John Waclawsky Ph. D. Services Architecture and Governance Motorola, Inc. From: Heavily Centralized Control Paradigms To: An Increasing Decentralized World

John Waclawsky Ph. D. Services Architecture and GovernanceMotorola, Inc.

From: Heavily Centralized Control Paradigms To: An Increasing Decentralized World via Internet

and Web Technology

Titan against Titan: Titan against Titan: What Technology will What Technology will

Win?Win?

2

MOTOROLA and the Stylized M Logo are registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office. All other product or service names are the property of their respective owners. © Motorola, Inc. 2007.

Technology Trends: Titan vs. Titan

Agenda

Commonality vs. Competition Some Innovation Chemistry Chemistry Migration Lessons Innovation Eco-systems Model and Area

of Common Benefit Goals and Results Technology Comparisons Some Challenges …Always Something

New! Lessons Learned

3



A Key Standards Perspective:

Common mechanisms are good …for applications too? 1. Some applications can leverage standards …billing etc.

2. Belief: Common control into the application space will facilitate interoperability, easier application creation, more application utility and numerous new applications will emerge by extending commonality. This is a common perspective of IMS/SIP advocates BUT: has IMS/SIP led to any new applications?

“differentiation IS the game”.... Geoffrey Moore

Competition and Commonality Standards vs. De facto

ISOISOETSIETSI

IETFIETF

3GPPW3C

4



Applications drive technology usage, not the selection of some common protocol or standard.

Competition and Commonality (continued) Standards vs. De facto

Smell Test: Will competition stop? …a single solution /application / signaling / control / format / data protocol, or any other common way to serve customers in a non-competitive manner…

de facto: Un-commonality is standard for applications

•Standards typically commoditize products tend to make products and services look more or less alike

•Standards may be giving competitors some control or even veto power•Applications don't want to “talk” to each other for business reasons

•Innovators always look beyond standards for ways to lead

5



…a part of the Four Area Innovation Model

Where is Innovation Thriving?…and what is driving it, …as if we didn’t know!

Consider the extended OSI model as “semi-

permeable membrane for innovation molecules”!

6



L1 - Physical

L2 - Data Link

L3 - Network

L4 - Transport

L5 - Session

L6 - Presentation

L7 - Applications

The OSI Model

Sem

i-perm

eable

m

em

bra

ne

Model extended because:•Accelerating technology changes •Disruptions and redefinition •Relentless on-going innovation•Business decisions are colored by:

•Politics/Ideology, •Financial considerations •Technology religion (driven aspects of a company’s or even an individual’s personality).

L8 - Revenue and Profit

L9 - Politics

L10 - Technology Religion

The upper three layers are mainly about competitive issues

“extended”

7



Telco / Cable co TITAN s

Internet Technology TITAN s

Restricted Competition Open Competition

1- System-Based

2 – Connectivity Innovation 4 – Connectivity Innovation

3 – Component-Based

L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10

Finance

Politics

Religion

Networking Protocol Layers

L5

8



} IM, eMail

VoIP

Ethernet

IP

TCP/UDP

Web

NetworkManagement

SIP-IETF

RESULTS: Innovation Movement: Mostly “FROM” the Internet

GSM/GPRS

L1 - Physical

L2 - Data Link

L3 - Network

L4 - Transport

L5 - Session

L6 - Presentation

L7 - Applications

L8 - Finance

L9 - Politics

L10 - Religion

Restricted Competition Environment: Telco/Cableco

Open Internet Environment

OSI

ISDN

ATM, DSL

DWDM, EDFA

Layering

X.25

SIP-3GPP ?

SMSPARLAYParlay-X}

CAMEL/IN

9



Innovation Migration Lessons

GSM/GPRS

IM, eMail

VoIP

L1

L2

L3

L4

L5

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10

Ethernet

IP

TCP/UDP

Web}

OSI

ISDN

ATM, DSL

DWDM, EDFA

SMS

Layering

NetworkManagement

X.25

SIP-3GPP ?

SIP-IETF

Internet is willing to eat its own children as well as the children of others. It isn’t apparent that any telco/cableco’s innovations are eating any

Internet children.

WiMAXWiMAX

1. Telco/Cable co's physical connectivity 2. Internet services3. Upper layers: highlight the Telco/Cable co

struggle at services. 4. Lower Layers: Telecom industry innovation

has been centered on basic transmission technologies (e.g., DWDM, EDFA, DSL, GSM)

5. Sometimes innovation stays within an eco-system and can be quite successful within it: SMS (what about IM), SIP (what about non-SIP)

6. Things change over time. E-mail -> AOL -> Gmail

LTELTE

10



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics

Religion1- System-Based


L5

Benefit by following

Benefit by leading



Internet Technology is becoming increasingly

important to the restrictive competition

environment by providing access to and

interacting with the incredible number of

web destinations

Area of Common Benefit!

11



Early / Obvious Model Conclusions

Everyone needs the bottom four layers of the OSI modelThe split is over how to exploit the top of the extended OSI model

Incentive to follow successful lower layer standards and, as a result, allow network-connected products and services to enjoy access to the widest audience

Create new standards to extend connectivity when new technologies emerge or provide ways to better leverage the internet, such as WiMAX

“connectivity is its own reward” was often echoed by the early Internet participants, and is embodied in Metcalfe’s law

12



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics

Religion


L5

GOALS: • Standardize communication, NOT application behavior or control of end users. • Everyone to benefits from connectivity.

RESULTS: • Experimentation for new applications, services and technology exploded •Innovation breeding ground spawning numerous high-market capitalization companies: Amazon, Google, eBay…•Enormous wealth engine - February 6th 2006 SIP Forum[1] presentation that concluded “The Internet is responsible for the largest creation of shareholder value in the shortest time in history.” [1] http://www.sipforum.com/

GOALS: •Standardizing communications including: •Interoperability between applications in their respective vertical markets, • End-user control • Total control of application behavior.

RESULTS: Meeting goals rooted in existing thinking about networking •A highly-controlled, but much-reduced experimentation environment •Depressed innovation activity•From our innovation migration lessons, it is becoming more apparent the trend is that the Internet is taking over

13



Restricted Competition

L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10

Open Competition

Finance

Politics

Religion


L5


Benefit by leading



Area of Common Benefit The standardized lower levels have also helped solve the bootstrap problem for innovators. These layers facilitate the spread of new,

unconventional products and services at the higher layers of the protocol stack. Via existing standardized lower networking layers, anyone can

now download and install the software needed to use such new innovations driving concepts such as social networking. That's a key

reason new innovations can reach critical mass so quickly.

A recent example

is SIP

IMS

BitTorre

ntXM

PP

Skyp

e

Gnutella

Defacto

Joost Will SIP cross-over?

IMS possibilities?

Moving this way?

14



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics

ReligionSystem-Based Innovation Component-Based Innovation


L5

System technologies about control: • IMS• Quality of Service (QoS)• Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) • RST Injection for TCP protocol• Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)• Digital Rights Management (DRM)

Control technologies are mainly desired by companies in the restrictive competition eco-system but have little value for the end-user customers.

Consider an evolution about relationships

• Mash-ups• P2P • Encryption • People technology

• Creating: Blogs, user generated content, podcasts• Connecting: Social networks, virtual worlds• Collaborating: Wikis and Open Source• Reacting to others: Forums, Ratings, Reviews• Organizing content: Tags• Staying aware: RSS, widgets and Twitter

• Cloud computing (XMPP) • Traffic Scattering • Network coding

Many of these technologies have demonstrated considerable end-user value (for example, Bit Torrent, Skype, etc.) but many provide little or no value to the restrictive competition eco-system.

Other related issues:1. Infrastructure costs!2. Privacy concerns! 3. Missing services/functions?

Mash-upsMash-upsP2PP2P

15



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics

Religion


L5

Application vs. No Application Is thinking about applications passé?

Centralized: delivered and controlled by

a server

Distributed: Built on demand,

distributed and controlled

by the end user devices

Is current core network controlled thinking about applications becoming obsolete?

e.g. IMS and SIP technologies are designed

around an application infrastructure supporting

paradigm

Mash-ups and P2P technologies

16



P2P (edge to edge) Anyone can offer a service to anyone else!

Mainly Involves: Sharing of resources by direct

exchange (NO man in the middle!), Ability to self organize (NO control from

the middle!), Deal with intermittent connectivity (NO

state maintained or master data base in the middle!),

…of the peers, for the peers, by the peers

17



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics

Religion


L5

Control: of What? …and How?

Centralized: IMS and SIP

Distributed: P2P and IM

We are moving from an early technology world where we had to talk to machines in their

language to an emerging world where machines will talk to us in our language

IMS CoreSIP control plane

Media and Signaling conversion

Billing and Back Office Functions

Network and Systems

Management

Operations and Control

WalledGarden

Applications

Concentration of State and Complexity

IMS CoreSIP control plane



Network and Systems

Management


WalledGarden

ApplicationsIMS CoreSIP control plane



Network and Systems

Management


WalledGarden

Applications

Concentration of State and Complexity

Will IM be the Will IM be the future control future control

paradigm?paradigm?

If so? …should we run If so? …should we run language parsers language parsers

underneath?underneath?

18



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics

Religion


L5

Another Example: Circuit Voice vs. VoIP What about Lawful Interception (LI)?

Centralized: Circuit Switched network is easy Data network: Session Border Controller (SBC)* as the point of convergence for VoIP packets.

Implementing LI on SBC is the VoIP equivalent of wire tapping on a circuit switched network.

*SBC is typically a VoIP session aware device that governs the manner in which VoIP calls are initiated, conducted and terminated in a network.

Distributed: VoIP IP provides numerous methods to ensure data security. no standardized manner to distinguish voice packets no telling which path the IP packet will take what headers get added.

Decentralization is effecting LI too!

BTW: this is BTW: this is all all

true for any true for any kind of kind of traffictraffic

19



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics



L5








Other related issues:1. Infrastructure costs2. Missing services/functions3. Privacy concerns

Traffic ScatteringTraffic Scattering

20



Cable TV

Internet

Digital Rabbit ears

CDMA

TV/Radio

GSM/GPRS

Satellite TV

UWB

WiMAX

UMTS

802.20

Etc.

NFC

What could STB’s see?

Bluetooth(R)

802.11a

802.11b/g

GSM/GPRS

CDMA

IR

RFID

GPS

UWB

WiMAX

UMTS

802.20

TV / Radio

Etc.

NFC

The world is increasingly connected

What could end-users see?

Traffic scattering Traffic scattering

21



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics



L5









Network CodingNetwork Coding

22



Network Coding

• Network coding is a field of information theory and coding theory and is a method of attaining maximum information flow in a network

• The core notion of network coding is to allow and encourage mixing of data at intermediate network nodes.

• In contrast to traditional ways to operate a network that try to avoid collisions of data streams as much as possible • A receiver sees these data packets and deduces from them the messages that were originally intended for the data sink.

• This is an elegant principle that implies a plethora of surprising results

http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci1267914,00.htmlhttp://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid7_gci1267914,00.htmlhttp://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=breaking-network-logjams&SID=mailhttp://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=breaking-network-logjams&SID=mail

Is current core network controlled thinking about packets becoming obsolete?

23



L1

L2

L3

L4

L6

L7

L8

L9

L10


Finance

Politics



L5









24



QoS How can QoS work today and in the future? ….when you consider…

• Emerging future: overlay techniques (P2P), mash-ups, traffic scattering, network coding. • Encryption or use packet-obfuscation

Lowest prioritization for all encrypted traffic? – Privacy is systematically discriminated against.

• Most of the time the SERVERS ARE SLOW and NOT the network. • Low Utilization is a fundamental part of network design

Redundancy for reliability. Capacity for peak loads. What does it mean to run a link/box at 10%?

• Race with Moore's Law Link queue can empty faster than you can run instructions to make QoS decisions.

• QoS adds complexity Fiber capacity shifts bottlenecks from pipes to nodes and because of the enormous fiber speeds available, adding node queues to the mix of things that need to be QoS configured and managed doesn't appear to simplify the QoS challenges.

• Where is the ROI? • etc.

QoS is NOT an adequate substitute for capacity and potentially makes a bad

situation much worse

25



At the Heart of the thing known as “The Internet”

• It’s an environment that fosters experimentationClearly "the place" for innovation of communication services Seems to be about the absence of impediments

The lack of impediments seen in one eco-system and not the other appears to be making a huge difference in where innovation (and the associated wealth it generates) will be most successful.

• More experimentation then more luck! More $$$!

A major part of innovation is what we can call unexpected usage (or luck). However, the luck seems to be on the Internet side these days.

• Application-independent, TCP/IP or UDP are the backbones of the end-to-end nature of the Internet.

If history is any guide, a betting man would probably look for the next large market cap company to be about services and

come from the Internet eco-system.

26



A Major Challenge for the Restricted eco-system Technology….

How can any technology which relies on extensive core network control and takes an application focus and consider packet information invariant, adapt to overlay techniques found in P2P networks, traffic scattering, network coding, the increasing use of encryption, the emergence of cloud computing, as well as trends related to dynamically composed and instantiated concoctions (formally known as applications) at the edge of the network?

The web is becoming “THE” programming development platform. Now, many view the web as the ultimate programming platform

that helps all of humankind

27



Lessons Learned

Early, half-baked is rewarded better striving for perfect is the enemy of good, and doing so is very

time consuming, very expensive, and easily by-passed Everyone wants to differentiate their products People always dream of reaching de facto nirvana Lock in your customers

mine your customer set with derivative products and advertising;

Politics (or group affiliation) overrides many choices Economic incentives to succeed in the market are the

major goals tied to differentiation strategies Technology religion (personality preferences) will

override the benefits of standards to product developers and people running companies focused on success.

28



Conclusions

Which Titan is winning??

Restricted vs. Open – this debate is still being waged on the technology battlefield

…The Internet eco-system has spawned great wealth, a massive number of jobs and even helped governments to grow tax revenues across the planet.

Understanding competition dynamics on innovation is critical for any company trying to anticipate where the technology is

going, instead of chasing it

29



Advice ….Some Thoughts

It is about winning…..

You should ask for: …the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, …..(and most importantly)…

…the wisdom to know the difference!

Documents

John Waclawsky Ph. D. Services Architecture and Governance Motorola, Inc. From: Heavily Centralized Control Paradigms To: An Increasing Decentralized World