Mr.Pansak Arpakajorn

TOT ,Thailand

NGN : the real future technology?APT Workshop on NGN

Hyderabad, India, 4 Aug.2004

Agenda

Objective

Definition

Lesson from the past

Why do operators need NGN?

Where TOT is headed?

Major concerns on NGN implementation

Conclusion

Objective

The main objective of this paper is to share information/opinions with APT participants who have been involved in NGN activities

Definition

A Next Generation Network (NGN) is ● a packet-based network ● able to provide services including telecommunication services ● able to make use of multiple broadband● QoS-enable transport technologies ● service-related functions are independent from underlying transport –related technologies● Offer unrestricted access by users to different service providers● Support generalized mobility which will allow consistent and ubiquitous provision of services to users

Source: ITU-T SG 2 : COM2-D-164-E

Lessons from the past(1)

In 1907, Manual system was installed in Thailand In 1935 ,SXS switch was first installed in Thailand In 1956,X-Bar switch was first introduced in Thailand In 1983, 47 years after SXS, Stored Program Control (SPC) system was first introduced in Thailand In 1998 , all X-bar switches had fully been replaced with digital switching technology (SPC)

• At present, the first generation of SPC switch is still in use with some modifications e.g. SS No.7, V.5.2 (the replacement of the first generation SPC will be based on soft switch technology instead of TDM)

Lessons from the past(2)

►Life cycle of technologies in the past longer than today's’?

1886 - 1907 (21 yrs.)

1907 - 1979 (72 yrs.)

1935 - 1976 (41 yrs.)

1959 - 1998 (39 yrs.)

1983 - Present

1993 - Present

2002 - Present

2000 - Present

2004

1875 1900 1925 1950 1975 2000

Magneto

Manual

SXS

CROSS BAR

SPC

ISDN

ATM

IP

NGN

Switching Technology Life Cycle

Lessons from the past(3)

The emergence of ISDN was seen to be the first step in a “telecom evolution” in the existing legacy telephone networks

• How many countries have succeeded in the implementation of 64 Kbit/s ISDN ?

•How much did telecom operators benefit from investing in ISDN?

•How many years had we spent for ISDN activities?

•How often do we use Fax.G4?

Lessons from the past(4)

Broadband ISDN was also seen to be the next step of future technology as a result of ISDN evolution

• B-ISDN standards : ITU-T vs ATM Forum e.g.B-ISUP vs ATM NNI• Today, have you ever heard the term B-ISDN commercially? The term B-ISDN is only used in the ITU Study Group for reference and study

► What went wrong with the above ISDN technologies?

Technological innovation fails ?

We are an early adopter?

We are the late adopter?

Lessons from the past(5)

“ ISDN was invented more than a decade ago, but with out PC-applications demand almost no one needed it. It ‘s amazing that phone companies invested enormous sums in switches to handle ISDN with very little idea of how it would be used.”

BILL GATE : The Road Ahead,1995

Lessons from the past(6)

FACT ABOUT FAX

Fax was invented in 1843 by Alexander Bain

The diffusion of fax began in 1983

The diffusion of fax occurred after await of 150 years! while the technology was shaped into its present form

►Many innovations eventually came good sometimes after decades or centuries !!

Why do operators need NGN?

The only one reason is “ technological innovation”- TDM

technology is technically obsolete and IP-based network is seen

as the future technology for telecommunication and information

• Is the above sentence true for us?: Clear for today/Unclear for

tomorrow

• Do we need time and money to prove this? : Yes, but no one can

guarantee our success! Technology is unpredictable!

• Are we ready to adopt NGN as the future technology? : Unclear

•Are we using all technologies efficiently ? : No, Technology life

cycle is shorter than before and many technologies do not meet

the market needs

Where TOT is headed(1)

Operators Dilemma : Circuit switch (PSTN) based on TDM or

Packet-based technology (Soft switch) would be the best

solution for today and tomorrow: No choice-NGN oriented has

been chosen

Availability of products in the open markets ?: Widely available

from world class vendors

Availability of world recognized standards? : Many

organizations e.g. ITU,IETF,ATIS,ETSI,3GPP and OECD are

playing active role in NGN activities

Where TOT is headed?(2)

Applications and services require by customers : Focus mainly on

voice and data (Internet access). Many other applications/services under

NGN concept are still unclear

Network concept(1) : Fully NGN or Pre-NGN concept ?:Pre- NGN

concept has been chosen for new subscriber lines extension project. A

small scale fully NGN project is being considered for the niche markets

Network concept(2): As Pre- NGN concept has been chosen, Soft

switches are therefore required as the core network where access

networks are still based on traditional DLC with V.5.2 Interface.

Interoperability between vendors: As the protocols between soft

switches have not been finalized, under multi-vendor environment

traditional SS No.7 is required for interoperability among soft witches

Where TOT is headed ?(3)

Site references are strongly required from vendors to ensure

that each vendor has actively been involved in NGN technology in

terms of commercial products, experience, system performance

etc.

Acquisition process is based on international bidding process,

technical and price evaluation have been performed as standard

procedure

Nine bidders (product owners : USA, France,Germany,

Sweden, and China) have been involved in the TOT’s NGN project

Acquisition of NGN is now in the process of technical

evaluation

Major concerns on NGN implementationTOT’s views

Network management : Requires new platform or Upgrading of the

existing platform to serve NGN requirements?

Interoperability: SIP-SIP (different vendors), SIP-ISUP conversion, MG-

Soft switch with H.248(under multi vendors)? , SS No.7 over IP (under multi

vendors)? , IN-NGN? , MGC-MGC:BICC vs SIP?

Signalling Gateway: Carrying SS No.7 (MSU) over IP protocol ?

Applications and services :Easy to use and understand by users?

Standardization: Standards have been finalized? Which standards are

required?

QoS : As good as TDM?

Migration of existing PSTN to NGN : How we safely migrate from

PSTN/ISDN to NGN ?

Can the ITU-FGNGN help us on time regarding the above concerns?

Conclusion

If NGN is considered as telecom innovation, Does the NGN comply with

the following characteristics?

• Relative advantage: Do people (users/adopters) think it is an

improvement over what already exists?

• Compatibility: Is it consistent with the values, experiences and needs of

the people (users/adopters) who might adopt it?

• Complexity: Will potential users find it easy to use and understand?

•Observalibility: How easy is it for people (users/adopters) to see its

results?

•Trialability: Can users/adopters experiment with the innovation before

deciding to adopt it?

Should the above characteristics be judged by the users and adpoters

/not innovator?

Source: Adapted from “Why innovation fails, Carl Franklin , Spiro press 2003

RIGHT TECHNOLOGY

with

WRONG DECISION, at

WRONG PLACE, and

WRONG TIME

LOOSES A TON OF MONEY !!