WebRTC for Telco: Informa's WebRTC Global Summit Preconference

17,042 views

Published on

The preconference workshop I did at Informa's WebRTC Global Summit in London, 31st of March 2014

It is targeted at bringing people up to speed with what WebRTC is, how people and vendors are using it today and placing it also in the context of the telecom world (which is the focus of this specific conference).

Published in: Technology
3 Comments
34 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
17,042
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4,828
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
603
Comments
3
Likes
34
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

WebRTC for Telco: Informa's WebRTC Global Summit Preconference

  1. 1. WebRTC in Telecom A Workshop March 2014 Tsahi Levent-Levi
  2. 2. About Me • Too many years in the telecom industry. Mainly VoIP • Developer, Product Manager, CTO • Had my share of standardization and patents • Write about WebRTC and other topics • Published the WebRTC for Business People report • Consulting 3/31/2014 2 Tsahi Levent-Levi tsahil@bloggeek.me @tsahil
  3. 3. From Basics to Telco with WebRTC 1. What is (and isn’t) WebRTC History, specification, browsers and mobile 2. WebRTC vs VoIP How does WebRTC compare to other VoIP protocols? 3. The WebRTC Ecosystem Vendor types, trends and use cases 4. Telecom and WebRTC IMS, RCS and the real opportunities 5. Open Discussion and Q&A 3/31/2014 3
  4. 4. What is (and isn’t WebRTC) 1. What is WebRTC? 2. History of WebRTC 3. The WebRTC Specification 4. Browser support 5. Mobile and WebRTC 3/31/2014 4
  5. 5. What is WebRTC? What is (and isn’t) WebRTC? 3/31/2014 5
  6. 6. 3/31/2014 6 WebRTC offers real time communication natively from a web browser WebRTC is a media engine with JavaScript APIs
  7. 7. 3/31/2014 7 WebRTC is a Technology not a Solution TheBusyBrain
  8. 8. How are Calls Made with WebRTC? 3/31/2014 8 1 2 3 4 5
  9. 9. WebRTCArchitectures: Triangle 9 Media Signaling
  10. 10. WebRTCArchitectures: Trapezoid 10 Media Federation Signaling
  11. 11. Key Features • MediaStreams – access to the user’s camera and mic • PeerConnection – easy audio/video calls • DataChannels – p2p application data transfer 11
  12. 12. What does it provide? • Real-time • Voice, video and data • Browser based • No plugins • Secured • Interoperable (between browsers) 12
  13. 13. So What? 3/31/2014 13 No Plugins No Downloads No Installations No App Store No SignalingFree (as in BSD) No Patents No Media Eng.
  14. 14. Why all the fuss? 3/31/2014 14
  15. 15. History of WebRTC What is (and isn’t) WebRTC? 3/31/2014 15
  16. 16. On2 & GIPSAcquisitions Assets Customers Google’s Target On2 Feb 2010 VPx video codecs Adobe WebM GIPS May 2010 iLBC, iSAC voice codecs Voice Engine Video Engine Skype, Google, Yahoo, Avaya, … WebRTC 16
  17. 17. The (short) History of WebRTC 3/31/2014 17
  18. 18. The Future? 18
  19. 19. The WebRTC Specification What is (and isn’t) WebRTC? 3/31/2014 19
  20. 20. Standardization • IETF – “network” • W3C – “api” • Based on existing standards • Large vendors involved: Google, Cisco, Mozilla, Microsoft, AT&T, Ericsson, etc. 20
  21. 21. Main IETF Documents 21 Document Title Reference Overview Overview: Real Time Protocols for Brower- based Applications draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview Use cases and requirements Web Real-Time Communication Use-cases and Requirements draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and- requirements RTP usage Web Real-Time Communication (WebRTC): Media Transport and Use of RTP draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage Security architecture WebRTC Security Architecture draft-ietf-rtcweb-security-arch Threat model Security Considerations for WebRTC draft-ietf-rtcweb-security Data channel RTCWeb Data Channels draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel JSEP Javascript Session Establishment Protocol draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep Audio WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing Requirements draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio Quality of service DSCP and other packet markings for RTCWeb QoS draft-dhesikan-tsvwg-rtcweb- qos-02
  22. 22. WebRTC Protocol Stack 22
  23. 23. Transport • Media transport based on SRTP • No RTP at all – only encrypted media • “Latest and greatest” of RTP got mandated • AVPF • Multiplexing • Etc. 3/31/2014 23
  24. 24. Media • No Mandatory To Implement (MTI) video codec yet 3/31/2014 24 Codec Use Specification G.711 Narrow band, selected for PSTN and VoIP interworking RFC 3551 Opus New flexible audio codec. Narrow to wideband support; Support for Speech & Music RFC 6716 DTMF Telephone events RFC 4733 VP8 Google’s open source codec RFC 6386 H.264 Video codec (MPEG-LA licensing) RFC 6184
  25. 25. NAT traversal • “Almost” like SIP • STUN – Enables announcing your public IP addresses during the negotiation phase of a session • TURN – Relays all media via a TURN server that is visible to all parties in the session • ICE – Decide on the best solution to send media (direct, STUN or TURN) • Trickle ICE – Speed up the process of the ICE protocol by parallelizing its handling of candidates • New specification, implemented in WebRTC • Slowly trickling into SIP and XMPP 3/31/2014 25
  26. 26. Browser support What is (and isn’t) WebRTC? 3/31/2014 26
  27. 27. Where? 1.2 Billion Enabled devices 27
  28. 28. Solving Browser Support 1. Ignore • Offer the service on supporting browsers only • Either don’t show WebRTC capabilities or block un supporting browsers • Videodesk.com isn’t showing the capabilities • popexperts blocks such browsers from access to the actual service 2. Plugin • Build a plugin for non-supporting browsers • AddLive and Weemo do that 3. Downgrade to “Flash” • Use Flash where WebRTC doesn’t work (and have interoperability headaches) • Requestec and Apidaze took this route 4. Don’t use WebRTC at all 28
  29. 29. Mobile and WebRTC What is (and isn’t) WebRTC? 3/31/2014 29
  30. 30. Mobile is Tricky 3/31/2014 30
  31. 31. Mobile is Tricky 3/31/2014 31 • People don’t install a browser on their phones • People use apps to access communications features • WebRTC isn’t really available on mobile
  32. 32. Progress in Mobile • Android KitKat • Migration towards Chrome-based WebView • In 2014 • WebRTC in WebView (Android) • Opus 1.1 • Echo cancellation optimizations (Android) • Better bandwidth estimation • Video for iOS devices 3/31/2014 32
  33. 33. 4 Routes to Mobile 1. Ignore mobile 2. Only on supported browsers 3. Port and pack in an app 4. Wait 3/31/2014 33
  34. 34. WebRTC vs VoIP 1. Anatomy of a VoIP solution 2. SIP versus WebRTC 3. XMPP or SIP signaling for WebRTC? 4. Interoperability with legacy VoIP deployments 3/31/2014 34
  35. 35. Anatomy of a VoIP solution WebRTC vs VoIP 3/31/2014 35
  36. 36. TheAnatomy of a VoIP Solution 3/31/2014 36 Infrastructure Signaling Media Processing Codecs Source:
  37. 37. Boundaries of WebRTC 3/31/2014 37 Infrastructure Signaling Media Processing Codecs Source:
  38. 38. SIP versus WebRTC WebRTC vs VoIP 3/31/2014 38
  39. 39. But What about SIP (and IMS)? 3/31/2014 39 Protocol WebRTC SIP Market Websites and web apps Voice and IMS deployments Media SRTP RTP or SRTP NAT traversal STUN, TURN, ICE STUN, TURN, ICE Media negotiation SDP SDP Voice codecs G.711, Opus G.711, G.7xx, AMR-xx, Speex, SILK, Opus, … Video codecs VP8 H.263, H.264 API Java Script Unspecified
  40. 40. APIs or Interoperability? 3/31/2014 40 Software Professionals Academia Hobbyists & Enthusiasts Mobile Developers Device Manufacturers Infrastructure Vendors WebRTC Traditional VoIP
  41. 41. AChange in Mindset Brain: How are going to get the Earth to lose weight? Pinky: I know! We can get everyone to go on a diet! Brain: Diets don't work. Pinky: Not even if you call them 'A Whole New Way of Eating?‘ Brain: No. 3/31/2014 41
  42. 42. Interoperability • All products use the same network interface • Targeted at 100’s of vendors • Requires much IOT testing API • All developers use the same programming interface • Targeted at building a developer ecosystem • Built on a small set of base implementations • Each vendor has his own island of a service 42 API versus Interoperability
  43. 43. XMPP or SIP signaling for WebRTC? WebRTC vs VoIP 3/31/2014 43
  44. 44. 3/31/2014 44
  45. 45. Signaling Options in WebRTC 45 Technique Advantages Server Side Requirements WebSocket No signaling infrastructure required WebSocket server with proprietary protocol implementation XHR No signaling infrastructure required Web server with proprietary protocol implementation SIP over WebSocket Easy path to SIP interoperability (and PSTN connectivity) SIP Registrar/Proxy server with support of SIP over WebSocket XMPP/Jingle Easy interoperability with XMPP clients XMPP server with support of XMPP WebSocket transport Data Channel Low latency signaling and improved privacy WebSocket or web server with proprietary implementation to establish the Data Channel
  46. 46. SIP over WebSockets • RFC 7118 – Fresh from the oven • Nothing to write home about. Think TCP (or UDP) and now replace with WebSocket • Already existing implementations: • Server side • Asterisk • FreeSWITCH • Client side • jsSIP • sipML • … 46
  47. 47. WebSockets + Fallback • WebSockets don’t always work • Not supported by all browsers • Not all web proxies can handle them • Web servers not always implement them • Fallback to XHR/SSE/Flash/Whatever • Best options in town: • Socket.IO (http://socket.io/) • SockJS (http://sockjs.org) 47
  48. 48. Interoperability with legacy VoIP deployments WebRTC vs VoIP 3/31/2014 48
  49. 49. 3 Points of Entry to Our Networks 1. Put WebRTC in the MCU • Any video call from WebRTC into the enterprise goes through the MCU • Takes up ports, and doesn’t realize the power of WebRTC 2. Put WebRTC in the SBC • A gateway of sorts, but with “improved” security • Still not using the power of WebRTC • Also – WebRTC doesn’t have any real use for an SBC 3. Use a Gateway for WebRTC • Works, but still – not using the power of WebRTC 3/31/2014 49
  50. 50. 3/31/2014 50 …
  51. 51. Gatewaying: Client Included Gateway/SBC vendor offers the client side (SDK/Widget/Other) 3/31/2014 51 HTML5 Client WebRTC JS SIP / Other SRTP WebSocket SIP / IMS PSTN GW
  52. 52. Gatewaying: Programmable • Gateway vendor offers control API • Customer build the client as he sees fit, interfacing with the gateway’s APIs from his own web server 3/31/2014 52 My-service HTML5 Client WebRTC ? SIP / IMS PSTN SRTP GW
  53. 53. IMS and WebRTC 3/31/2014 53
  54. 54. 3/31/2014 54
  55. 55. Back to WebRTCArchitectures… 3/31/2014 55 Media Signaling Federation Media
  56. 56. WebRTCArchitectures 3/31/2014 56
  57. 57. Triangle or Trapezoid? 3/31/2014 57
  58. 58. Trapezoid = Federation • Agreement on communications protocol • Business agreement 3/31/2014 58 SIP, XMPP
  59. 59. Traditional Means of Communications I use my service to call your service 3/31/2014 59 Carrier A Carrier B
  60. 60. Triangle • Single service takes care of its own • Federate via PSTN for monetization 3/31/2014 60 OTT
  61. 61. The “WebRTC Way” of Communicating 3/31/2014 61 I reach out to you at your URL Carrier A Carrier B
  62. 62. 3/31/2014 62 The Ecosystem thewritingzone
  63. 63. Vendor Types in the Ecosystem 3/31/2014 63 2nd Market Vendors Tooling WebRTC Core Repurpose
  64. 64. Core: The Browser Vendors 3/31/2014 64 2nd Market Vendors Tooling WebRTC Core Repurpose • Google & Mozilla • But also Vidyo • Contributed SVC to the WebRTC ecosystem • & Cisco… • OpenH264 for WebRTC • Microsoft & Apple missing • How does it affect WebRTC’s future? • How does it affect IE & Safari market share?
  65. 65. Tooling Vendors 3/31/2014 65 2nd Market Vendors Tooling WebRTC Core Repurpose • Providing infrastructure and “shortcuts” for developers • WebRTC API vendors: Tropo, AddLive, TokBox, OpenClove, … • Services vendors: XirSys, PubNub, … • Infrastructure vendors: GENBAND, Dialogic, … • SDK vendors: Digium, Eyeball Networks, …
  66. 66. The “Vendors” 3/31/2014 66 2nd Market Vendors Tooling WebRTC Core Repurpose • Providing services based on WebRTC • Develop either directly on top of WebRTC or via tooling vendors • Target the end users via a multitude of use cases
  67. 67. 2nd Market 3/31/2014 67 2nd Market Vendors Tooling WebRTC Core Repurpose • Vendors adopting other vendor’s end user solutions • TNW Academy’s story
  68. 68. 3/31/2014 68 2nd Market Vendors Tooling WebRTC Core Repurpose Repurposing WebRTC • Reusing WebRTC’s components to fit in other places, treating it as a pure media engine • Vonage – going mobile with an OTT app • M5T – Client SDK for developers
  69. 69. Where are we Now? 3/31/2014 69
  70. 70. Shifts in the Ecosystem 3/31/2014 70 Customer-facing Services Tooling Vendors
  71. 71. Use Cases 3/31/2014 71 & Business Models
  72. 72. Top Use Cases 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Mar ‘14
  73. 73. Business Models in “Search Mode” Subscription Unknown Device selling Project based Pay as you go None Freemium Licensing Revenue sharing Support Mar ‘14
  74. 74. Telecom and WebRTC 1. Possible routes Telcos can take 2. What vendors “sell” to carriers? 3. What are carriers doing? 3/31/2014 74
  75. 75. Possible routes Telcos can take Telecom and WebRTC 3/31/2014 75
  76. 76. 3/31/2014 76 …
  77. 77. Possible Routes for Carriers with WebRTC • Infrastructure Play • APIs • Enterprise Focus • Internal Consumption • CDN & Streaming • IMS/RCS Extension 3/31/2014 77
  78. 78. Infrastructure Play • STUN/TURN Hosting • Multipoint Bridge • Recording/Archiving Service • Gateway • Low Latency Network • QoS Work via partnerships 3/31/2014 78 uwehermann
  79. 79. APIs • Many vendors on the market • Different angles: languages, voice/video, API set, coverage, etc. Partner a vendor 3/31/2014 79
  80. 80. Enterprise/SMB Focus • Provide enterprise specific solutions • WebEx-like • Drum • … Partner commercially 3/31/2014 80 • UC offering • TenHands • vLine • BlueJeans • Vidtel • …
  81. 81. Internal Consumption • Remodel the contact center • Enabling web dialing with context • Enable app dialing with context • Add video – a la Kindle Mayday button Find a vendor/technology stack that fits 3/31/2014 81
  82. 82. CDN & Streaming • Augment “broadcasting” requirements with a P2P technology • Make use of WebRTC’s data channel • Suitable for VOD, IPTV, CDN, Caching • Multiple vendors in this domain All early stage. Follow this domain to build a strategy 3/31/2014 82
  83. 83. IMS/RCS Extension • Web-front to RCS • Technology of an OTT play of a Telco • Boring, but required – most NEPs here Offer regardless of IMS/RCS deployment 3/31/2014 83
  84. 84. 3/31/2014 84 We are here IMS Service Provider WebRTC Shameless copy from Victor Pascual Avila This is more interesting
  85. 85. 3GPP “Adopting” WebRTC Just another access into the IMS network 3/31/2014 85
  86. 86. What vendors “sell” to carriers? Telecom and WebRTC 3/31/2014 86
  87. 87. 3/31/2014 87
  88. 88. Ericsson • Focus on IMS Gateway domain • AT&T Foundry deployment • Supports both voice and video (video not via AT&T Foundry) • Launched Bowser • The first WebRTC supporting mobile browser • Proof of concept of the possibility to run WebRTC on mobile • Failure in adoption terms 3/31/2014 88
  89. 89. Alcatel Lucent • Focus on IMS domain • Push Telcos to offer web-based RCS clients by using WebRTC • Showed a startup use case @WebRTC Conference (Atlanta) • Vobi - Connecting the web to a telco IMS 3/31/2014 89
  90. 90. Huawei • Two routes for WebRTC: • An announced IMS Gateway to WebRTC  ALU strategy • Ongoing partnership with Tropo (Voxeo Labs)  Telefonica strategy 3/31/2014 90
  91. 91. Oracle • Acquired ACME Packet • Has WebRTC SBC capabilities • Launched an SBC @ Oracle OpenWorld • Working on integrating WebRTC into their core offerings 3/31/2014 91
  92. 92. GENBAND • Launched their own WebRTC Gateway (SPiDR) • Pouring marketing/sales $$ into it & pushing towards Tier-1 SPs • Acquired Fring – Israeli VoIP OTT • Plans on offering Telco OTT solutions • In such a case, WebRTC becomes the desktop browser client 3/31/2014 92
  93. 93. What are carriers doing? Telecom and WebRTC 3/31/2014 93
  94. 94. Telcos & WebRTC 3/31/2014 94 “Everyone talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it. Mark Twain
  95. 95. Telefonica • Acquired an API platform: TokBox • Focus is on external innovation with no relation to Telefonica’s existing assets (yet) About TokBox • 33 developers on acquisition • Below $50M acquisition • $26M funding raised • Focused on Video APIs (Flash & WebRTC) • Left “independent” – for now 95
  96. 96. AT&T • Plays with WebRTC in the San Jose Foundry (jointly with Ericsson) • Platform based on Ericsson, Phono and lately &yet • Makes the link between AT&T phone numbers to WebRTC calling capabilities • See https://js.att.io/ 96
  97. 97. CenturyLink • Third largest telecom company in the US • Started using WebRTC to deliver services directly to its customers • Using it to reduce the reliance on Telecom vendors • Viewing it as a way to “write once run anywhere” • First commercial service to launch during H1 2014 97
  98. 98. Vonage • Wanted to penetrate mobile & offer video • Ported WebRTC to iOS & Android • Added SIP signaling • Replaced voice codecs to meet their deployment • Used VP8 as the video codec • 1-5M downloads on Google Play 3/31/2014 98 • US Vendor • Provides phone service via broadband connection • 2.3M subscribers • Unlimited calling to over 60 countries
  99. 99. The Rest of the Pack • Initiating hackathons around RCS… and WebRTC • Thinking of what to do with it • Playing in their CTO labs • There are more opportunities in the carrier space than just IMS access 99
  100. 100. The Triangle of Tensions 3/31/2014 100 IMS
  101. 101. Wrap up 3/31/2014 101 1. What is (and isn’t) WebRTC History, specification, browsers and mobile 2. WebRTC vs VoIP How does WebRTC compare to other VoIP protocols? 3. The WebRTC Ecosystem Vendor types, trends and use cases 4. Telecom and WebRTC IMS, RCS and the real opportunities 5. Open Discussion and Q&A
  102. 102. Need More? 3/31/2014 102
  103. 103. Thank You! Tsahi Levent-Levi http://bloggeek.me tsahil@bloggeek.me 3/31/2014 103

×