telecoms & webrtc: opposites attract?!

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

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


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.


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


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


Create new services

& partner

CHANCES FOR OPERATORS


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


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


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


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.


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


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!


THANK YOU.Sebastian Schumann

Application & Platform Innovation | Slovak Telekom, a.s.

[email protected]

@s_schumann

+421 903 419 345

ATTRIBUTION

Relationship designed by gilbert bages from the Noun Project

17

http://www.thenounproject.com/gilbertbages

http://www.thenounproject.com/

telecoms & webrtc: opposites attract?!

Technology

webrtc opposites

webrtc developers

webrtc ims

scopetelecoms webrtc

webrtc summit europe

browser communication

webrtc allip

telecoms business history