trying to anticipate where the technology is going, instead of chasing it



Advice ….Some Thoughts

It is about winning…..

You should ask for: …the serenity to accept the things I cannot change

(attempts to control the Internet), the courage to change the things I can

(business cases that ignore reality),

…..and most importantly…

…the wisdom to know the difference!



30

Titan against Titan: What Technology will Win? John Waclawsky Ph. D. From: Heavily

Titan against Titan:

What Technology will Win?

Agenda

Telco / Cable co

TITAN s

Internet Technology

TITAN s

WiMAX

Area of Common Benefit!

Centralized: delivered and controlled by a server

Distributed: Built on demand, distributed and controlled by the end user devices

Mainly Involves:

Sharing of resources by direct exchange

Ability to self organize

Deal with intermittent connectivity

Control: of What? …and How?

Centralized: IMS

and SIP

Distributed: P2P and IM

BTW: this is all true for any kind of traffic

Decentralization is effecting LI too!

Conclusions

Advice ….Some Thoughts

Related documents

Products

Support

Titan against Titan: What Technology will Win? John Waclawsky Ph. D. From: Heavily

Titan against Titan:

What Technology will Win?

Agenda

Telco / Cable co

TITAN s

Internet Technology

TITAN s

WiMAX

Area of Common Benefit!

Centralized: delivered and controlled by a server

Distributed: Built on demand, distributed and controlled by the end user devices

Mainly Involves:

Sharing of resources by direct exchange

Ability to self organize

Deal with intermittent connectivity

Control: of What? …and How?

Centralized: IMS

and SIP

Distributed: P2P and IM

BTW: this is all true for any kind of traffic

Decentralization is effecting LI too!

Conclusions

Advice ….Some Thoughts

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib