Policy Control, Decision and Enforcement to Deliver IMS Services: An Analyst Perspective Ronald Gruia Program Leader, Principal Analyst - Emerging Communications © 2008 Frost & Sullivan. All rights reserved. This document contains highly confidential information and is the sole property of Frost & Sullivan. No part of it may be circulated, quoted, copied or otherwise reproduced without the written approval of Frost & Sullivan.

The Future of the Mobile Enterprise Landscape “ At a Glance” Agenda IMS: Ready to Cross the Chasm? IMS Strengths & Caveats Policy Control: IMS Catalyst IMS QoS Support PDF Evolution Global PDF CAPEX Forecast A Word About Our Model Conclusions

“ At a Glance” Agenda

IMS: Ready to Cross the Chasm?

IMS Strengths & Caveats

Policy Control: IMS Catalyst

IMS QoS Support

PDF Evolution

Global PDF CAPEX Forecast

A Word About Our Model

Conclusions

IMS: Ready to Cross the Chasm? The most difficult step in the road to “crossing the chasm” is to conquer the early majority of mainstream market. Moore’s book is a worthy guide into how to be successful in establishing that first beachhead in the pragmatist market. Topics covered include product concept and positioning, defining the target market, developing a marketing plan, selecting the best distribution channel and pricing. Geoffrey Moore “ Crossing the Chasm: Marketing and Selling High-tech Products to Mainstream Customers” Founder of The Chasm Group Co-founder, Managing Director TCG Advisors Venture Partner Mohr Davidow Ventures

The most difficult step in the road to “crossing the chasm” is to conquer the early majority of mainstream market. Moore’s book is a worthy guide into how to be successful in establishing that first beachhead in the pragmatist market. Topics covered include product concept and positioning, defining the target market, developing a marketing plan, selecting the best distribution channel and pricing.

IMS: A More Efficient Service Implementation… Source: Frost & Sullivan PSTN “ Stovepipe” Service Model IMS Service Approach WLAN RAN IP Multimedia Subsystem . . . Application Servers Network Subsystem Base Station Subsystem Control Layer Application Layer Transport Layer Access Layer ... ... Multi-service IP Network Push to Talk Service QoS Billing / OSS Presence . . . . . . . . Interactive Gaming Service QoS Billing / OSS Presence . . . . . . . . Video Streaming Service QoS Billing / OSS Presence . . . . . . . . Billing / OSS QoS Presence Session Management and control Common functions are replicated Common functions are reutilized

25% of carriers surveyed concerned about standardization, 22% about “openness” and interoperability issues (Frost & Sullivan 2007 survey) … But Despite That, There is Still Some Skepticism Source: Frost & Sullivan n=53

25% of carriers surveyed concerned about standardization, 22% about “openness” and interoperability issues (Frost & Sullivan 2007 survey)

IMS Allows Operators to Charge Based on Services IMS charging allows operators to be more than “dumb pipe” providers (i.e. have a pricing based on transport) Source: Frost & Sullivan Enterprise Consumer All users

IMS charging allows operators to be more than “dumb pipe” providers (i.e. have a pricing based on transport)

Policy Control: One of the Catalysts for IMS QoS for the NGN (IMS architecture) must be at least as robust as that of the legacy network (POTS, cable, etc.) Difficult to characterize end-user behavior (interactivity is fundamental for IP services) Relative contention points due to technology or cost (i.e., in access links, at backhaul aggregation and at interconnect points) IP network needs to offer differentiated services with low operational complexity Need to effectively manage the way the network supports the applications running on it Control the behavior of a service running on the network depending on its underlying conditions Time-to-market for new services need to be faster than before Need to establish a few differentiated service packages in network to serve many applications, subscriber types (consumer, enterprise) and ASPs PM (Policy Manager) function in the Verizon led A-IMS initiative

QoS for the NGN (IMS architecture) must be at least as robust as that of the legacy network (POTS, cable, etc.)

Difficult to characterize end-user behavior (interactivity is fundamental for IP services)

Relative contention points due to technology or cost (i.e., in access links, at backhaul aggregation and at interconnect points)

IP network needs to offer differentiated services with low operational complexity

Need to effectively manage the way the network supports the applications running on it

Control the behavior of a service running on the network depending on its underlying conditions

Time-to-market for new services need to be faster than before

Need to establish a few differentiated service packages in network to serve many applications, subscriber types (consumer, enterprise) and ASPs

PM (Policy Manager) function in the Verizon led A-IMS initiative

IMS QoS Support Network QoS for IMS: provided by the Access Network (e.g. UMTS QoS) and the underlying IMS infrastructure (e.g. Diff-Serv support in routers/switches) IMS also provides a control mechanism based on the PDF (Policy Decision Function) element Key PDF functions: Authorizes and controls the resource usage for each bearer, which enables a cap on the resource consumption and prevents the theft of service and misuse of QoS Acts as a PDP (Policy Decision Point), with the GGSN being the corresponding PEP (Policy Enforcement Point) Exchanges Charging Correlation Identifiers with the GGSN, which allows the correlation of charging information generated in the PS and IMS domains Source : Alcatel-Lucent Old R5 Architecture

Network QoS for IMS: provided by the Access Network (e.g. UMTS QoS) and the underlying IMS infrastructure (e.g. Diff-Serv support in routers/switches)

IMS also provides a control mechanism based on the PDF (Policy Decision Function) element

Key PDF functions:

Authorizes and controls the resource usage for each bearer, which enables a cap on the resource consumption and prevents the theft of service and misuse of QoS

Acts as a PDP (Policy Decision Point), with the GGSN being the corresponding PEP (Policy Enforcement Point)

Exchanges Charging Correlation Identifiers with the GGSN, which allows the correlation of charging information generated in the PS and IMS domains

3GPP IMS Standards (Rel. 6 & 7) – PDF Evolution The separation of the PDF from P-CSCF was introduced in 3GPP R6. This enables the connection of access networks of different administrative domains to the same IMS network. Source : Operax

The separation of the PDF from P-CSCF was introduced in 3GPP R6. This enables the connection of access networks of different administrative domains to the same IMS network.

Global PDF CAPEX Forecast The PDF CAPEX is not expected to kick in until 2008 (based on carriers’ feedback) Bandwidth managers will be required by all three carrier types PDF demand is based on the usage of CSCFs (based on a cap-and-grow model) APAC and EMEA will make up the bulk of the regional demand for PDFs Source: Frost & Sullivan

The PDF CAPEX is not expected to kick in until 2008 (based on carriers’ feedback)

Bandwidth managers will be required by all three carrier types

PDF demand is based on the usage of CSCFs (based on a cap-and-grow model)

APAC and EMEA will make up the bulk of the regional demand for PDFs

A Word About Our IMS Model PDF CAPEX Calculation Source: Ronald Gruia, Frost & Sullivan (adapted from Bell Labs)

Why Will Horizontal Integration Work This Time Around? The concept of moving from a vertical integration model to a horizontal architecture is not new: the Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) was also supposed to reach that goal, but the AIN failed to reach its lofty expectations Million $ Question: Can this failure happen again with IMS? Differences to consider: IMS introduces standards/web-based programming models based on well known specifications such as SIP rather than closed, proprietary systems which required a substantial ramp-up period and a higher overall level of programming complexity Standard interfaces make it easier to replace a non-performing or non-cooperating vendor The value chain is much more fragmented, enabling the carriers to play vendors off each other and pick best-of-breed solutions in some instances

The concept of moving from a vertical integration model to a horizontal architecture is not new: the Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) was also supposed to reach that goal, but the AIN failed to reach its lofty expectations

Million $ Question: Can this failure happen again with IMS? Differences to consider:

IMS introduces standards/web-based programming models based on well known specifications such as SIP rather than closed, proprietary systems which required a substantial ramp-up period and a higher overall level of programming complexity

Standard interfaces make it easier to replace a non-performing or non-cooperating vendor

The value chain is much more fragmented, enabling the carriers to play vendors off each other and pick best-of-breed solutions in some instances

IMS allows operators to be “smart pipe” providers and offer various class of service (CoS) applications to consumer and enterprise subscribers. The entire IMS ecosystem will need to ensure that these applications should meet the end-user needs including QoS (Quality of Service). IMS also provides a control mechanism based on the PDF (Policy Decision Function) element. PDF became separated from the P-CSCF on 3GPP Rel. 6 The PCRF has the Gx interface for pushing policy for enforcement in the RAN and is a complement to the RACS and PDF. Even in the worst-case scenario in which IMS does not achieve the goals of AIN, it will at least be a good means to an end, by getting carriers and vendors to speak the same language and accelerating service delivery. IMS will provide operators with the ultimate sandbox to experiment with different applications and find the right combination for a certain customer segment. IMS will allow operators to fail more often and fail more cheaply than a legacy stovepipe implementation or a quick Web 2.0 style mashup. Conclusions

IMS allows operators to be “smart pipe” providers and offer various class of service (CoS) applications to consumer and enterprise subscribers. The entire IMS ecosystem will need to ensure that these applications should meet the end-user needs including QoS (Quality of Service).

IMS also provides a control mechanism based on the PDF (Policy Decision Function) element. PDF became separated from the P-CSCF on 3GPP Rel. 6 The PCRF has the Gx interface for pushing policy for enforcement in the RAN and is a complement to the RACS and PDF.

Even in the worst-case scenario in which IMS does not achieve the goals of AIN, it will at least be a good means to an end, by getting carriers and vendors to speak the same language and accelerating service delivery.

IMS will provide operators with the ultimate sandbox to experiment with different applications and find the right combination for a certain customer segment.

IMS will allow operators to fail more often and fail more cheaply than a legacy stovepipe implementation or a quick Web 2.0 style mashup.

Q & A Session Ronald F. Gruia Program Leader, Principal Analyst – Emerging Telecoms  rgruia@frost.com  416-490-0493 Thank You

Frost & Sullivan: Leading Growth Consulting & Research Firm with 30 offices across the globe and more than 45 years of partnership with Blue Chip firms