Examining the status of IMS

Presentation for IMS ARCS Stakeholder event

Toon Norp, Business Consultant

TNO is a leading independent contract research organization

Technology

About TNO
Founded by a Dutch law Independent organisation Annual turnover: EUR 579 mln ~ 4600 Employees
Services

Markets & Customer Behaviour Business Models

Organization & Processes

TNO Information and Communications Technology

Established: January 2003, bundling of former KPN Research with ICT related departments within TNO One of the largest ICT knowledge centres in Europe Annual turnover: EUR 42 mln 390 professionals, mainly PhD or MSc
TNO ICT expertise*

TNO and IMS

Extensive experience since start of IMS in standardisation IMS consultancy: strategy, impact analysis, RFQ & architecture support, business modelling IMS Experience Centre for proof of concept demonstrations IMS surveys Standardisation

IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event

Dublin, October 2008

Outline
IMS survey

IMS strategy

IMS status

IMS interoperability

Conclusions

IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event

Dublin, October 2008

IMS Survey

IMS surveys
IMS vendor survey *)
In 2007 TNO conducted a survey amongst some 20 IMS vendors to hear their views on IMS vision, interoperability and service creation

IMS operator survey *)

In 2008 TNO conducted a survey amongst 17 European operators to hear their views on IMS vision, business drivers, and IMS status
12% 24% Fixed Mobile 6% 58% Fixed + Mobile Carrier

*) The IMS vendor survey report is freely downloadable via www.tno.nl/ims, the IMS operator survey report can be purchased via the same website. 4 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS Strategy

IMS strategy options

Service Integration

Operator provides integrated services Service innovation is key

Applications provided by third parties 3rd party Operator add billing, QoS, subscription and Intermediary basic connectivity Operator provides same services as before Cost reduction Replace existing network with IMS network to achieve OPEX reduction

IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event

Dublin, October 2008

IMS Strategy

First IMS services

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Consumer VoIP fixed VoIP for mobile IP TV VCC IPX SIP truncking Presence / messaging Routing service Hosted PBX Other 0%

Operator plans

24%

17%
Replacement services Enriched voice

Vendors view

Fixed Mobile Convergence

24% 34%

Other

Voice services focus of first IMS deployments

6 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS Strategy

Main business driver for IMS

None OPEX/CAPEX reduction Network evolution / rationalisation Shorter time to market Legacy VoIP replacement PSTN replacement Converged services Alignment with standards 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

[IMS is] Strategic platform for OPEX savings. [IMS is] Strategic platform for OPEX savings.

OPEX/CAPEX savings and converged services are the main business driver for operators to migrate to IMS
7 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS Status

Status of IMS with European operators

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

18% 34% 24% 0% 24%

Not thinking about it Considering future use Experimenting / trials Concrete plans for introduction Implementing infrastructure Commercial exploitation Decision not to implement IMS

Mar-06

Oct-06

Apr-07

Nov-07

Jun-08

Dec-08

Jul-09

Jan-10

Aug-10

Most operators will launch before 2010

8 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS Status

IMS market penetration

80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
80% 70% 60% 50% Less than 10% Less than 10% Between 10% and 25% Between 25% and 50% Between 50% and 100%

Between 10% and 25% 40% Between 25% and 50% 30% Between 50% and 100%
20% 10% 0% Year 1 Year 3 Year 5

Operator expectations for market pentration of IMS

Operator expectations for market pentration of IMS terminals

Full market penetration not expected within next 3 years

9 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS Status

Main obstacles for IMS

No real business driver Fixed and mobile on 1 platform Paradigm shift difficult No IMS devices available No IT interface standards Complexity High costs Immature technology 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Main obstacle is bringing IMS from a first deployment Main obstacle is bringing IMS from a first deployment for one or very few services into an established platform for one or very few services into an established platform leveraging Telco assets with mashed Internet services. leveraging Telco assets with mashed Internet services. Naturally the latter is at least as much a business model Naturally the latter is at least as much a business model issue as a technical challenge. issue as a technical challenge.

Immature IMS technology still an obstacle for operators

10 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS interoperabilty

Technical obstacles for IMS introduction

Complexity Interoperability Processing time No support multiple domains QoS guarantees 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Interoperability within one vendor is good. Interoperability within one vendor is good. Difficult with multiple vendors because of different Difficult with multiple vendors because of different interpretation of standards. interpretation of standards.

Operators see lack of IMS interoperability as an issue

11 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS interoperabilty

Lack of interoperability
66 % of vendors indicated IMS interoperability has not yet been achieved Different reasons mentioned for lack of interoperability
Percentage of respondents

Adaptations needed with each vendor

39%

Standards lacking

22%

Technology not mature enough

17%

Vendor specific additions

17%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Vendors didnt think interoperability has been achieved

12 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS interoperabilty

Lack of interoperability
WS SOA Service Exposure SCE XDMPOC IM P VCC TEL IPC SCIM SIP AS OSA SCS IM-SSF

Parlay X

IMS application layer:

standards lacking interoperability is a problem testing of many different entities

ISC interface
ISC well standardised vendor specifics

HSS

DNS CSCF PDF

PEF

MRF

IBCF MGCF IMS MGW

BG

ENUM

IMS control layer

well standardised few interoperability problems

IMS handsets
many issues on end-to-end integration adaptation still required

UE

ABG

IMS interoperability depends on layer

13 IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event Dublin, October 2008

IMS interoperabilty

Conclusions
IMS is an accepted technology amongst European operators
Operators are planning, implementing or commercially exploiting IMS technology

IMS is still immature

Interoperability issues lead to proprietary solutions

Initial services are voice oriented

Focus on voice makes interoperability and interconnection easier

14

IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event

Dublin, October 2008

Contact
Toon Norp Business Consultant Mobile Networks

TNO Information and Communication Technology Brassersplein 2 P.O. Box 5050 2600 GB Delft The Netherlands T +31 15 285 72 08 M +31 6 200 102 12 F +31 15 285 73 70 toon.norp@tno.nl

More information about TNOs activities related to IMS can also be obtained via www.tno.nl/ims

15

IMS ARCS Stakeholder Event

Dublin, October 2008