IETF 63 - Paris VOIPPEER BoF A Broadband Service Provider’s Perspective on VoIP Peering August 5, 2005 Presented by Jason Livingood The Context for VoIP Peering • If it originates on IP and terminates on IP, why convert it to something else in the middle? – Adds cost and complexity (operational & network). – Decreases control over: • User Experience • Services & Quality • Network / Troubleshooting • So… Keep communications IP-based, end-to-end. • IP networks are generally private & free of traditional telecom regulation. • Helps make possible new, broadband IP-based services, not possible via PSTN. • Many big economic and strategic motivations… 2 The Context for ENUM in VoIP Peering • Without ENUM: – – – – Each switch (CMS) is largely an island unto itself. Linking many CMSs is difficult to scale. Vendor-specific methods to share TN / IP data. Legacy / PSTN-centric solutions (inefficient via IP). • ENUM can tell me, for a dialed TN, what IP network element (CMS, Proxy, SBC, etc.) to send a call to. • Can help to enable easily scalable: – – – – – CMS-to-CMS calling (all PacketCable). PacketCable-to-SIP calling. Fixed-to-wireless calling. MSO-to-MSO calling. MSO-to-any IP-based carrier calling. • BUT, ENUM is just one part of the solution (lest we forget SIP). • Laying the foundation now: (1) Working to use ENUM as part of a solution to simplify call routing; peering work is incremental. (2) Working on backbone for peering and other uses (takes time). 3 Preparing a Backbone for Intra/Inter-Network Peering National Backbone Network Features • Links all the regional networks into a unified network. • Consolidates peering and interconnection with other operators. • Managed QoS delivery end-to-end with no third-parties involved. • Supports centralized management functions. Benefits Comcast territory • Over 19,000 route miles of national fiber • Covers 95+% of Homes Passed • All major peering points • Transport capability of >2500+ Gbps in 2005 • 40Gbps IP links in 2005 •QoS based voice, video and data over IP 4 • Very flexible and low cost linear and OnDemand video distribution. • Backbone transport payments to transit providers reduced. • Reduce overall operational costs and complexity by supporting centralization. • Increased revenue opportunities by providing high quality, national end-to-end services. Private ENUM & VoIP Peering • Development work underway with CableLabs (more later). • Could prioritize peering priorities based on economics (similar to peering analysis used in HSI peering) and/or business strategy. • Comcast and other parties could begin using private ENUM to peer without waiting for public “1.e164.arpa” being up and running. (Short-term hedge.) • Communications peering over IP could enable the federation of multimedia services not feasible over the PSTN due to bandwidth constraints. – Leverages unique capabilities of broadband networks. – Could include both TN-addressed and URI-addressed communications. 5 Public ENUM & VoIP Peering • Bi-Lateral / multi-lateral, private trees will only scale so far before operational and management challenges present themselves. • Thus, Public ENUM is a long-term goal. – What form will this take? (Carrier or User ENUM) • Without carriers in e164.arpa is the business model for “User” sustainable? – Will there be a mix of different peering types? • Private POPs, with committed capacity. • Public peering points. • Over the Internet generally, best effort (no QoS). • Bottom line: Working towards public ENUM in the future (very important), while hedging our bets with work on private ENUM in the shorter term. 6 Specific Near-Term VoIP Peering Challenges • Provisioning into / security for ENUM tree. • Normalization of different SIP profiles between providers. • Trust at network edge. • Security / encryption at network edge. • QoS at network edge / passing QoS between parties. • Lawful intercept. • Selection of best IP routes & advertising routes as # POPs increases. • Failover to PSTN routes in the event of IP route failure. • Explore the role of SBCs. • Some PacketCable™-related work on interfaces needed. – Evolves into part of PacketCable 2.0. 7 PacketCable™ 2.0 Standards Development • Driven to support: – Backward-Compatible (PacketCable Multimedia & PC 1.X) – Enhanced Telephony – Video Telephony – Cross-Platform (voice/video/data convergence) Features – Cellular Integration – Presence and Availability – ENUM / Peering – Commercial Service Extensions 8 In Summary • What VoIP Peering Is About for Us: – It is about a lot more than saving money. – It is more than just “voice” communications. – It is about enabling new services not possible on the PSTN. – It is about creating / increasing network effects; supercharging adoption. – It is about end-to-end control over communications and staying all-IP. – It is about reducing complexity & increasing efficiency vs. “PSTN-imitation” models. (“Keeping IP in VoIP”) • VoIP Peering is important to companies like Comcast. • Building network and systems infrastructure now. • Both ENUM and SIP are important to this effort; basic standards / protocol groundwork is there. • Some incremental standards work is necessary and vital to success. 9 Thank You! Questions? Jason Livingood jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com +1-215-981-7813 10