1. ETSI/TRIS Workshop on NGN Interconnection Effects of incumbent migration to NGN on competing networks Paul Rosbotham 18 th January 2006

2. Agenda  Setting the scene  The interconnect iceberg  Some issues; –Availability of NGN interconnection –Commercials –Location of interconnection –Stranded Assets –Cost recovery for migration –New services –Network Hooks versus Common Capabilities –Number portability

3. BT’s 21 CN plans: From this ….. IP ATM PSTN DSL KStream PSTN DPCN PDH Fibre Copper Access SDH End User ~5.5k sites ~2k sites ~300 sites ~100 sites ~15 sites SDH - VC-4 ~1k sites SDH - VC-12 PDH Access

4. …to this…. IP-MPLS-WDM DSL Fibre Copper Aggregation End User ~5.5k MSAN sites ~106 Metronode sites Class 5 Call Server Content WWW ISP Muilti-service accessConverged Core

5. …over these timescales 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Broadband available to 99.6% Strategic vendors announced Broadband growth on MSAN/combo cards First new service launches based on re-usable capabilities Mass PSTN migration begins New operations & service management capability in place Broadband dialtone available to most customers Large scale non PSTN service migration begins 2009 Mass PSTN migration reaches more than 50% of customers Consult21 PSTN transformation technology proving Deep fibre technology proving Converged network Service creation Experience development centre

6. BT’s 21CN architecture Metro node Aggregator Node TDM & IP logical interconnects DSL Analogue ISDN2/30 MSAN POTS DSL ISDN Business Data Data centre location Call Servers Intelligence Modem NTE TA Media Server Gateway PE router MPLS core ADSL Modem Media Server provides tones, announcements, conference, messaging etc Gateway to legacy networks and PNOs Call Servers for: PSTN Features Multimedia & Mobility services (Including “Broadband Voice” Business services Terminal Adaptor Provider Edge Router 30,000 across 5000 sites 109 sites

7. It would be nice to do this… TDM Transmission Network IP Network TDM Transmission Network IP Network C&WBT C7 TDM Links PPC handovers IPStream/Datastream

8. It would be nice to do this… C&WBT NGN 21CN Multiservice Handover Callserver SBC Callserver SIP-I voice Next Gen Access LLU Etc

9. But the reality is… In any given location either C&W or BT will migrate first C&W NGN Callserver Gateway TDM Transmission Network IP Network BT C7 TDM Links PPC handovers IPStream/Datastream (or vice versa…)

10. The interconnect Iceberg Technical Standards Notional charging models

11. The interconnect Iceberg Technical Standards Notional charging models Detail of architecture Mapping functions to physical nodes Planning rules Practical commercials Practical contracts Transition arrangements Testing/Trials Support of legacy services Support of new services

12. Hitting the Interconnect Iceberg 64 obligatory products + ?? Non-obligatory products Immediate term + Medium term + Long term 5-10 Large Operators + ?? Small Operators + ?? Service Providers + 5 Mobile Operators Technical Standards + Detail of architecture + Interconnect location + Planning rules + Commercials + Contracts + Transition arrangements + Testing/Trials XXX = A lot to talk about Example – January 06: 16 Consult21 meetings 8 NICC (technical standards) meetings And January has 21 working days…

13. Some Issues : Availability of NGN interconnect  Two elements to NGN interconnect –MSIL Underlying multi-service IP link that carries NGN services –NGN voice (For initial release) SIP-I signalled voice service interconnect  BT’s delivery timelines are such that NGN interconnect will not be available when 21CN is rolled out –The difference Initial rollout = end 2006 MSIL availability April 2007? NGN voice interconnect availability end 2007? –Which causes issues Lack of equivalence Service quality issues (NGN-TDM-NGN translations) Costs of migrating 3 times –(e.g. C&W migrates, then BT migrates, then we have to migrate the interconnect later) Additional network costs –More TDM gateways needed to face the interconnect, instead of far cheaper Session Border Controllers

14. Some Issues : Commercials  What should NGN commercials look like?  MSIL –Complicated because a mixture of reciprocal & non-reciprocal services  NGN voice –Technology neutral approach being adopted short term (…2009) Deliver traffic at same location as today, and be charged the same rate But this leads to perverse investment decisions… Number of interconnects to support technology neutrality may be different to that needed to support longer term solution –What about longer term? When should “longer term” start? Unpaid Peering not an option –Traffic levels aren’t (and will never be) balanced –Some solutions amount to variations of paid peering Originator must pay terminator not just for transmission capacity, but service aspects Distance is not dead –May be diminished, but certainly not dead –“Distance” = network distance – network elements used by calls –Is differential between e.g. single Metronode & double Metronode conveyance material? –Is economy of scale of fatter interconnect pipes more significant than using fewer network elements? Likely models will revolve around –Peak bandwidth + –Peak sessions + –Network distance –How to move to a new regime while not destroying business models of companies with extensive investment overnight?

15. Some Issues : Location of Interconnect  109 Metronodes  Many CPs have fibre connectivity into sites that will be MSANs, not Metronodes –Legacy services –LLU  CPs required interconnect to BT at MSAN as well as Metronode level  BT have broadly accepted concept from technical perspective, but –With limitations – e.g. voice will need to loop through Metronode hence pointless! –Book has not been opened on commercial aspects

16. Some Issues : Stranded assets  If interconnect is defacto only available at Metronodes, then CPs will have fibre assets at sites which will either be useless, or have severely limited use  How to compensate for this? –Long-line fibres to suitable Metronode May not be nearest What if having multiple Metronode connections yields no commercial advantages? –Financial compensation How should fibres be valued? –Book value –Loss of future value?

17. Some Issues : Migration costs  Contract allows for CPs to recover engineering costs from BT for migrating the interconnect when the TDM node closes.  But what about non-engineering costs? –Customer communications & liaison –Billing system updates –OSS updates –Network management –Product management  And if we have to migrate in more than one step, who pays for the subsequent steps?

18. Some Issues : New Services Example : Voice Access  BT’s callserver controls its MSANs by H.248  Why not allow competing callservers to control individual lines on MSAN? Next Generation Wholesale Line Rental  Prolonged technical discussions with BT  Prospective solution is “Application Gateway Control Function” –Facility in BT callserver to encapsulate H.248 signals within SIP –Quasi-direct control, but with policing –Does it provide equivalence between BT and its competitors? –Standards are nascent Example :FAS  Next generation internet access services  Potential for broadband dial-tone  Prolonged discussion to scope solution  How to provide equivalence for LLU providers?

19. Some Issues : Network Hooks & Common Capabilities – the new bottlenecks?  A Common Capability is a service enabling capability which accesses network elements and resources in the control plane –E.g. presence, authentication –Capabilities are re-usable by services  A Network Hook is how the Common Capability accesses the network  It is clear that for 21CN, BT wish to provide Common Capabilities to 3 rd party providers –We’d like to have access to the Network Hooks rather than have to use BT’s capabilities –Could these capabilities have applications outside telecoms? E.g. could authentication become a capability for use in e-commerce? –Whether we get Network Hooks or Common Capabilities remains an ongoing debate…

20. Some Issues : Number Portability  Day one solution will mimic existing onward routeing solution. –Why? It works Doesn’t need re-invention of standards before initial NGN launch Works where there’s a mixture of TDM and NGN networks –Problems Scope for multiple TDM-NGN (& vice versa) conversions –But intelligent design/planning avoids the worst of this NGN interconnection standards have to allow for carriage of UK 5xxxxx prefixes  NICC is examining longer term solutions –Obviously factor in European/international debate –Have examined techniques such as SIP redirect, SIP proxy But don’t seem to add much value for associated transition costs that would be incurred –Usage of a carrier-ENUM based solution seems an attractive prospect SUBJECT TO BUSINESS CASE!!

21. Conclusions  Technical standards are the tip of the iceberg  It’s complicated!!  Have highlighted a few issues –Could easily have carried on for rest of day…