-
The Company
The Company
- Ericsson is shaping the way the world communicates. Read on to discover more about our company, its history and vision.
-
Thinking Ahead
Tech Talk
- Do you want to know what the Social Web of Things is and how we can benefit? Watch our latest Tech Talk film
Thinking Ahead
- All our insights, research, and discussions are here in one place. Use them for Thinking Ahead.
-
Your Business
- Government
- Transport Industry
- Utilities Industry
- Developer Portal
- Equipment Manufacturers
- Channel Partner Program
Your Business
- Take a closer look at how Ericsson can help your business excel in a rapidly evolving market.
-
Our Portfolio
Our Portfolio
- Find out more about Ericsson’s comprehensive portfolio of innovative products, operator solutions and services.
-
Careers
Careers
- A career with Ericsson offers outstanding opportunities for professional and personal development in a truly global organization.
Thinking Ahead
Innovation is moving rapidly. Where is technology taking us? How will we communicate in the future? The destination is still unclear. Think ahead with us and join the conversation.
Delivering the best possible network performance
May 30, 2011 by Peter Briggs in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
The Scalable and Adaptive Internet Solutions (SAIL) consortium of leading operators, vendors and research institutions recently summarized some key trends in observed internet traffic.
They report that over the last two years, the internet core has begun to be optimized for delivery of services and content from a decreasing number of dominant sources to reduce cost and improve performance.
Revenue potential is increasingly associated with the delivery of higher value services such as virtual private networks (VPNs) and content delivery networks (CDNs). Old global internet economic models are evolving while new entrants are reshaping both the definition and the value of connectivity.
We know that the drivers for these changes are the worldwide rollout of mobile broadband networks and new, attractive terminals and devices that are being used along with fixed devices to enjoy an ever increasing volume of video content. Network operators are therefore considering how best to monetize the delivery of all these so-called 'cloud' services.
Clearly best-effort networks are unlikely to provide either very profitable operations or the kind of performance that users expect.
The emerging new generation of IP networking is a great balance of smart delivery, simple operation and scalability.
Since overprovisioning won’t maximize operator profit, ecosystem network operators and content and service providers will collaborate to maximize mutual benefit. This needs ‘smart’, service-aware delivery control and associated charging systems.
Operators can be smart about how they use the valuable RAN resources that are really well positioned to maximize value – plentiful enough to drive practical desirability, yet scarce enough to avoid collapse to low-priced commodity.
HetNets will build RAN capacity but require yet more 'smarts' to integrate into a flexible fixed/mobile access network, so users are always ‘best connected’.
Although, on average, IP traffic patterns are becoming simpler and dominated by content delivery, the underlying packet infrastructure still needs the traditional transmission, transport and routing functions – now enhanced with video and content optimization.
Operating this content-optimized network must be highly automated to keep opex in check as the network continually adapts to new traffic delivery patterns, sometimes over very short periods. Maintenance activities, capacity enhancements and inevitable faults must not disrupt valuable services nor require expert-level network re-planning every time. So management systems will allow network operators to deliver ‘more’ but keep control of their operating costs.
Networks will scale with higher bit rates in all domains from wireless and fixed access, microwave links, optical/WDM systems and through the cross-connects, switches and routers of the infrastructure. These higher speeds will cope with the volume of traffic and also reduce latency (especially important in some vertical scientific and enterprise markets).
The need for scale extends to network control plane signaling and the sheer number of devices that need to be addressed and managed.
Packet transport is replacing TDM for packet services. It builds on the traditional transport objectives; it delivers native transport services, provides internal network system interconnectivity, optimizes provisioning, OAM, resilience against faults and provides for planned network maintenance activity. MPLS (-TP) packet transport is also great for carrying emulated services during the transition to all-IP networking.
The new generation of IP networking will deliver marketing promises, user expectations – and an amazing user experience!
Voices:
Related links
Is FTTx Rollout On Your Mind?
May 24, 2011 by Lingaraj Patil in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
The explosive growth in fixed broadband has meant that it has become necessary for many operators to upgrade their access networks.
However the decision is not an easy one, especially because it requires significant capital investment. A detailed up-front financial analysis is the key to ensuring short term as well as long-term success.
For operators with existing copper, it is important to look at bandwidth growth for the next 10 years and the access network evolution that it would entail, as opposed to doing the business case for the next immediate upgrade. How does payback time for copper network enhancements deteriorate over time if the operator is forced to upgrade it every couple of years, as opposed to doing a bigger fiber rollout once?
For operators from low-ARPU countries, recovering capex investment might be difficult. In such cases, it may be helpful to look at open access and Retail Service Provider (RSP) business models, and decide which role they want to play in the value chain. Due to shared resources, open access reduces the ‘cost to connect’ but it also reduces the barriers to entry for new RSPs. Differentiated voice, video and data service offerings become very important. And, more differentiation can be achieved by selecting superior content, a versatile multi-service IP edge and a smart policy manager to provide superior customer experience.
Outdoor fiber deployment constitutes the biggest part of the rollout costs and hence it is extremely important to plan this carefully. Is it better to lay the fiber once and upgrade the active electronics for higher speeds, instead of trying to reduce the splitter ratio to get higher speeds?
It is also important to choose fiber laying technologies that reduce the overall labor hour needed. It may be useful to choose a technology that has a higher proportion of the total cost in the ‘cost to connect’ vs. ‘cost to pass’ since ‘cost to connect’ is incurred only when the customer signs up. This not only spreads out the investment but it also reduces the risk associated with take-up rate uncertainty.
For the opex, care should be taken to reduce the cost of adding a new customer to the network and subsequently servicing the customer. Features like ease of configuration, remote activation and upgrade and reduced truck rolls all become key to increased profitability.
Voices:
Related links
Fiber will fly. Do you have a flight plan?
May 23, 2011 by Ajay Saini in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
Fiber deployment requires good initial investment, but is there a choice not to do it?
Well, alternative operators can try to delay fiber deployment by using their existing infrastructure, by leasing copper from incumbents or by waiting until others deploy fiber and then react.
However, this will not help them become strong long-term leaders or meet their financial goals in today's tough telecom market. It will be difficult for them to offer differentiating services and they will probably hope to make use of any poor reputations incumbents or other competitors may have, which unfortunately from the end-users’ perspective, is not uncommon.
The challenge for incumbent operators is that bandwidth speeds are increasing every year and in spite of various technological efforts, copper or cable bandwidths will not be able to compete with fiber.
Therefore, if an incumbent will not deploy fiber, sooner or later an alternative player will do it. Is this a wise option for incumbent operators?
A follower or second entrant in the FTTH space will struggle to make a similar or better impact, and it will be difficult even for incumbents. Please note that deploying fiber, especially the civil works and network planning aspects take time, which can hinder the ‘go-to- market’ strategy for late entrants.
It is quite clear that fiber will fly and is without any doubt the ‘end game’. Quite often the major driver is fear; however the question is more if one prefers to become a leader in FTTH journey or a follower.
To come out as a strong leader, one has to have a solid flight plan, where the bottom line is to have a higher take-up rate rather than solely focusing on ARPU. Access is all about connecting users and one can only get good revenues from connecting more users. Fiber provides better chance to connect more users.
There have been quite many successful FTTH deployments around the globe and end users are even enjoying speeds of 1 Gbps, which many would not have imagined 10 years back.
Hence, the recommended actions can be to ensure early adoption, come up with efficient time-to-install plan, have an aggressive go-to-market strategy and consider various partnership models to increase as high take-up rates are possible.
This will ensure a smooth take-off rather than being blown away by fiber from the competitors.
Voices:
Related links
Network management: opening the door for more
May 20, 2011 by Massimo Enrico in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
Returning to the parallels between IT and telecom, there are several immediate attributes required for a new "telecom network OS." It needs to be end-to-end, service-oriented, easy to operate (even by unskilled personnel), scalable and flexible.
In a nutshell, it needs a system that exploits network capability by managing e2e services, really exploiting network convergence, in ways so simple that almost everybody can do it, and so efficiently and flexibly that it can handle the service explosion driven by mobile broadband, video demand and machine-to-machine applications.
This means new network management solutions that tear down existing operational silos; that are systems consolidated and designed to interoperate with each other; that have smart and intuitive user interfaces, automating tasks and are ready to scale up and support new services.
But is this "Windowsification" enough? Is it only an enhancement of existing products? Maybe for the next three to five years, yes, but for a world with more than 50 billion connected devices, with telecoms a fundamental part of life just like energy or water, network management must also sustain a radical shift in business models and take a further step.
Again, the parallels with OS can help, and my thoughts go here to Apple iOS and Android. Their success is not only product-related but is inherently tied to the ecosystems they enable, where users can become developers, where new, previously unforeseen applications and solutions are developed, and where everybody gains from the creative power of the community. Their secret is the clever way they are open and make new business models possible.
The same has to happen in network management. Today it is the exclusive domain of telecom operators; tomorrow it might become the instrument to open the network, under appropriate control, and to allow the end users – first other companies, then even individuals – to define, develop and finally manage the services they need. This will build on the complete, hidden potential of the networks, probably beyond any of our current expectations, and generate new revenues for operators by empowering the market to create and expand itself. That is the way to generate "more" for everybody.
Voices:
Related links
Creation, delivery and consumption in the expanding video ecosystem
May 19, 2011 by Robert Haim in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
We live in interesting times.
This is especially true for all the players involved in the creation, delivery and consumption of the video ecosystem. There is a plethora of content being created throughout the world; delivery is made by content providers and owners of network infrastructure (service providers); and there are plenty of consumers for these products.
Consumers’ behavior, of course, is the ultimate test of success for the other players, i.e. content, and service providers. The content has to be interesting and its delivery has to be bound within consumers’ acceptance level. Consumers also expect to watch this content anywhere and on any device. Placing control of the consumption in the hands of the consumer is a good idea and, frankly, essential. This brings us to our real topic, as to what is the inter-play among the participants of this ecosystem.
To begin with, content can be delivered in a “structured” way, as in IPTV, or the new nascent non-structured method via Over-The-Top (OTT).
The statistics on the combined expected traffic volume in the network (mobile and fixed) is staggering: 90 percent of the traffic will be video by 2015. Ericsson’s forecast points to a traffic volume of 732 Exabyte (that is 732 followed by 18 zeros) by 2014.
While this data can be perceived as a major challenge for the infrastructure vendors and their customers (i.e. service providers) it must also be viewed as a tremendous opportunity for all the players: more content providers, faster, reliable, and more efficient networks, and satisfied consumers; consequently more revenues for the providers.
The technical challenges include: 1. delivery and operation of a highly efficient and reliable network, 2. infrastructure must allow the consumer to be in control of the content in terms of time and place.
There are also business challenges: how do the content providers and service providers work together? Clearly, the service providers do not want to become simple conduits for the content providers’ data (see data given in the previous paragraph) and the content providers want to ensure that their content is delivered in the most efficient way.
Finally, what kinds of business models work with consumers? In North America, consumers – author included – have been, for lack of a better word, spoiled with flat rate, “all-you-can-use” pricing models, with no cap on monthly usage. This model is not necessarily going to be relevant given the expected video traffic in the network.
The success of OTT video business depends on new more sophisticated pricing and business models for profitable delivery of these services. For example:
Collaborate with content providers to deliver superior video quality and content than that delivered via Best Effort pipes
Offer value-added network services such as bandwidth on-demand to enhance OTT
Allow users to control their services using advanced policy management – this provides a new stream of revenue and helps reduce churn by more effectively addressing users’ needs
Sophisticated pricing and business models can be implemented via intelligent and flexible networks, through “Smart Networking” – broadband policy management, tools such as Deep Packet Inspection (DPI), and application and service layer traffic management.
Other tools that can complete the above solutions include Content Delivery Network (CDN) and Transparent Internet Caching (TIC) to ensure bandwidth optimization and enhanced user experience. And Asset or Content Management to manage different metadata format, content type, and workflow processes are also necessary.
Voices:
Bigger, faster, extreme-scale transport
May 16, 2011 by Alan Repech in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
"Projections show that the network will need to support Tb/sec transmission rates by 2015-2016."
Is this yet another prognostication by some futurist pundit disconnected from reality? Nope.
It’s an excerpt from a grant notice from the United States Department of Energy posted April 7, 2011.
The grant is titled, "Terabit networking for Extreme-Scale Science." The grant description goes on to say, "While industry will supply the underlying optical technologies to build the network, DOE will need to develop and deploy the tools and services that will allow scientists to exploit this advanced infrastructure." The grant application window is planned for closure on May 23, 2011, so there’s not much time left to submit your proposal.
Extreme-scale science includes projects such single-cloud-granularity climate modeling "accurate enough to inform critical policy decisions (IEEE Computer, 2009)," and as stated above assumes, "industry will supply the underlying optical technologies."
So while "industry" is just now rolling out 100Gbps optical links and 1Gbps microwave systems, the demand for 10 times that is already upon us. And extreme-scale is not confined to the esoteric niches of high end computer science.
Mobile broadband growth has been well-documented, streaming video is commonplace, and business Ethernet services are growing fast. The number of end users and end devices is approaching extreme scale ("50B by 2020"). And it seems our "smart" access devices are actually getting "dumber." We’re running task-specific apps on phones and tablets as opposed to bloated, general purpose software applications on laptops. Cloud services and servers are critical components in the new model. Users demand quick, instant-on access and bandwidth headroom to accommodate upload/download bursts. Consider the number of Facebook users (very, very many) compared to the number of Facebook servers (very, very few).
The extreme-scale number of end users and devices needing always-on access to a very small number of extreme-scale servers are driving the need for bigger, faster, extreme-scale transport.
Voices:
Related links
Want more from IP networks? Management’s the key
May 13, 2011 by Massimo Enrico in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
When I talk with colleagues and customers about the new generation of IP networking, there is one word that is used very frequently: "more."
When "more" relates to bandwidth, services, capacity, scale and quality of experience, everybody wants to hear it. Everybody likes the great business and social opportunities that we can foresee in the years ahead. But there is less enthusiasm when "more" is associated with complexity, cost, time for provisioning the network, and increases in overall operational cost driven by the type of services, number of connections and size of the network.
The key to handling the trade-off between positive and negative here is network management, the software that operates the network.
After working for many years in the telecom world, I know that network management is the big challenge for transforming network expectations and promises into reality. We are going to face the same experience we had several years ago in computers: where we once used to speak of CPU speed and RAM capacity, we gradually shifted the discussion to operating systems and finally tools and services. The scope, the service, is becoming king. This concept is now so important that we have entered the cloud era where the means – whether hardware or software – simply disappear.
Similarly, in the telecom world, the network – converged, with a lot of capacity and growing quickly – is becoming a given, just like the x86 platform in the computing world. The question is how to exploit this potential efficiently. To achieve that, we need to rethink network management, similarly to the shift that happened in the move from DOS to Windows and finally to iOS and Android. We will look more closely at that in my next entry.
Voices:
Related links
City life: index shows true value of connections
May 11, 2011 by Dwight Witherspoon in the theme Living in a Networked Society
ICT is making life better for you, me and billions of other people around the world. Just increasing broadband penetration alone has been shown to increase GDP, boost social cohesion and improve efficiency in service delivery.
But as we combine the power of ICT with the dramatic growth of cities globally, we are seeing the emergence of a new phenomenon within the Networked Society: the connected, empowered city.
Ericsson and consultancy firm Arthur D. Little have developed the Networked Society City Index, which ranks 25 cities according to ICT maturity and development. The aim is to inspire and assist networked societies around the world by highlighting the ways top-performing cities successfully use ICT to grow.
I see ICT becoming even more important for cities. The index report points out that more than half of the world’s population already lives in urban areas, a figure set to top 60 percent by 2030. People are flocking to the cities, because that’s where the opportunities are, the jobs are, and where the money is. All of this is putting more pressure on our growing cities.
The best performers in the index – topped by Seoul, Singapore and Stockholm – use their extensive investments in ICT to tackle issues such as environmental management, infrastructure, public security, healthcare quality and education.
In lower-ranked cities, which have underinvested in ICT, governments are encouraged to provide digital access and ICT training for the underprivileged to reduce the digital divide.
As well as all its social benefits, ICT is a vital way to reduce environmental impact, making cities more sustainable while their populations continue to grow.
I see the Networked Society City Index as a way of stimulating discussion and generating ideas about how the cities of the world can harness the power of ICT to meet their challenges. What are the challenges your city is facing? And how do you see ICT helping?
De-mystifying MPLS-TP
May 10, 2011 by Elisa Bellagamba in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
Is MPLS-TP a new technology, similar to MPLS?
Absolutely not!
MPLS-Transport Profile (TP), as the name indicates, is a ‘profile’ of MPLS, hence it is MPLS!
If I were a mathematician, I would have formulated it like this:
MPLS-TP = transport subset_of_(MPLS + OAM_tools + NMS_or_Control_Plane)
By ‘subset_of_MPLS’ I mean restricting the scope to only those MPLS mechanisms that operate in a ‘connection-oriented’ way, in that they don’t lose or delete precious information along the traffic path that is useful to identify the traffic stream.
This ‘deletion’ is not necessarily a bad thing. It is in fact used in the core network for scaling purposes, but it is something that would change the nature of transport networks.
‘OAM (Operation and Maintenance) tools’ are at the heart of MPLS-TP. They are extensions to existing tools augmented with some new ones designed with transport networks in mind, but capable of running in any kind of MPLS networks in general and allowing traffic to be monitored in a deterministic way.
The new point here is that they can run in-band together with the traffic and are independent of the need for a full-IP network.
Protection switching, then, can be performed within 50 ms, which is a very strict requirement coming from transport networks.
Unlike Ethernet-based OAM, the IETF BFD based OAM is consistent with the MPLS architecture and existing MPLS deployments that can be enhanced for interoperability.
‘NMS_or_Control_Plane’ refers to the possibility of controlling and configuring MPLS-TP networks either with a GMPLS (Generalize Multi-Protocol Label Switching) control plane or with a centralized NMS (Network Management System). The latter closely resembles the SDH way of managing networks.
And this is in fact one of the most remarkable aspects of MPLS-TP: it introduces no real difference to the way operators are used to running their TDM networks. Think about how OPEX is kept low in this way and you’ll realize the importance of this point even more.
So…when will the standardization be ready?
This is the most frequently asked question. Speaking in IETF language, the working group will have finished its work in May/June and the last RFCs will be published during October/November.
But speaking in terms of deployments, it is already feasible right now because the standards are already stable enough for implementation.
Unified MPLS…what is it? Yet another flavor of MPLS?
No, this is simply a name we are using to emphasize the point that MPLS-TP is MPLS as much as traditional MPLS.
For the very purpose of having a single, transparent and optimized e2e network architecture, we are reflecting on the nuances of customizing and tailoring MPLS to meet operators’ needs. But all these ways are simply MPLS, unified MPLS.
What do you think about it?
Voices:
Uniting worlds – MPLS gets a transport makeover
May 9, 2011 by Elisa Bellagamba in the theme A new generation of IP Networking
Let’s zoom in on the cost-reduction aspect following up from the previous posts on the wider IP networking scope.
I think everybody will agree when I say that, to achieve a more optimized and cost-efficient network, we need to simplify the multitude of network layers currently existing in many deployments. Together with that, we see that metro and aggregation networks are transitioning from the TDM to the packet model due to the progressively higher bandwidth demands of applications, and the gains that the burst tolerance of large pipes, shared protection and statistical multiplexing can offer.
This is where MPLS comes into the game.
Multi-Protocol Label Switching is a mature technology that has been playing a dominant role in core networks for 15 years, delivering a diverse and rich set of services and applications. Just that? Well, no. The biggest strength of MPLS is the fact that it can run over a multitude of different layer 2 technologies and, at the same time, it allows multiple services to be converged over a single network.
You can see it as a layer 2.5 technology which acts as a very efficient "common" denominator across layer 1 and layer 2 technologies.
This is where its big success is coming from and why it has been seen as the perfect candidate to harmonize the metro and aggregation networks, maybe even extending all the way out to the access nodes.
Of course, the metro and aggregation networks have very different characteristics and requirements than core networks. For example, a much higher number of nodes (which means individual nodes need to be cheaper), simple point-to-point and ring topologies (compared with the mesh topologies in the core) and, last but not least, the need to monitor the traffic in a deterministic way in order to be able to meet the agreed SLA (service level agreement) and switchover within 50ms for the traffic in case some kind of failure occurs.
This is where MPLS-TP (Transport Profile) comes into the game. I’ll elaborate on that more tomorrow…
Voices:
Related links
Latest 5
Loading
Latest Tweets
The latest tweets about our themes. Use the following hash tags to join the conversation.
