Post on 12-Jun-2015
description
10/27/2014– strictly confidential, confidential, internal, public – 1
TELECOMS & WEBRTC: OPPOSITES ATTRACT?!SEBASTIAN SCHUMANN, SLOVAK TELEKOM27. October 2014. Berlin, Germany
SCOPE
Telecoms & WebRTC: ‘Opposites attract’?!
Are Telecoms and WebRTC opposites?
The diversity of interpretation of WebRTC in Telecoms.
Why is WebRTC so attractive for operators?
How can operators be attractive for WebRTC developers?
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 2
@s_schumann
Feedback is welcome, get in touch during/after the event!
SLOVAK TELEKOM
Former fixed & mobile incumbent (merger in 2010), Zoznam, Posam, DIGI
Diverse service portfolio (fixed/mobile network and communications services, Internet access + content, data services, CPE, ICT services(data center + cloud), radio/TV broadcasting, call center services, …)
The major shareholder is Deutsche Telekom AG.
Successful deployments in SEE as well as in DT group:
One of the biggest national-wide deployment of NGN technology in Europe in 2004, whole city migrated to all-IP NGN in 2007
Fixed network IMS migration to be finished in 2014
Leader in IPTV, offering hybrid sat TV (s. 2009) & OTT app (s. 2012)
Extensive FTTx deployments (360k households)
First nation-wide 4G/LTE network (s. 2013)October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 3
Slovak Telekom Group is the telecoms market leader in Slovakia
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 4
WHAT IS WEBRTC?
WebRTC is about enabling web developers access to audio/video input devices via JavaScript and abstracting the problem of real-time browser-to-browser communication
WebRTC is a technology, not a service. For operators, is also an invitation to “rethink your thinking”
When WebRTC is discussed within operator units, they are almost always discussed with legacy assumptions in mind
For many, “adding WebRTC” means adding voice/video to a service and have this service in the browser
Thinking due to Telecom’s business’ history: “communications” = “telephony”
It comes with less defined constraints than previous services (even VoLTE/RCS), operators sometimes forget that!
WebRTC is NOT (only/mainly) about “calling” from within the browser
Voice is no longer a stand-alone service or product, but becomes more and more an integral part of a service
Disruption not only technology wise, but also business model wise (value shift from pure connection to context)
The discussion about WebRTC & IMS should not be at the beginning, but the end of any consideration
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 5
ARE TELECOMS AND WEBRTC OPPOSITES?
What defines Telecoms in the context of today’s presentation?
Incumbent role in offering interoperable real-time communications to the general public
E2E standardized communications
Operator network interconnection
Communications services are paid for by the user
Value in connecting to others
Network evolution much more progressive than real-time voice/messaging evolution
How does the Web compare to that?
Evolution from content and E-mail to all sorts of synchronous and social communication
Technology advances are latest challengers of incumbent universal communications services
Flexible cross service/service provider interworking through well-defined API’s
Various monetization models, often free offering
Value in solving problems, gathering communities, making things fun, data analysis, etc.
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 6
Any answer can fit, depending on the context. The question needs to be looked at from different angles
TELECOMS PARADIGM WEBRTC PARADIGM
NEW RULES ON A COMMON PLAYGROUND
In the past, integrated operator communications services were ‘a given’
Smart phones nowadays used for everything but ‘telephony’, yet the service is still present
Connectivity was costly, which lead to the rise of alternative online service provider
International minutes affected initially, paved the way for working on experience
The “smart phone revolution” disrupted the operator business model even more
All of a sudden SMS faced with replacement option that had similar service characteristics
Service extensions and experience improvements continued
Basic apps minor increase in how we communicate remotely
WebRTC was released, the web revolution for RTC just started, and many things are entirely new
The efforts decreased, free technology and means that were expensive before
Technology introduced to operators by their long-time vendors, hard to ignore
And here we are in October 2014, trying to find out how this all new “thing” fits Telecoms
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 7
T -11y
T -7y
T -3y
T
TELECOMS BECAME QUICKLY “ATTRACTED” TO WEBRTC
All-IP enabled straight-forward backend access to services
Usually only delivered via non-IP front-end so far (i.e. legacy interface that has not evolved much)
“Traditional units” learn from it through legacy services upgrade
Mainly stimulated by vendors (i.e. “outside stimulation”), often not internal need that could not be satisfied before
“Nomadic access” introduced “natively” (e.g. VoLTE usually starts with VoWiFi) started to open mind, too
“Innovation units” embrace it themselves
Need for new revenue streams/business models arises
Use cases or prototypes can be developed so much faster than before
Much easier to show what WebRTC is at first hand
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 8
Create new services
& partner
CHANCES FOR OPERATORS
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 9
Service Strategy
Improve legacy services
Evolution Innovation
EVOLUTIONIMPROVE LEGACY SERVICES
It is an important area, since it still pays the bills for now
Modernization of current service portfolio has to be done
Legacy communications dealt with RTC, has just recently received a new polished infrastructure
“Adding” multiple new ways of accessing it is natural
Web gateway (utilizing WebRTC) as “IMS alternative access” is of course one use case
Should not be “WebRTC strategy”, but overhauling services – so far it is all about the technology
Service updates can include “modernized interfaces”, but need to go beyond
Adding “Web” to existing products means they are defined, and mostly limited
Integration where it makes sense is more important than a “pure web dialer”
Sample: “Real” triple play
The "front-end design/functions defines services now, the back-end is completely irrelevant
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 10
WebRTC
INNOVATIONCREATE NEW SERVICES
Operators need to adapt a lot of their thinking
We do not build a “WebRTC service”/“cloud service”; we need to build services that solve problems
Once the service is defined, the technologies can be chosen based on many criterions
It has to be elaborated per service how it should be exposed, delivered, and made accessible
Telephony: IMS/MMTel/VoLTE vs. lightweight open-source alternatives – almost exclusively SIP
Non-telephony: Own backend, libraries, protocol alternatives (XMPP, REST/JSON)
Final architecture is a case-by-case decision, not just use because it is there (efficiency, suitability)
For everything that is not telephony, alternatives most likely much more suitable
Less ubiquitous, but more targeted applications will replace general purpose communications
Flexible re-useable capabilities exposed through simple APIs are tremendously important
Standardized core technologies (HTML/CSS/JS, Objective-C, Java), but not services
Standardized interfaces (REST API with doc/SDK is enough) trumps complex E2E scenarios
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 11
WebRTC
WHY IS WEBRTC SO ATTRACTIVE FOR OPERATORS?
It is attractive, because it is an opposite with so much potential
WebRTC can be one of the technologies to accelerate service development and decrease costs, if operators want to build services that are:
Access independent/network independent/location independent
Use a software front-end (app/web) Completely new experience in how they deliver voice in the application
Opposite technology-wise:
Different architectures, no signaling, no federation*, no interoperability
Not just one box or service to deploy
Enabler and exposure more important than closed service features
Opposite culture-wise & approach-wise:
No committee standardization, no defined UNI/NNI – but is somehow still works
Trial and error seems to do well in-small, no big investments/projects yet
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 12
HOW CAN OPERATORS BE ATTRACTIVE AROUND WEBRTC?…NOT ONLY FOR DEVELOPERS, BUT AS GENERAL PARTNERS
Don’t assume “build it and they will come” – WebRTC is for developers and they do not need operators
At least not for real-time communications, that is one of the purposes of WebRTC
Direct business innovation potential most likely with selected verticals
Potential indirect business around WebRTC
Hosting of real-time communication applications
Local TURN server, demand for local low latency servers
SIP trunk for WebRTC applications that require break-in to legacy domain
Attractive and properly exposed assets may be used for technology partnerships
WebRTC and API exposure go hand in hand
Voice/SMS API, header enrichment, payment, identity, age verification etc.
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 13
PRACTICAL BACKUPWE ARE DOOGFOODING
Slovak Telekom has implemented a PoC not connected to legacy telephony, actively used by employees
A WebRTC gateway RfQ on IMS and show telephony would be easy, but doesn’t have much value yet
We developed a (simple but yet) contextual web application
Sent E-mails contain signature to web portal (address built using E-mail as identifier), contact employees
People can be contacted and also notified out-of-band using various channels, owner/guest not equal
No telephony dial-out: Faster, easy b/c no legacy boundaries such as billing, integration, approval
No complex account setup: Address confirmation using received hash/token for mapping
No one-size-fits-all: Many features consciously omitted (directory, collaboration, conferencing)
One application doing one thing well and which contains only those features required
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 14
SUMMARY
Telecoms & WebRTC: Attractive opposites!
To remain competitive, alternative approaches need to be embraced
Faster innovation, trial and error
Enable new business models with different cost models, new revenues!
“WebRTC” is not one box/platform. It is not just some front-end to the IMS.
Gateway/open-source/partnering/in-house development/vendor acc. your need
For legacy services its more important to improve the service than just “add WebRTC”
Focus on user’s needs & experience - technology driven services and features will not lead to success!
WebRTC can be part of many new solutions, an ingredient. It is not THE solution, or A solution, though!
October 2014, Berlin, GermanySebastian Schumann: “Telecoms & WebRTC: Opposites Attract?”, WebRTC Summit Europe 15
THANK YOU.Sebastian Schumann
Application & Platform Innovation | Slovak Telekom, a.s.
Sebastian.Schumann@telekom.sk
@s_schumann
+421 903 419 345
ATTRIBUTION
Relationship designed by gilbert bages from the Noun Project
17