Framing a discussion around IMS and Web 2.0
There has been lots of noise in various forums recently regarding the challenge faced by communication service providers (CSPs) in realizing IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) architectures and the tantalizing opportunities to provide equivalent capabilities to consumers leveraging Web 2.0 architecture. As reported recently in a Heavy Reading report, CSPs have been working to design and implement IMS network architectures since 2002 but have been struggling to deploy IMS solutions due to a range of hurdles including compliant equipment availability, cost justification and legacy network integration. In contrast, many carriers are succeeding in using overlay technologies (i.e. Parlay or other network mediation languages) to abstract the complexity of their existing platforms and present Web services which can be rapidly integrated into new, exciting consumer service offerings ranging from mashups to sophisticated rich internet applications (RIA) leveraging Web 2.0 concepts and principles.
This is born out by a brief overview of two Gartner Hype Cycle reports;
- "Hype Cycle for Carrier Network Operations, 2006" : in this report, IMS is positioned at the peak of inflated expectations. Given that we are one year later, it is reasonable to expect that IMS is rapidly sliding down into the trough of disillusionment; and
- "Hype Cycle for Web and User Interaction Technologies, 2007" : which positions expectations around Web 2.0 and related technologies (AJAX, RSS, etc) as bottoming out and starting to move up the Slope of Enlightenment.
So everyone agrees that the expectations and maturity of understanding around IMS and Web 2.0 are at different stages, but these are fundamentally different technologies and concepts. So why are people discussing Web 2.0 as an alternate strategy to IMS?
It is important to understand these technologies individually before they can be compared;
- The IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) is an architectural framework for delivering services based on internet protocol (IP) multimedia to users over multiple access technologies and devices. It is generally implemented as a defined set of network management functions.
- Web 2.0 is the set of business concepts and technology which enable the delivery of highly interactive user applications, utilizing the internet as an integration and delivery platform. Applications commonly associated with Web 2.0 include blogs, wikis, mash-ups, social networks, etc.
To avoid providing an inadequate partial definition of each I recommend the following Wikipedia (a 2.0 poster-child) links; Web 2.0 and IMS.
So if these concepts, technologies and architectures are so different, what is it about them that is similar enough that their being discussed in the some breath? Because they both, in theory, allow CSPs to rapidly define and deploy new applications and services. Tech savvy customers , both consumers and enterprise, are demanding new, innovative services be delivered faster to retain their loyalty.
With IMS trailing in customer expectations, CSPs are looking at Web 2.0 technology to deliver immediate benefits and address time to market challenges. Web 2.0 is particularly good at tackling these problems because of its simplicity and the ubiquity of internet connectivity which enables the development of RIAs. Typical CSP services - voice telephony, video delivery, data services, etc - can all be delivered as applications which capture content (voice, video, etc), digitize it and route it onto the internet over a broadband data service. Client applications and application servers can be developed to mimic the functions of a carrier, i.e. routing, connection control, buffering to improve quality of service, etc.
The final advantage of Web 2.0 technologies is that so many systems have been connected by the internet and functionality exposed that there is a vast reservoir of "low-hanging fruit" - restaurant locations, weather data, map data, newspapers, etc - that people are rapidly mashing together in new and innovative ways which is creating a lot of excitement around Web 2.0.
This means that potentially all the quad-play services being chased by carriers could potentially be enabled as applications, packaging their data over a single telecommunications service, the data pipe. In fact, as carriers deliver faster broadband speeds due to customer demand, they are enabling the commoditization of bandwidth. We are all familiar with large enterprises today which have extremely high speed internet services over which they bundle all their voice, video conference and data services, at relatively low cost.
How much bandwidth does a consumer need? 20 MBs? 100MBs? 1 Gig? At what point does quality of service control in the network become irrelevant? Once they lose the value of network management within the core, CSPs become marginalized to providing a high speed, commodity data service with no ownership of the customer experience. The new, innovative application players will be creating customer value and owning the experience (and therefore the advertising dollars).
As ominous as this sounds, there are saving graces for carriers. Customers want to be able to use any device, anywhere. They want to be able to make a phone call without being dependent on high speed internet, they want to be able to call people who are on legacy network infrastructure and they increasingly want multiple-access solutions such as fixed-mobile convergence. These are not low hanging fruit for Web 2.0 but are addressable through adoption of an IMS architecture. It should be noted that these issues are not impossible to address through Web 2.0 technologies and application management services but they are non-trivial.
In conceiving innovative services and bringing them to market we need to balance the convenience and immediate power of Web 2.0 against the need and potential value of applications supported by an IMS network.
