Rethink Wireless is a sample of our full paid service Wireless Watch, click link below for 4 week FREE trial. Wireless Watch Trial
Mobile operators have decided they still need to have their own voice platform, despite the collapse of the business that originally made their fortunes. However, the revenue potential of Voice over LTE (and Voice over WiFi) is limited so it there are two essentials - that voice contributes in other ways to the overall business model, and that deployment is as cost-effective as possible. The latter consideration is proving a major driver for virtualizing the IMS, and NEC's Netcracker division is the latest vendor to address that need.
NEC/Netcracker says its new vIMS offers virtualized control and data plane functions for 3G and VoLTE services, which can be managed from the firm's Network and Service Orchestration platform. This can sharply reduce the cost of VoLTE in particular, as well as allowing for greater optimization, says the company.
These promises will be important to MNOs. While native voice came rather late to the LTE process, VoLTE is now seen by the majority of MNOs as something they have to implement in the next couple of years, even if most of them cannot see a clear profit model. But VoLTE (and Voice over WiFi, which some are using either as an interim step or to fill LTE gaps) are significant deployments with high associated cost and complexity.
Given that, outside of some enterprise applications, it is not obvious that customers will pay for voice any more, high quality voice needs to support the business model in other ways - by keeping customers more visible to the operator, or by improving the overall user experience and therefore reducing churn. And it needs to be affordable.
Whether VoLTE/RCS really can provide something so compelling that users flock back from Skype remains to be seen. At least carriers can minimize the cost and deployment burden somewhat by turning to NFV. vIMS allows both signalling and data transfer functions to be run over a "common virtualization platform" on general purpose servers, which could reduce costs significantly, especially for smaller carriers. IMS functions are deployed as required, depending on service demands, so that the MNO can optimize performance and launch new services easily, while only scaling up as usage requires that.
In a panel at this week's CCA Annual Convention of smaller US carriers, Ericsson's CTO Glenn Laxdal said the benefits of virtualization were applicable to tier two and three operators, not just the big firms which are leading the way. The panel agreed that some network functions lent themselves to virtualization more than others with vIMS being selected as one of the best use cases. For a smaller carrier, Laxdal said this could be a more affordable way to launch VoLTE even to smaller numbers of subscribers. The other element which he recommended as a first step to virtualization was the EPC.
So far, virtualized IMS and VoLTE deployments have been the preserve of the tier one pioneers such as Telekom Austria (also working with Netcracker) and AT&T.
AT&T, which has a sweeping program for virtualization and software defined networking (SDN), said last year, ahead of its VoLTE launch: 'The underlying network to support Voice over LTE and the IMS piece of that will be virtualized and will run in a cloud."
Virtualized, outsourced VoLTE has also been on display at Russian operator MTS, which has been using Nokia's telco cloud infrastructure. This cloud-based system includes a full voice core with IMS, Telephony Application Server and HSS.
And IT companies are announcing NFV versions of their products to make the path to IMS and VoLTE a less daunting one for carriers.
But all the benefits of virtualization do not remove the need to invest heavily in the network to support the kind of QoS that will be necessary to differentiate from over-the-top options.
First, it will require carriers to intensify their RAN build-out, since they will need full coverage and, in many cases, denser cells for guaranteed hand-off and QoS (though WiFi Calling is a useful gap-filler, it also requires IMS). Where VoLTE is well implemented on a dense network, superior voice quality is generally reported compared to legacy circuit switched systems or the vagaries of OTT services. However, for most MNOs, it will be years before they achieve that kind of density over a majority of their coverage areas, and so they will have to maintain dual systems - and their customers will have to tolerate fallback to 2G/3G - for a long time, adding to cost and to QoS issues.
Huawei has already said that MNOs will need 'VoLTE Plus', which will appear from 2016, to deliver truly superior services. This will address uplink rates, density and also the risk of signalling storms, a factor which will drive the need for more investment in IP infrastructure and Diameter routers.
And second, it will need to provide services that users genuinely want, to avoid becoming merely a cost incurred for a dying service carriers just can't bear to let go. Call forwarding, video chat, unified voicemail boxes … these just don't seem exciting enough to lure customers away from free services any time soon.
Mobile operators cling to the voice-driven model they understand, but the profitable user experience has moved on
By contrast, mobile operators are proclaiming that with VoLTE they will be able to enhance their voice services with IP-based goodies like consolidated mailboxes and multimedia messaging - areas where Facebook will build on WhatsApp too. The operators will be spending many millions of dollars each on the IMS and other platforms to support VoLTE; they support teams of hundreds apiece dedicated to voice; and their collective subscriber base, around 7bn, is within the reach of over-the-top mobile VoIP services (currently numbering 1.5bn users).
Their cost bases are unsustainable in the web world, and however clever the rich communications services (RCS) they manage to layer onto their IP networks, they will not have the consumer impact of WhatsApp (or Skype or Google Voice or whichever new communications app is about to be unleashed by a start-up with two staff and a cost base in six figures not 10). Analysts at Citi estimate that telecom operators in Europe still generate more than 50% of their revenues from voice services, but that calls are worth 97% less if conducted over the internet, making traditional cost bases untenable.
But most cellcos believe that, without voice, they risk becoming dumb data pipes, and so they are adopting VoLTE and RCS because they can't think of anything else to do. So while there may be 35 VoLTE operators and 50m VoLTE users by the end of this year, according to calculations by Infonetics, the carriers will make very little revenue from them (and what revenue they do take will be fragmented between them, unlike WhatsApp's). For consumers, VoLTE will be just another mobile VoIP choice. Even carriers which brand and differentiate successfully will be playing in an unfamiliar market where most services are free and where users can be very fickle (for instance, Japan's Line overtook the mighty Skype to capture about 25% of the world's active mobile VoIP users last year).
One of Line's tactics has been to integrate paid-for apps such as games into its voice and messaging services, and some carriers believe the GSM Association's RCS platform (now branded Joyn) will allow them to do the same (again, ignoring the fact that expensively developed industry platforms are not the issue - firms like Line succeed by being agile, low-cost and understanding consumer behavior). This month, Deutsche Telekom launched Joyn services in Romania and Slovakia, trying to take on OTT providers with a smartphone app which offers one-touch access to video calls and messaging.
The service was developed by US-based Jibe and is delivered over its cloud network, a pattern which could help cellcos to reduce their costs and tap into web-oriented talent. That, rather than the offering itself, shows DT thinking in a more modern way, but it will still have to convince consumers that its services are better - and more fashionable - than WhatsApp and Line. Analysts were downbeat at a recent Sprint event, where the US operator announced HD Voice across its footprint (though it will not introduce VoLTE until 2015 onwards). Credit Suisse's Joseph Mastrogiovanni and Michael Baresich wrote in a client note: "HD Voice is now available across Sprint's network footprint. While the service should provide better voice quality, we do not expect it to set Sprint apart from its peers."
Telekom Austria CTO Gunther Ottendorfer told the recent LTE World Summit that it was important not to get carried away about VoLTE, calling it "a great development" but adding: "We shouldn't overhype and over-promise. At the moment, it's a very basic service with a very good call set-up time. Two to three years in the future, there will be ideas to combine voice with data information that's useful during calls."
Across the pond in the UK, both the largest cellco, EE, and the smallest, 3UK, are experimenting with new voice models and ways to compete with OTT rivals. 3 announced an app called ThreeinTouch, which allows users to talk and text over WiFi when in range. This offloads voice traffic from the cellular network, and may improve experience where cellular coverage is poor, but the minutes and texts are still deducted from the customer's allowance - in marked contrast to 'WiFi-first' approaches, which are being adopted in the US in particular, even by cellcos like Sprint. These similarly offload users onto WiFi when available, but that usage is free.
Just before the 3UK announcement, EE had proclaimed that it was investing £275m in its voice platform, and would enhance quality in congested areas by adding voice over WiFi (and VoLTE from 2015). It insisted that its WiFi voice offering would be of higher quality than OTT alternatives and would harness the native dial function of compatible handsets, rather than a separate application.
The statements reveal, yet again, the gulf of perception between mobile operators and OTT voice providers. MNOs are still talking about the network and how to harness an additional technology, WiFi, to improve quality of experience. Coverage and QoS are important to mobile users, but only insofar as they impact those consumers' experience of WhatsApp (or equivalent). Carriers have to decide whether they really do believe they can offer superior applications to Skype and Line by harnessing RCS, or whether their real power lies in keeping customers loyal to their networks by guaranteeing a good experience for key OTT apps.
The latter plays to their strengths and cultures, and they can use new tools to improve the proposition. Analytics and policy systems allow them, for instance, to identify a subscriber's most important app and offer guaranteed QoS for it (for a fee), or a good deal on data used for that app. Mobile OTT providers are looking for new revenue streams themselves, as they expand, and will be open to creative sharing arrangements with carriers (as seen, in particular, in some emerging markets like India). These are tactics which could keep the cellcos relevant, and require limited outlay, unlike the great red herring of massive VoLTE build-out.