Communications

FCC workshop on Open Internet at MIT this Wed January 13th

I haven't seen much publicity for this, but an FCC staff "workshop" on "Innovation, Investment and the Open Internet" will be held in the Bartos Theater at MIT"s Media Labs on Wedensday January 13, 2010.  "Open Internet" is usually political speak for Network Neutrality, although presumably some of speakers will differentiate between the advantages of open access versus the specifics of network neutrality, common carriage, structural separation and other approaches to achieving open access.

Details were provided in a press release which was picked up by a few people, but not many that I follow so, if you are in the Boston area, here's the scoop:

JANUARY 13 WORKSHOP ON INNOVATION, INVESTMENT, AND THE OPEN INTERNET

The Federal Communications Commission will hold a staff workshop on innovation and investment as part of the Commission’s Open Internet proceeding. This workshop will examine how the Internet’s openness affects the ability of network operators, Internet content and application providers, and other Internet technology developers to innovate and to drive investment, job creation, and economic growth throughout the Internet ecosystem. These issues will be explored from the diverse perspectives of innovators and entrepreneurs, investors, network operators and equipment vendors, and experts in Internet innovation and investment. 

WHAT: Innovation, Investment, and the Open Internet
WHEN: Wednesday, January 13, 4:30 p.m.
WHERE: MIT Media Lab, Bartos Theater Cambridge, Massachusetts
ONLINE: www.openinternet.gov/workshops/ 

PANELISTS:
Ajay Agarwal, Bain Capital Ventures
Tim Berners-Lee, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
David Clark, MIT Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
Jeffrey Glueck, Skyfire
Shane Greenstein, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University
Nabeel Hyatt, Conduit Labs
Susie Kim Riley, Camiant, Inc.
Paul Sagan, Akamai
Lynn St. Amour, Internet Society
Amy Tykeson, BendBroadband
Barbara van Schewick, Stanford Law School
Marcus Weldon, Alcatel-Lucent
Christopher S. Yoo, University of Pennsylvania Law School 
Sharon Gillett, Wireline Competition Bureau (Moderator)
Paul de Sa, Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis (Moderator) 

The workshop will be open to the public; however, admittance will be limited to the seating available. Audio/video coverage of the workshop will be streamed live with open captioning over the Web at www.openinternet.gov/workshops/.

Leaving for eComm in Amsterdam - Will tweet conference talks

I'll be leaving for Amsterdam this afternoon to attend Fall eComm 2009. 

I plan to record my notes as I did at the HD Communications summit in NYC in September, i.e. I'll write my notes on Twitter in real time and then, after the conference, collate the results into one giant blog post (for my own sake as much as for yours, esteemed reader).

If you're interested in live coverage, follow my tweets at: http://twitter.com/brough

Whoever and whatever you follow, I assume the common tag people will be using (as before) will be "eComm" so that's another approach...

Shameless self-promotion:  My part in the conference:

On Wednesday morning, I'm speaking on Open Spectrum issues.  I will point out some laws of physics and emerging technology changes that, together, suggest a new, better focus for open spectrum efforts.

On Wednesday afternoon, I'm a panelist on Andy Abramson's panel, "Are current wireline and wireless eco-systems still relevant?."

And then on Friday afternoon, I'm moderating a panel that I've organized on "Spectrum 2.0 - What's really happening?"

Download speeds of GSM & 3GSM networks

ARCchart is selling a new report entitled Mobile Broadband Performance of Carrier Networks.  I can't personally justify the purchase, but I notice this wonderful graph in their sample.

ARCchart gave mobile users free speed test applications, first for iPhone beginning in August 2008, then for Android and BlackBerry.  By June 2009, they had over 2 million tests across 268 wireless operators in 103 different countries.  For this graph, the data was filtered to focus on major urban areas.  That left 648K individual test results which were used to form the graph above.

What does this tell us?

• First, 2G GSM data rates are usually 50-60 Kbps.
• While EDGE data rates might go as high as 250 Kbps, a good bet is 140-200 Kbps.
• And finally, deployed 3GSM networks are good for 600 Kbps to perhaps 1.4 Mbps.
• Anything faster is extremely unlikely (at least as of 2Q09).

In a world of endless hype, it's nice to have some real data.

Structural Bypass - my talk from eComm last spring

At Spring eComm 2009 in California in March, I gave a presentation entitled:  Structural Bypass - A Simple, Proven Path to "Real Broadband" that dealt with policy approaches for first mile fiber deployments.  The video has just been posted here.  Unfortunately, this is my face and the audio with my words.  The slides are not shown in the video, instead you have to look at the slides here.

My arguments focused on urban areas only, as the economics are different between urban, suburban and rural deployments.  You can't just lump together all areas in a country and draw reasonable conclusions.  Also, the only data I have is for urban areas.  And, as a simplification for this talk (I only had 15 minutes including Q&A), my metric of success was the consumer price for 100 Mbps symmetric Internet connectivity.

My points were:

• Structural separation produces better results than other approaches.
• Separation between dark fiber and everything else is more effective than separations at higher layers.
• There is a political path, which I call Structural Bypass, which has been used at least once (in Stockholm), to effectively achieve structural separation without explicitly fighting that battle.

If you are interested, I suggest you open the video in one browser tab merely for the purpose of listening to the audio.  Then view the slides in another browser tab.  The audio is of some interest, but my facial expressions are of questionable value.

eComm agenda is on-line ―Check out the speakers!

There's a fascinating agenda building for eComm in Amsterdam in October.  Here's the latest list of talks, but what's best is the set of speakers who are giving these talks.  I personally know quite a few and know of many more (who I look forward to meeting).  The group includes a preponderance of innovators -- new views on what's happening, new ideas for how to drive change.  If you don't read through this list of talks, look at the speakers list here.  Then come to Amsterdam and meet these people.

21st Century Economics: Lessons for Telcos - Umair Haque (Havas Media Lab)

Advances In Spectrum Transparency, Software Defined Radio/Cognitive Radio - Darrin M Mylet (Spectru-Station)

Almost all Marketing & Product Management of Telco Services is Wrong - Rudolf van der Berg (Logica)

Current Trends in Community Wireless Networks and Beyond - Aaron Kaplan (FunkFeuer)

Death of the Handset: Evolving from Mobile Devices to the Mobile Digital Life - Mark Rolston (frog Design)

Edge As Value - Value As Edge - Graham Brierton (Voicesage)

Enslaving Humans using Communications Technology for Fun and Profit - Thomas McCarthy-Howe (Jaduka)

Entrepreneurial Advantages with New Open-Source Technologies - Jay Phillips (Voxeo)

European Telecoms 2015: Silent Death or Generative Bazaar? - Julien Salanave (IDATE Telecoms)

Finding Disruption - Michael Jackson (Mangrove Capital)

Goodbye Minutes, Hello Moments - Martin Geddes (BT)

Google Wave - David Wang (Google)

How the "Internet of Things" will Change the Way we Connect - Alexandra Deschamps-Sonsino (Tinker.it)

How to get More Value out of Customer Interactions by Blending Online with Voice - Stefan Hopmann (Swisscom)

Humans as a Service: Abstracting Communications to Reach New Applications - Todd Landry (NEC Sphere)

Is LTE being Held Hostage by Ordinary Voice Telephony? - Dean Bubley (Disruptive Analysis)

Lifestyle Segmentation from Carrier Location and Call Data - Greg Skibiski (Sense Networks)

Lifestyle Segmentation from Carrier Location and Call Data - Tony Jebara (Sense Networks)

LTE - Long Term Employment or Less Than Expected? - Moray Rumney (Agilent)

Open Access Makes Economic Sense - Benoît Felten (Yankee Group)

Open Screen Project: Next Generation Contextual Applications - Andrew Shorten (Adobe)

Opening of the Terahertz Region - Robert Horvitz (Open Spectrum Foundation)

Opportunities in Post-Telecom Connectivity - Bob Frankston (Frankston Innovating)

Post Financial Trauma - How is the Telecom Value Chain Now Positioned? - James Enck (mCapital)

Redefining Gifts in the Digital Space - Katie Lips (Little World Gifts)

Slowing Down Communication: Designs Inspired by Quality, Intimacy, and Humanity - Stefan Agamanolis (Distance Lab)

Spectrum 2.0 – What's Really Happening? - Brough Turner (Ashtonbrooke)

Stealth Approaches to Legislating Open Spectrum - Brough Turner (Ashtonbrooke)

Technology and Biological Evolution: What This Means for Media and Communications Technologies - Tomas Rawlings (University of the West of England)

Telemedia Futures - Gerd Leonhard (MediaFuturist.com)

The Emerging Telecology of Social Networks and the Status Update - Stuart Henshall (Phweet)

The Future of Interconnection - Rudolf van der Berg (Logica)

The Global Battle for Communications Justice: An Open Spectrum Manifesto - Sascha Meinrath (New America Foundation)

The Next Wave of Communications Applications - Cullen Jennings (Cisco)

The Practical Edge of Speech Technology - Moshe Yudkowsky (Disaggregate)

Ubiquitous Voice over Broadband - is There a Future Role for the Smart Pipe? - Martin Taylor (MetaSwitch)

Unlicensed Spectrum: Future Regulation - Prof. William Webb (Ofcom)

Video Killed the Telephone Czar? - Jan Linden (Global IP Solutions)

When Will HD Voice Become a Reality? - Martyn Davies (Dialogic)

What Would Telephony be Like if we Designed it Today? - Matt Ranney (RebelVox)

If you've read this far, there's a 10% discount via this registration link - register here.  And for more information, visit http://eComm.ec.  This one conference is at the top of my list for:  interesting, productive and an excellent set of contacts.

HD Summit wrapup - my twitter stream condensed

Here are my notes from  last week's HD communications Summit, i.e. my twitter stream condensed.  I've followed that with a copy of the day's schedule just in case the original on-line version disappears.  :)

Brough’s Twitter stream from the HD Communications Summit in NYC
September 15, 2009 – See http://tinyurl.com/nu843b

— Dan Berninger kicks off with a picture of Europe where Moldova is highlighted. See http://tinyurl.com/n3jst9 for Orange's PR.

— Jeff Pulver is talking about two friends in Paris who have HD voice on their triple play VoIP service and love it.

— Jeff passes a rumor that a US incumbent may launch HD on triple play in San Antonio. I wonder what he's heard. Nothing via GOOG.

—" Jeff promoting "HD Connect Now" a trade group that I know Dialogic has joined. http://hdconnectnow.org/

— Aside - Dialogic has published a white paper based on stuff I wrote last spring. http://tinyurl.com/qjsfda - needs Moldova update..

— Alan Percy of Audiocodes focuses on the problem of HD peering. It doesn't happen today! Is he volunteering to drive an effort?

— Alan Percy says VoIP peering at 2% of VoIP-to-VoIP traffic. I don't know where he got that data but it sounds plausible (or high).

—" Jan Linden of GIPS has the first audio samples of the day. Nothing new for me, but it's got me thinking about the audience today."

—" Jan Linden points out good HD also needs acoustic echo control, packet loss concealment & noise suppression - & device tweaks!"

— Mike Eastman of WYDEvoice announcing an all-software wideband audio conference bridge. http://bit.ly/1B8Y7

—" Robert Graves of ATSC Forum speaking. Are there lessons to learn from the HD TV industry? No surprise, he's a fan of Forums."

—" Robert Graves - indeed as ATSC Forum wraps up, he's available for hirer. :)"

— Robert Graves boasting about the efficiencies of HDTV spectrum usage.  But no mention of the industry resisting TV white spaces!

—" Robert Graves makes it very clear the broadcasters want to hold onto their spectrum to add new services - mobile, handheld, etc."

— Brough's HDTV summary - very political because it required FCC approval. At least we don't have that to deal with.

— Robert Graves summary - increased quality essential; all-format decode (old & new) from day one; consistent government policies.

—" Nxt up: HD Innovation Panel. Robert Messer, ABP Tech; Tobias Kemper Nimbuzz; Alan Percy, Audiocodes; Ryan Heidari, Qualcomm."

—" Robert Graves says HDTV tipping point was getting critical mass of programming, but this due to satellite, then cable! Not ATSC!"

— Tobias Kemper - turning point will be when mobile subscriber can just press the green button and get HD w/o knowing it.

—" HD Innovation Panel is thrashing around transcoding; too many coders; extra latency - Good business for Dialogic, Audiocodes, etc."

—" Ryan Heidari, Qualcomm.comments that Bluetooth has adopted HD stds but low power, low computational capacity."

— Ryan Heidari also lists five codecs approved by Bluetooth community. Sounds like too many to me!

—" 2nd HD innovators panel: Ben Lillenthal Citrix; Jim Toga, Vivox; Tim Panton, PhoneFromHere; Richard Romagnino, Voiceage"

—" Tim Panton is focused on zero install PC-based HD voice interfaces for web, facebook, etc."

—" Jim Toga focused on applications, currently at Vivox which does HD voice for gamers and in Second Life."

—" Richard Romagnino takes us back down into the mud. Codec licensing patent pools. Maybe necessary, but ugh!"

— Tim Panton says opportunity for innovation is in 3D sound - but need speakers and other consumer I/O devices

— Jim Toga - the microphone is in the iPhone is digitized at 32 KHz sampling rate. It could support really excellent telephony.

— Jeff Rodman co-founder & CTO Polycomm also starts with audio demos but promises 10 reasons people want HD voice.

— Jeff Rodman #1 Understand yr overseas team. #2 understand yr young kids. #3 it's easier - don't have to ask for repeats.

— Jeff Rodman #4 save yr energy for dancing. #5 like being there.

—" Jeff Rodman #6 enhance emergency abilities. #7 It's ""cool"" (if your old) or ""sick"" (if your young)."

— Jeff Rodman #8 no incremental cost. #9 everybody's making it. #10 Yr competitor sounds good when speaking to yr customers.

—" Jeff Rodman - responding to Q:. ""Polycom HD Voice"" is copyright, but no copyright on ""HD Voice"""

—" Rick Krupka of Uniden is focused on cordless phones. Claims, despite mobiles, cordless phones are still a hot seller."

— Rick Krupka was head of DECT Forum and is also promoting DECT 6 phones.

—" Rick Krupka gives Uniden pitch, nothing about HD yet... turns out they are ""backing into"" HD - still pitching non-HD stuff."

—" Rick Krupka - ""Conversational gain"" compares the end-to-end volume of a phone call with two people speaking live at 1 meter apart."

—" Rick Krupka - his only tie to HD is the idea that HD needs something like ""conversational gain."" Why was he invited to speak?"

—"#hdcomm Dan Petrie, SipEz; Jeff Rodman, Polycom; Dave Beckemeyer Televolution; Joyce Kim, GIPS are now on a panel ""HD in Action"""

—#hdcomm Dan Petrie was at Pingtel years ago when they tried to push wideband audio. It was way too early. No traction until 2 yrs ago.

—#hdcomm Jeff Rodman on early Picturetel experience where they needed wideband audio to make video ok - back in the mid-1980s!

—"#hdcomm Joyce Kim suggests people don't understand HD voice well enough to pay extra for it. My point: not revenue, but mkt share!"

—"#hdcomm Jeff Rodman - Polycom biz is coming from enterprise. Also large businesses understand HD now, e.g. multisite HD conferences."

—"#hdcomm Dave Beckemeyer says Svc Providers 1st Q is ""how much will people pay"" and that won't work. People won't pay extra for HD voice."

— Q: in what namespace will we make our HD calls? The panel is stumped. My answer - mobile. Tim Panton says DNS .tel.

— Chris Fine VP Goldman Sachs shows graphs that suggest IT spending has past the trough.

— Chris Fine ranks CIO priorities: Risk Reduction; Revenue Increase; Cost Reduction; Productivity Increase; everything else...

—" Chris Fine lists 7 possible scenarios for HD voice adoption, but this is just an exhaustive list. What does he believe?"

—" Chris Fine - at Goldman Sach, HD voice is being delayed while two ""large"" vendors fight over standards and interfaces."

— Chris Fine is not hearing anything about HD voice from the large carriers.

— Chris Fine gets others at Goldman to notice HD by putting MS Communicator on their desktop and then calling them.

— Josh Bottum of Cisco talking HD voice ecosystems - expects upstart svc providers to start and become thorn in side of big guy.

—" Josh Bottum admits HD voice is low on Cisco's radar, but he expects it to be a check box and to be on >50% of their desksets soon."

— Josh Bottum says high end users are demanding HD so smaller businesses are getting HD by default. But EU different than US.

—" Mike Rude of DSPGroup makes cordless phone technology, e.g. they are in the Gigaset phones (and Uniden?)."

—" Mike Rude pushes DSPGroup. They have DECT+VoIP+Wi-Fi+ and app processor in 1 chip, for DECT phones etc. Have 70% of 4M HD devices."

—" Michael Stanford, WireEvolution; Mike Jablon, Time Warner; Tony Storella, snom; are on a panel entitled ""The HD value chain."""

—" Mike Storella of snom expects there is a lot of money to be made in HD voice - but in products and conf svcs, but not for operators"

— Tony Stankus of Gigaset gets a round of applause as they have given cordless phones to everyone at the conference.

— Mike Storella of snom complains his VARs need more education as they still don't sell HD.

—" Correction: Michael Stanford, WireEvolution; Mike Jablon, Time Warner; Tony Stankus, Gigaset; Mike Storella, snom;"

— Mike Jablon answers question about Skype - Time Warner doesn't see them as competition.

—" Mike Jablon (TimeWarner) sees reciprocal comp as an issue today, but one that will eventually go away. I sure hope he's right."

— Mike Jablon points out the cable MSOs have enough of a customer base but he estimates 3-5 yrs to make them all HD capable.

—" Candice Malmstrom, FreedomVoice; Kevin Groth, XConnect; Rodrigue Ullens, Voxbone; Dave Frankel, ZipDX; on a panel HD Interconnect."

—" Rod Ullens provides e.164 numbers in various countries, also in inum (a new non-geographic country code) registered with the ITU."

— David Frankel need to program every IP-PBX with routing for IP-accessible e.164 numbers. Big hassle - guarantees islands of VoIP.

—" David Frankel: Have to solve the directory lookup issue, for originating phone or phone system. The rest is simple."

—" David Frankel: who runs the directory? Some contenders: Intelepeer, XConnect, NetNumber, Neustar, e164.org, VPF, Verisign, others"

—" Kevin Groth, XConnect: One source of resistance is carriers unwilling to reuce their reciprocal compensation revenue. Wow!"

— Rod Ullens talks about inum (new international phone #s) and HD support. He's still in the very early stages...

— Alla Reznik of Verizon discusses a global HD deployment by a biz customer but only in their corporate HQ island. It's Verizon NJ!

— Alla Reznik claims HD needs FCC to drive adoption. VoIP regulation is mixed or regulated as PSTN voice. Should be treated as IP.

— Alla Reznik answers Q about enterprise wide HD - problems in some countries about access links; otherwise waiting for PBX upgrades.

— Alla Reznik sees early adoptor HD beginning to happen. Today and in 2010 it's still early adoptors (who are large enterprises).

—" Alla Reznik simplified mkt study says joint wire-wireless offer would be attractive, but she can't comment on any plans. (far off?)"

— Alla Reznik comes back to pushing FCC to treat VoIP as IP (not voice telephony) - presumably this gets them free of term. fees.

—" Thomas Lemaire, FT-Orange, different telco, different accent (French). But his slide deck doesn't work."

—" Thomas Lemaire has 7M VoIP subs, >680K with HD, on triple play. Note: BT also has > 500K HD subscribers. Mobile HD just launched."

— Thomas Lemaire also notes that T-Mobile Germany has announced they are launching HD service.

— Thomas Lemaire - pitch is emotional - be closer to the people you love. HD provides a better sense of intimacy.

—" Thomas Lemaire - Sagen, Thomson & Siemens are providers of CPE for HD VoIP services in France & Spain."

—" Lemaire - HD telephones have better acoustic performance, so even when calling a non-HD phone, the quality is a bit better."

—" Lemaire - fixed: France, Poland, Spain,; mobile UK, Belgium, France in 2010 plus of course its already in Moldova mobile."

— Lemaire - why not faster? Time and money - and it's a complex endeavor - much coordination...

— Lemaire frustrated that they don't have MAR-WB to G.722 adaptation (so mobiles can't talk to HD VoIP).

—" Lemaire - HD mobile initially only on 3G networks, partly for use of 3G core network, partly to induce adoption of 3G."

— Lemaire hopes AMR-WB becomes the norm. They are working on transcoding but won't be able to do it when service launches in 2010.

—" Lemaire says pressure in France is coming from CLECs, i.e. there HD program is driven by competitive threats."

— Up next: Julian Spitka of Skype (with a potential 480M registers users who might use HD)

— Julian Spitka is pushing Skype SILK coder as a royalty free codec that everyone should be using...- proposed to IETF.

— Missed reporting on my panel...

—" Next panel Doug Mohoney HDConnectNow; Rich Buchanan, Ooma; Anatoli Levine, RADVison & IMTC; Ben Arnold, Consumer Electronics Assoc."

— Ooma announces they will be launching HD voice.

— Ben Arnold makes analogy to HDTV adoption; need critical mass of device in hands of consumers (as HDTV needed content).

— Anatoli (& IMTC) is focused on HD voice and video and on pitching the IMTC. No $ in HD voice - it enables other applications.

— Rich Buchanan sees chip and product companies as benefiting from HD voice.

— Doug Mahney promotes Digium & Asterisk as beneficiaries of HD Voice either directly or indirectly.

— ooma has already provided G.722 but they use ILBC on constricted access links.

— Robert Graves from audience - HDTV: satellite went first; Cable noticed (in 2002) and broadcasters came last.

—" From audience: quality of DECT HD phones in France is so good, that even non-HD calls sound much better than normal."

—" Jake MacLeod, VP/CTO, Bechtel Comms. 31 yrs; built 110k cell sites; Jake is summarizing the conference - spkr by spkr?"

—" Jake MacLeod - I'd like to get his slides (the summary of the conference) but I don't need to hear it now, at least not this detail"

—" Jeff is planning to do an event in California next spring. He's also investigating a possible event in Europe, sooner."

Event Schedule

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

8:30 9:00	Registration / Networking
9:00 9:05	Welcome - Daniel Berninger, CEO, FWD and Executive Director, HDConnect
9:05 9:20	Jeff Pulver - CEO, pulver.com - "Accelerating the Conversion to HD"
	Step 1 - The HD Technology Roadmap
9:20 9:40	Alan Percy, Director Market Development, AudioCodes
9:40 10:00	Jan Linden, VP Engineering, Global IP Solutions
10:00 10:20	Mike Eastman, VP Sales, WYDEVoice
10:20 10:40	Case Study: Lessons Learned from SD to HDTV Robert Graves, Chairman, ATSC Forum
10:40 11:10	HD Innovations Panel - Part I: Moderator - Robert Messer, President, ABP Tech - Tobias Kemper, VP, Nimbuzz - Alan Percy, Director Business Development, AudioCodes - A. Ryan Heidari, Director Technical and Product Marketing, Qualcomm
11:10 11:40	HD Innovations Panel - Part II: Moderator - Ben Lillenthal, founder and CEO, VAPPS - Jim Toga, co-founder and VP Engineering, Vivox - Tim Panton, CEO, PhoneFromHere - Richard Romagnino, VP Business Development, VoiceAge
11:40 11:50	AM Break
	Step 2 - Triggering End User Demand
11:50 12:10	Jeff Rodman, co-founder, CTO Voice Division, Polycom
12:10 12:30	Rick Krupka, VP Business Communication Services, Uniden
12:30 1:00	HD in Action Panel: Moderator - Daniel Petrie, CEO, SIPEz - Joyce Kim, VP Marketing, Global IP Solutions - Jeff Rodman, co-founder, CTO Voice Division, Polycom - David Beckemeyer, CEO, Televolution
12:50 2:00	Lunch
2:00 2:20	Field Report: HD Voice in the Enterprise Chris Fine, VP, Goldman Sachs
	Step 3 - Toward a Fully Functioning HD Ecosystem
2:20 2:40	Josh Bottum, Director Business Development, Cisco
2:40 3:00	Mike Rude, VP Business Development, DSPGroup
3:00 3:30	The HD Value Chain Panel Moderator - Michael Stanford, WireEvolution - Michael Jablon, VP Digital Phone Strategy, Time Warner - Tony Stankus, PM Emerging Technologies,Gigaset Communications USA - Mike Storella, Director Business Development, snom
3:30 4:00	HD Carrier Interconnection Panel: Moderator - Candice Malmstrom, Dir of Marketing, FreedomVoice - Kevin Groth, VP North America, XConnect - Rodrigue Ullens, CEO, Voxbone - David Frankel, CEO, ZipDX
4:00 4:20	PM Break
	Step 4 - The Path to HD Mass Market Adoption
4:20 4:35	Alla Reznick, Dir Product Management, Global Advanced Services, Verizon
4:35 4:50	Thomas Lemaire, Director Business Development, FT-Orange
4:50 5:05	Julian Spittka, Product Manager and Sr. Engineer, Skype
5:05 5:35	Mobile HD VoIP Panel: Moderator - David Bluenstein, co-founder, The Hatchery - Brough Turner, Chief Strategy Officer, Dialogic - Diego Besprosvan, CTO, MailVision - Mahesh Makhijani, Director Technical Marketing, Qualcomm
5:35 6:05	Perspectives on HD Tipping Points Panel Moderator - Doug Mohney, Editor in Chief, HDConnectNow - Anatoli Levine, Dir Product Management, RADVISION and President, IMTC - Richard Buchanan, Chief Marketing Officer, Ooma - Ben Arnold, Sr Research Analyst, Consumer Electronics Association
6:05 6:30	Wrap-up - Jake MacLeod, VP and CTO, Bechtel Communications
6:30 7:30	Networking Reception

LTE: another way to estimate when it will be real

Hardly a week goes by without a press release touting how soon we'll be using a Long Term Evolution (LTE) wireless network.  Verizon has promised a major commercial launch in 2010 and a two-city trial before the end of 2009.

Let me show you a little chart I put together for my 3G Tutorial and have repeatedly updated (e.g for my 3G / 4G Tutorial and for the cellular wireless history "Our G-enealogy" presented at 4G Wireless Evolution.  This tracks the different releases of wireless specifications by the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), the body that controls the GSM family of wireless specifications.

Release	Specs complete	Commercial deployments	Major new features defined
98	1998		Last purely GSM release
99	1Q2000	2003	W-CDMA (UMTS) air interface
4	2Q2001	2004	Softswitching & IP in core network
5	1Q2002	2006	HSDPA and IMS
6	4Q2004	2007	HSUPA, MBMS, GAN, PoC & WLAN integration
7	4Q2007	Future (2010 seems likely)	HSPA+, Better latency & QoS for VoIP
8	4Q2008	Future	LTE, All-IP

If every other release has taken ~3 years from specs complete to commercial deployments, why is LTE going to be so much faster?  Especially when we remember the 3GPP Release 8 specification freeze was ahead of schedule only because parts were delayed until March 2009.

Based on this chart, an sane person would project LTE in 2011 and wouldn't be surprised if substantial deployments didn't begin until 2012.

Now it's true, I define commercial deployments as at least two operators (somewhere in the world) selling commercial services to the general public who also have access to an assortment of compatible mobile devices.  On the other hand, if Verizon has just one or two USB modems that receive data from the LTE network and they deploy that LTE network beyond their first two cities, Verizon will declare they've met their plan.  So most likely we'll both be "right."

Speaking at 4G Wireless Evolution conference next week

I'll be at 4G Wireless Evolution next week.  It's being held in Los Angeles, co-located with Internet Telephony Expo (ITEXPO West 2009).

My first session is:

TUE 9/1 - 9:00-10:15am

"Mobile Broadband- New Applications and New Business Models” (4G1-01)

ROOM #: 501A

Whether it's LTE or WiMAX or local WISPs using combinations of Wi-Fi, WiMAX and other technologies, we are on the verge of having affordable mobile broadband in the US (it's already available in the UK and Scandinavia and becoming available elsewhere in the EU). What services can be provided over the top and what services need or can benefit from operator capabilities (QoS, security, ...)? The iPhone store, Android store and similar initiatives suggest power is shifting away from the operators and into the hands of application developers and the end user. How can operators leverage their core capabilities (QoS, security, billing, customer relationships, call detail, ...) to provide applications and remain relevant to their customers?

And the second session a day later:

WED 9/2 - 8:30-9:45am

"Our G-enealogy” (4G3-01)

ROOM #: 501A

The Generations do not flash cut from one version to another so 4G should not be considered an end point, but a process. Looking at the history of cellular technology helps us gain an understanding of the converging 4G model of the world. Based on cellular technology, and the progress to date, how long will it take for Long Term Evolution (LTE) to be delivered? Where do we stand in the process of delivering wireless broadband services?

If you will be at 4GWE or ITEXPO, please say hello.

eComm in Amsterdam ― shameless self promotion

I've just wrapped up a focused effort that delayed blogging and many other things.  As a result, I finally submitted the detailed description for my plenary slot at eComm Fall 2009 which will be happening in Amsterdam October 28th-30th.  My abstract is not up on the website yet, but hopefully the next few weeks will bring details on my talk and many others.  For now, let me just say my title is
   Stealth Approaches to Legislating Open Spectrum
in which I propose what I hope is a novel approach to dramatically expanding the capabilities and commercial success of license-exempt consumer devices.

This will be the first time eComm has been held in Europe but, based on the first two eComm conferences (2008 and Spring 2009), this is the meeting for the future of communications.  It's not a trade show and it's not a mass event.  Instead, it's three days of rapid paced information ― high level, insightful and non-commercial.  Even more important, the people are very, very interesting.  It's not cheap, but it costs less if you sign up now (especially if you sign up before July 21st).  What's more, because I'm such an enthusiast, and I'm on the conference's advisory board, I've been given a discount code.  For an additional 20% off type in "BroughTurner" as the eComm discount code, i.e. where the registration form says "Click here to enter a promotional code."

I hope to see you in Amsterdam in October.

Opportunity Doesn't Always Knock. Sometimes It Calls.

The mammoth telecom industry ― fixed and cellular ― is in the process of being re-written. You can stand on the side and be written into history or join with the growing community that's writing the future. Opportunities have never been so great ― to influence how humanity connects, communicates and collaborates and to profit from radical restructuring.

The Dumb Pipe Paradox ― How open access networks build shareholder value

On more than one occasion, "natural monopoly" arguments have been used to obtain, and/or hold onto, a government granted monopoly,  This is definitely true of access networks where the physical right-of-way to any specific real estate parcel is a limited resource, but the economics of what you put in it have changed over time.  At one time it made sense to consider telephone service a natural monopoly.  And for most of the twentieth century, telephone service was operated that way (think Bell System in the US and government run PTTs in most of the rest of the world).  In the latter 20th century, cable TV became a second such monopoly.  Today, it's increasingly clear that telephony and television are higher layer services, not inherently tied to the access network.  Yet our laws and regulation have barely evolved ― each access network is still regulated as a different vertically integrated monopoly.  And, managers in each business focus on preserving their historic monopoly even as market forces or government regulations force them to also offer Internet access.

So it's interesting to see solid economic analysis showing that access network shareholders would make more money if management was willing to open up their access networks, i.e. become "dumb pipes."

The first such argument I encountered was by Craig Moffett and Amelia Wong of Bernstein Research who wrote an interesting paper The Dumb Pipe Paradox, early in 2006.  The original paper is not on line but I have some quotes here and there are some other comments here.  Craig and Amelia were looking at Cable TV's hybrid fiber-coax networks and concluded that cable companies could make more return on investment if they were in the pure dumb pipes business.

More recently, I reported on a speech given by Benoît Felten of Yankee Group and Fiberevolution in which he argued that new fiber to the home (FTTH) investments could be paid back more rapidly if the FTTH network were open, i.e. offered to competitors at attractive wholesale rates.

Now Benoît has written a detailed report describing his findings.  Although the report is for Yankee Group subscribers only, Benoît is also giving a webinar on the subject next Tuesday and that's open to all.  Register here.

I particularly liked the polite suggestion near the end of Benoît's report:

Recommendations for Incumbents
• Re-examine your economic fundamentals in light of the FTTH business model. It’s irrational to cling to antiquated business practices if new approaches, no matter how disruptive, deliver better shareholder value.

Shareholders should demand phone companies open their fiber networks

A few weeks ago, Benoît Felten of Yankee Group and Fiberevolution gave a speech at a New Zealand Commerce Commission event which included a fascinating argument.

He points out that receiving a return on the substantial capital investments that a fiber to the home (FTTH) project requires is much more dependent on takeup rates than on the average revenue per user.  

Single player large scale deployments usually achive only 20%-25% initial adoption after which growth is exceedly slow.  On the other hand, systems which are open to competitors, i.e. with viable wholesale services, attract many more players who market, sell and deliver new services thus dramatically increasing adoption and accelerating the wholesaler's return on investment.

In short, obtaining a regulatory holiday so you can run your new fiber network as a monopoly is actually bad for your shareholders!

Benoît's speech was filmed.  For the full presentation (in four segments of < 10 minutes each on YouTube) see Benoît's post.

If you want just the essence, listen to the first three minutes of this:

Here is an enlarged version of the chart that Benoît is using while he speaks:

More cloud-based telephony services

One thing (of many) that struck me during this morning's session at eComm 2009 was multiple companies going after cloud-based communications platform services.  Three which had their public launch announcements today were Grid.com, Tropo.com from Voxeo and Mobivox.  They're not the first to tackle this area and they each have a somewhat different focus, but there's a clear interest in producing Web 2.0 service platforms that developers can use to access communications services without hassle.

Grid.com is from a couple of developers who were frustrated that they could mash up an application quickly but then had to spend months getting SMS short codes and other communications services.

 

Tropo.com is an offshoot of Voxeo and makes the underlying Voxeo platform services available to Web 2.0 developers.

 

Similarly, Mobivox has launched a cloud services platform based on the platform they build for the Mobivox service.

There is certainly room for someone to get this right.  On the other hand, there must be a dozen companies going after portions of this space.  The first round were telephony calling platforms like CallFire, Angel.com and five9.com focused on allowing developers to access traditional calling, switching and IVR platforms - call centers and business process automation were early targets.  It will be interesting to watch the evolving focus of this new round of entrants.

Where's the money in Communications for 2009 & beyond?

Sorry, no magic answer.  But I look forward to eComm 2009 to provide a lot of ideas in the first week of March.  The speaker lineup is posted and the list is both impressive and diverse.  Like last year, the format is a single track with a veritable firehose of information, mostly in 15 minute and 5 minute talks.

Based on last year and what I know of the speakers on this year's list, it fair to say Lee Dryburgh has done an excellent job of picking interesting and bleeding edge speakers.  I'm also on the speakes' list and I have to say I'm working hard to make sure my 15 minutes lives up to expectations.

Even though this is a terrible time for conferences, eComm has signed up an impressive list of sponsors.  The facility (The San Francisco Airport Marriott Hotel) is larger this year and so there is still room for additional attendees, but early bird prices end this week.  Also the extra 20% off you can get my mentioning my name ends this Friday, so if you are thinking of attending sign up this week.

So here's the deal, if you mention my name you get 20% off.  More specifically, if you enter the promo code "BroughTurner" (case-sensitive) at the appropriate point during registration, you'll get 20% off the registration fee.

Best conference bet for 2009 ― eComm 2009, March 3-5, San Francisco

I attended a number of conferences in 2008, both interesting and not so interesting.  One conference stands out, for the range of interesting speakers and the variety of interesting people I met.  That was the first Emerging Communications Conference, eComm 2008, organized by Lee Dryburgh.  Many of talks from this conference are available on Slideshare and as podcasts on IT Conversations.

eComm 2009 is scheduled to take place at the San Fransico Airport Marriott, March 3-5, 2009.  I highly recommend you check it out.

This is not a trade show with vendors hawking today's products and multiple tracks full of vendor product pitches. 

Presenters have been chosen for the quality of their proposals:  is it new?  is it disruptive?  what will the audience learn?  (As an adviser, I've been in on those discussions).  Like last year, the format is one track spread over three days, with 15 minute presentations, 5 minute lightning presentations, panel discussions and social time.  It all adds up to a veritable fire hose of information.

There's a list of speakers here.  Major topics for 2009 (so far) include:

* Mobile Social Networking (MoSoSo)
* Open Handsets & the Open Ecosystem
* Both Voice and Video Evolution
* Convergence of Media with Personal Communications
* Open Spectrum
* Open Communication Platforms
* Leveraging Cloud Computing
* Social Computing
* Towards 4G Wireless
* P2P and Decentralization of Telecoms
* Communications enabling business processes, especially B2C
* New Forms of Contactability and Connectability
* Emerging Markets

And last, but by no means least, if you mention my name you get 20% off.  More specifically, if you enter the promo code "BroughTurner" (case-sensitive) at the appropriate point during registration, you'll get 20% off the registration fee.  This works now, while early bird rates are in effect, and I'm told it will also work right up to the last minute ("late", not on-site registration), although then it's 20% off the full conference rate, and only if the event is not sold out!

I hope to see you there.

2G, 3G, 4G Wireless Tutorial

Recently I put a lot of effort into updating an earlier wireless tutorial.  Part of the resulting material was presented at the Communications Developer Conference in Los Angeles in September 2008.  Other versions have been used internally at NMS Communications.  Last week our marketing team recorded me presenting the tutorial and, today, the complete Wireless Tutorial:  2G, 3G, 4G and beyond became available as a slide deck and as three recorded segments of audio with slides (.wmv files).  Here's the abstract:

This comprehensive tutorial is designed to benefit both the technical and general telecom audience. Brough Turner reviews the history and evolution of mobile radio, evolving network architectures, services, applications, and business models; considers alternative 4G paths and the potential for convergence of GSM/LTE and WiMAX; and discusses the longer term impact of new WiFi standards on fixed and mobile wireless services. In this wireless tutorial, Brough also covers core network architectures and their evolution to all-IP, new wireless applications and application frameworks, spectrum licensing and more.

This work started as a 3G Tutorial that Marc Orange and I put together back in 2002.  Although the 3G Tutorial has not been updated since early 2003, it has remained one of the most frequently accessed pages on the NMS website.  So clearly there's interest.  Hopefully this new version will be even more useful as it covers the whole range from pre-mobile radio days to the latest 4G proposals.  Here's the outline:

• History and evolution of mobile radio

• Brief history of cellular wireless telephony
• Radio technology today: TDMA, CDMA, OFDMA
• Demographics and market trends today
• 3G, 3.5G, WiMAX, LTE and 4G migration paths

• Evolving network architectures

• GSM-MAP (EU) and IS-41 (US) origins
• Softswitches, VoIP and SIP in NextGen Networks (NGN)
• 3GPP and NGN convergence: releases, features and schedules

• Evolving services

• SMS, MMS, location, rich presence, video
• IP multimedia subsystem (IMS) vs. “dumb pipe”

• Applications and business models

• Killer applications & killer platforms
• 2-sided business models

• Related technology, Issues and Futures

• WiMAX, Backhaul, Bluetooth, NextGen WiFi
• Mobile device diversity / application environments

But there's still more needed...

There is much more I could add.  The current tutorial barely touches on mobile handsets, handset software and handset applications frameworks.  There's also a lot more to say about WiFi evolution, but I don't want to promise an update that could be significantly delayed.  After all, it did take me five years to get around to updating the original 3G Tutorial.   :-)

MMS has missed its window

Multimedia Message Service (MMS) is the mobile industry's successor to SMS.  MMS goes beyond texting to support pictures and graphics, voice messages and video clips sent as messages.  Unfortunately MMS was a technology design not a service design.  It can support a variety of services but the specific services are not standardized and thus not widely adopted.

Of course the much simpler Short Message Service (SMS) also took a while to be adopted, but MMS services are more diverse and they have a shorter window of opportunity.  Now there are signs that window is about to close.

A few weeks ago MobileIN asked me for an article on this subject which I wrote last Friday while flying back from AstriCon.  My article has been published so click through for the details.

eComm 2009

The eComm 2009 website is live.

As some of you already know, the date was picked through a feedback process conducted on Facebook.  It's March 3-5, 2009 in California.

I attend a lot of conferences and trade shows and, as I look back at the past year, the most interesting conference I attended was eComm 2008.  Typically conference organizers start with a list of sponsors and/or exhibitors and then do their best to build an interesting conference, given their primary objective of facilitating sponsors' and exhibitors' promotional efforts.

For eComm, Lee Dryburgh (the principal organizer behind eComm), started with an idea ― emerging communications ― then went after speakers who had something relevant to say and were known to be good at saying it, finally he sought sponsors and attendees interested in discussing emerging communications.  The result was a really interesting set of talks and a fascinating set of people in attendence.

If you are at all interested in where communications is going, subscribe to the eComm 2009 blog and think about attending eComm 2009.

African telecom: corruption mostly limited to publicly run operators

The latest issue (#421) of Balancing Act News Update has an interesting story based on the prosecution (in the US) of former sales agents for ITXC found guilty of bribery in arranging VoIP connectivity contracts.

Six of the seven telcos involved were state owned businesses and in the one with private ownership (Sonatel, the PTT in Senegal that's partially owned by France Telecom), it was France Telecom that got suspicious.  Balancing Act News goes on to point out the problems with bribery:

It will be clear from the summary of the available public documents that this approach to business has a number of pitfalls. The bribed employees in two instances subsequently had to sort out “cost disputes” which were the pretext for asking for more bribes. In one instance, the bribed employee failed to share his gains with the managing director. In the only company with a private shareholder (which also sells wholesale minutes), the bribed employee became isolated under commercial questioning: this provides a strong if not always decisive argument for privatisation.

Based on their conclusion, it appears there is no viable way to do business with the state controlled Telcos in Africa:

From the telco side, what has been known privately for years is now revealed clearly and publicly by the Rwandatel and Sotelma examples. Corruption is systemic and goes right to the top and bribes are expected to be shared with the boss of the organisation and woe betide anyone who tries to keep the money to themselves.

Luckily, the mobile telecom industry in Africa is mostly private and increasingly competitive, with the result that mobile phone adoption is soaring in Africa.  It would be nice to think the PTTs will be cleaned up, but in any event, the benefits of telecom are reaching African citizens via mobile phone services.

Why the Danes text while the US talks

Recently I can by some interesting data on monthly voice and SMS usage in Denmark.  But first let me set the stage.  It's well known that people are price sensitive ― as per minute prices fall, telephony usage goes up.  It's also true that people prefer flat rate pricing as it reduces their mental transaction costs.  This graph (from Andrew Odlyzko) shows what happened to mobile minutes of use when flat rates were introduced in the US.

AT&T launched their Digital One-Rate plan in 1998 offering a block of minutes for one monthly fee with no long distance or roaming complications.  This plan was so popular that all operators were forced to respond, with the results visible in the graph above.

Today US mobile voice usage is approaching 800 minutes per month and that's average.  Leap Wireless and MetroPCS subscribers use 1500-2000 minutes per month.  One wonders how much time people can spend on the phone...

So here's the new (to me) data from Denmark.

The Danish regulator has a wonderful set of statistics available in half-year increments.  Those above are from 2H02 thru 2H07.  Voice minutes are out-going traffic in millions of minutes per period (6 months).  The population of Denmark is 5.5 million (82% are over the age of 14) so this represents ~330 voice minutes and ~225 messages per person per month.

Wireless minutes of use continue to rise, but fixed line minutes are falling faster so total voice minutes are falling.  But total person-to-person communications is still increasing because SMS and E-Mail usage has soared, growing to roughly 40% of all communications.

This is very interesting as flat rate pricing for monthly bundles of SMS messages was introduced in Denmark in 2002.  Meanwhile, Danish mobile voice calls are mostly charged per minute (very typical in Europe) and are expensive compared to the US.

So price matters, but flat rate monthly bundles (rather than per minute or per message charges) is even more important in driving usage.

Gold bits and brown bits ― When you need QoS, two classes will do it!

Quality of Service is a contentious subject.  Every now and again, I look at Wikipedia's QoS page.  (Here are my comments 18 months ago).  While the Wikipedia content continues to evolve, it always downplays anything that questions the value of sophisticated QoS.  As of today, the section titled "QoS Problems" has been cut back to a single sentence (which does reference a classic anti-QoS paper):  "Internet2's QoS Working Group concluded that increasing bandwidth is probably more practical than implementing QoS."

Rather than directly debunk QoS yet again, let me investigate where QoS is actually useful by looking real life situations and the deployed solutions that allow for robust services despite congestion.  Identifying common elements in successful deployed solutions is much more realistic than theorizing about NGNs that still await deployment.

The first thing to notice: the only problem is on access links.  As I've written before:

Once you get beyond the access network, every link in the Internet — local, regional, national or international — is carrying multiplexed traffic from many users. Multiplexing many, many, bursty flows results in relatively predictable volume. Traffic volumes vary by time of day, but these links don’t saturate, except as a result of poor engineering or forecasting on the part of an ISP, or failures in other parts of the network causing rerouted traffic. Either case generates a rapid response from any ISP that expects to remain in business. So “best efforts” in the Internet core means sub-millisecond delay variations and near zero lost packets.

Net, net:  you never need QoS priority schemes in the core, all traffic gets excellent service. 

Access links are another story for two reasons.  First it can be very expensive to add more bandwidth.  This may be a byproduct of political/ regulatory issues, but we won't go there, at least in this post. :-)  Second, an access link may saturate due to an outgoing email with large Powerpoint attachment (the home case) or an equivalent event in the corporate environment, for example, transfer of a large CAD file.

But these are solved problems with multiple commercial products on the market for residential and corporate use.  It's worth looking at what these products do in order to understand exactly what kind of QoS is really required, when you can't just provision more bandwidth.

In the corporate market, there are two approaches.  The brute force approach splits voice and video telephony traffic from data traffic using two separate Internet connections with the VoIP connection sized to preclude any potential congestions.  When a single access link is shared, the typical solution employs a QoS router at the customer’s end. The QoS router gives absolute priority to outbound VoIP packets and protects inbound VoIP packets by active traffic shaping; i.e., by signaling remote TCP hosts to throttle inbound TCP data flows so there’s enough capacity for inbound VoIP packets.

Elsewhere within corporate LANs, there is either no QoS or simple priorities. Since VoIP traffic is a tiny percentage of all traffic, it can be given absolute priority without noticeably impacting other applications.  Thus some enterprise VoIP installations use QoS based on DiffServ or Ethernet 802.11p/q.  Typically there are just two classes assigned, with absolute priority for VoIP and video telephony.

I've written about equivalent solutions for residential situations that support VoIP and interactive gaming.  The solution?  Consumer VoIP phone adapters incorporate simple priority and have the ability to fragment large packets (so as to reduce serialization delays).  Because it's so useful for VoIP and also for interactive gaming, this functionality is showing up in popular residential routers from Linksys, Netgear, etc.

Two classes and simple priority is what it takes ― Gold bits for voice (and video and interactive gaming); Brown bits for everything else.

And that's only when you can't get more bandwidth.  On your own premises, it's likely cheaper and easier to upgrade to Fast Ethernet or Gigabit Ethernet.

Another analyst under estimates mobile subscriber growth

From a recent press release

Worldwide mobile subscriptions will rise from 3.9 billion in 2008 to 5.6 billion in 2013, according to a new Strategy Analytics report.

Sorry guys, you're forecast has fallen into the same trap as almost all the five year forecasts I've seen since 1995.  About the only credible analyst's statement in this area is one by Mark Newman, head of research at Informa, who said (in 2007):

The mobile industry has constantly outperformed even the most optimistic forecasts for subscriber growth.

The problem is analysts' forecasts are consistently pessimistic.  Consider Strategy Analytics' numbers.  They project 1.7 billion new subscribers in 5 years (60 months).  By every measurement I've seen, mobile subscription growth has been over 50M per month at least since 2004-2005.  For example, 2 billion subscriptions in September 2005 and 3.3 billion subscriptions in November 2007 comes out at 52 million new subscriptions per month.  If you believe Strategy Analytics' forecast of 3.9 billion by the end of 2008, that's 54 million more per month for the balance of 2008.  If we merely sustain current rates, we will hit Strategy Analytics' December 2013 forecast in just 31 months, i.e. in July 2011.  So they expect current growth rates to decline rather substantially in coming years. 

Why would they think this?  I haven't spoken with anyone at Strategy Analytics, but in discussions with other analysts over the past ten+ years, a frequent answer is "current growth rates will have to slow as we're running out of people who can afford mobile phone service."  Wrong!  This is the view of someone who doesn't understand Moore's law.  Whether it's transistor density or wireless performance, innovation drives exponential improvements in price-performance.  Per-capita GDP is improving slowly, but the cost of mobile phone infrastructure and mobile handsets is dropping substantially every year.  Today, those at the bottom of the pyramid are in a position to at least use a phone and increasingly to acquire their own mobile phone.

In addition to innovation ― at work since the introduction of mobile services ― political obstacles are falling in many countries.  Since 2000 it's become clear, mobile phone adoption brings significant economic advantages, and the best way to get mobile phone adoption is to attract multiple competitive mobile phone operators to your country.  Increasingly, even the most backward dictators are realizing there's more money to be made taxing multiple competitive mobile phone services than in keeping all the profits from one government phone company.  So country after country are encouraging competitive mobile phone operators and allowing substantial foreign investment.  This political trend serves to increase mobile phone adoption rates.

Of course, adoption rates will saturate at some point.  When might that be?  The best evidence we have is for 2G and 2.5G services in developed countries.  It appears things slow down a bit around 120 subscriptions per 100 people.  Of course this may change with 3G.  It's too early to tell.

Technology adoption generally follow an S-curve:

If saturation is at 120 or above, and we're currently around 50, we have at least another five years of rapid growth.  Perhaps a five year forecast made in 2013 will be justified in projecting a decrease in adoption rates.  But by then we'll also understand the impact of 3G.  Who knows? 3G may drive things even faster. 

Or perhaps by 2013, I will have a single mobile data subscription for a gateway device on my body, that in turn provides connectivity for all my other devices.

In any event, I expect 5.6 billion mobile phone subscriptions by the summer of 2011 and more than 6 billion by mid 2012.

Service Creation - Traditional Telecom Still Doesn't Get It

TMCnet is republishing, on their website, articles I originally wrote for my monthly column, "Next Wave Redux", that appears in Internet Telephony Magazine.  Here's from the April 2008 column:

In the late 1980s and through the 1990s the telecom industry defined and then adopted standards for the “Intelligent Network” (IN). The objective was to make it easy to create and deploy new applications and new services. More recently the industry has defined various next generation networks, most notably the IP Multimedia System (IMS). Besides convergence economies (all services on IP), the objective is to facilitate the rapid development and deployment of new applications and new services. Sound familiar? Unfortunately, it’s not going to work any better the second time around.

Go here to read why.

SIP revolution, massively delayed — but there's hope

The SIP Center asked for an article which I finally wrote the weekend before last.  My article was actually rather negative, but they published it anyway.  Now I'm feeling a little guilty as there is an optimistic note I could have used as my conclusion.  So let me try again...

First let me summarize my problem.  When SIP emerged in 1996, it's support for direct connections from one user to another was extremely compelling.  This was the VoIP protocol which would lead to a complete revolution in communications.  Yes, you might refer to a directory service, but you wouldn't need an operator to make a phone call.  You could do it yourself, directly.  Unfortunately, that revolution never happened.

So far, no revolution

The biggest change in telecommunications in the past 12 years has been the global deployment of three billion mobile phones, all based on conventional circuit-switching and Intelligent Network technology — nothing to do with SIP. And arguably, the most interesting telephony service enhancement, after mobility, came from Skype with its seamless integration of presence, instant messaging, wideband audio and video. But Skype is based on proprietary protocols, not SIP. Finally, VoIP technology has helped drive down the cost of international calling, but using MGCP, H.248 &/or H.323 protocols much more than SIP, at least so far.

SIP has been adopted by PBX manufacturers in recent years, but this doesn’t seem to have changed business practices at all. The IT department still buys the PBX and the telephone sets from a single vendor and then contracts with a service provider to handle calls outside the enterprise.

And then there's IMS

SIP has been adopted for use in the IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), but this completely warps the original SIP vision.  IMS is a centralized system — a next generation network for mobile and fixed operators.  It's the complete opposite of the original vision for SIP.

Why have things gone so far astray?

SIP assumed an end-to-end Internet

SIP assumes it's possible to make end-to-end connections over the Internet and therefore a SIP session can know about and use globally valid IP addresses.  That was a naive assumption, even in 1996-1999 when SIP was being defined.  The real Internet contains firewalls, network address translators (NATs) and other "middle boxes."  They are not going away, it's only getting worse over time.  Today, applications must be aware of and able to work around middle boxes and other network problems. 

Many middlebox issues can be overcome with the help of client software and central servers implementing Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE), a recently completed IETF proposed standard that in turn relies on STUN, TURN and/or RSIP.  A continuing obstacle for direct user-to-user connections is the need for central servers for STUN, etc..

So it there no chance for the original SIP vision of direct user-to-user communication?

P2PSIP — a reason for optimism

Actually, there is some reason for optimism.  The advent and widespread adoption of Skype showed what was possible and suggested how one might distribute central services among peers, potentially avoiding the need for an explicit service provider.  The past few years have seen rising interest in peer-to-peer SIP which has resulted in an IETF working group under the name p2psip.  Their goal is "to leverage the distributed nature of P2P to allow for distributed resource discovery in a SIP network, eliminating (or at least reducing) the need for centralized servers."

Assuming this is completed (during 2008 & 2009), we'll have the elements with which one could make a SIP-based open peer-to-peer communications system.  It will be interesting to see actual software implementing the ideas of the p2psip group.  We may yet see a revolution!

Monopolists, caught in a time warp

This afternoon, I was in a local shopping area and noticed a new storefront advertising Verizon FiOS service.  I've been a FiOS subscriber for two years now, but I'd never seen a FiOS storefront.  Unfortunately, the store wasn't open.

There was a T-Mobile store 50 feet away and a Verizon Wireless store two blocks away.  They were both open, as was an AT&T store about a half mile away.  The Verizon Wireless store hours were typical of all the mobile phone stores, i.e.
  M-F    10am-8pm
  Sat      9am-8pm
  Sun   10am-6pm

Indeed, these hours are typical of retail stores in the neighborhood.  Weekday openings are at 9:30am or 10am and closing times are 8pm or 9pm.  And all retail stores are open at least a half day on Sunday.

The Verizon FiOS store hours:
  M-F   9am-6pm
  Sat   9am-1pm
  Sun    closed

I remember when retail stores were closed on Sundays.  It was a long time ago.  I even remember, as a child, when some neighborhood stores were only open a half day on Saturday.  That was a very long time ago.

Apparently the FiOS store was opened because Verizon is now competing with Comcast for TV subscribers in our neighborhood.  Comcast is another long term monopolist, so it was interesting to drive (about a mile) to ther retail storefront.  It was also closed on Sunday.  In fact their only store hours were M-F 9-5.  Wow!

I suppose two sources of wired TV services is better than one, but this is another case where it's clear a duopoly provides very little competition (for example, compared to our mobile market with 6+ players).

3G's biggest success is as a dumb pipe

Thanks to Dean Bubley for pointing out this presentation by Antero Kivi on the use of 3G mobile networks in Finland.

92% of all data traffic is from PCs

Furthermore, of the 4% of traffic from Symbian devices, 79% of that is for web access and 10% is for email.  So users are paying for mobile data for the sole purpose of connecting to the Internet.

Put another way, mobile operators have failed to provide any operator-specific data application of any relevance.

Why invest another penny in IMS?

Voice telephony needs priority, but after that all people want is a dumb pipe. In a competitive market that what they'll get. So IMS is vastly more complex than appropriate.

The cost effective solution is simple (i.e. two) priorities on the radio link, softswitch-controlled circuits-over-packets for voice telephony and straight off-load to the public Internet for everything else. An IP/MPLS core network is more than sufficient.  And existing GSM voice telephony protocols are both adequate and appropriate for voice telephony.  Existing GSM signaling is already being carried over Sigtran over IP, so the pieces are falling in place.

What I've just described matches what I've seen of China Mobile's new 3G backbone.  If true, that means the Chinese network equipment providers (Huawei, ZTE, etc.) are well positioned to win 3G business in high growth emerging markets where costs are key.

It certainly sounds bad for IMS.

NGN ≠ the Internet, and never will

I see and hear a lot of confusion about next generation networks (NGN).  In most cases people are using the term roughly as the ITU-T defines it:

A Next Generation Network (NGN) is a packet-based network able to provide services including Telecommunication Services and able to make use of multiple broadband, QoS-enabled transport technologies and in which service-related functions are independent from underlying transport-related technologies.

but many people don't realize how little this has to do with the Internet.

The Internet is a "network of networks" that includes millions of smaller domestic, academic, business, and government networks interconnected using IP.  It is a hierarchy because there is a backbone of ~28,000 autonomous systems (ASs) which exchange IP packets using routes established by Border Gateway Protocol (BGP).  The remaining millions of networks connect to that backbone via hundreds of thousands of ISPs and other intermediaries who are ASs or connect to an AS.

All of the NGN proposals (Wikipedia has a good summary) involve sophisticated QoS.  But it is well established that there is no technical or commercial requirement for QoS on the Internet backbone (references discussed here and here).

The thousands of organizations that are ASs exist in hundreds of different jurisdictions.  While some ASs are heavily controlled by governments (there is basically one AS for all of China), AS interconnection is independent of any single government.  Interconnections occur based on tradeoffs between the cost of doing business locally and the cost of routes to other locations.

Indeed, to the extent Tier 1 ISPs have attempted to limit free peering, Tier 2 ISPs have established peering agreements that form a donut around the Tier 1s, thus cutting Tier 2s' transit costs to an absolute minimum.  So the effectively unregulated Internet backbone is working remarkably well based on commercial arrangements between thousands of parties, just as it has for 15+ years.

With no technical need for QoS on backbone routes (as discussed here) and no commercial reason that anyone has articulated, it's hard to see how the thousands of parties who make up the core of the Internet would agree to do anything with QoS, ever.

Established telephone companies will deploy NGNs for telephone service.  To the extent they have a monopoly on Internet access, they will be able to use their NGNs to block access to the Internet, but the existence of NGNs won't change the way the Internet core works or the way anyone else's network works.

So NGN's are an evolution path for existing telephony networks, not the Internet, and they will last as long as the existing telephone service model lasts and no longer.

US Mobile Internet access prospects looking up

This is a very good week for the mobile Internet in the US.  Our best prospect for open mobile Internet access is not legislation or regulation, but having four or more competing networks that are technically able to offer mobile broadband access.

We have three such networks today — Verizon, AT&T and Sprint — but three is not enough to break the walled garden mentality.  What's changed?

1.  T-Mobile USA has launched their first 3G service using the spectrum they won in the 2006 AWS auctions.  For now, it's only New York City, but Reuters reports that T-Mobile plans to launch in 20 to 25 new markets by the end of the year and T-Mobile's stated intention is a full national HSPA network. In 2009, this will be our fourth national 3G network fully capable of multi-Mbps down and multi-hundreds Kbps up.

2.  Clearwire has cut a deal to take over Sprints WiMAX network.  As the Wall Street reports (subscription required) today:

Sprint Nextel and Clearwire are close to announcing a $12 billion joint venture that plans to roll out ultra-fast wireless Internet access for cellphones and laptops in coming years, with the backing of an unlikely alliance of technology and cable companies. Sprint has agreed to merge its wireless broadband unit with Clearwire, a Kirkland, Wash., firm founded by cellphone pioneer Craig McCaw. The new company has raised a total of $3.2 billion in outside financing from several heavyweights -- $1.05 billion from cable provider Comcast, $1 billion from Intel, $550 million from Time Warner Cable and $500 million from Internet giant Google. Smaller cable provider Bright House contributed $100 million. The investments value the new company at more than $12 billion.

This also reduces Sprint's financial exposure and hopefully reduces the likelihood they will be taken over or their network consolidated, at least in the short term.  I've been negative on the prospects for WiMAX in the past, but if anyone can make this go, Craig McCaw is good bet.  So Clearwire represents our fifth national network capable of delivering mobile broadband Internet access.

Assuming all this holds together, we will see affordable flat rate open mobile Internet access in the US by 2010.

Talking about Voice SMS, Video SMS and MMS in a webinar tomorrow

Tomorrow (May 6th) at 9 am EDT (1300 GMT) I'm doing a webinar on:

Mobile Messaging- Its Not Just About Texting

Mobile Text messaging has created new opportunities for additional revenue resources for global mobile operators.  Industry analysts predicts mobile messaging to reach $65B in annual revenue by 2010.  As a result of this messaging explosion, operators continue to look for ways to differentiate themselves in messaging services and to increase the revenue realized from text messaging.  Adding voice and video messages to the standard text message service is just one of the services operators are using to enhance the texting experience within their subscriber base. This webinar will examine video and voice short messaging services(SMS), discuss the technical considerations of implementing these types of services and review various operator successes with media messaging services.

Multi-Media messaging (MMS) has been very successful in some markets, e.g. the UK, while in others, like the US, it's used only for sending photos.  In other markets, it's hardly used at all.  Part of the problem is handset interoperability, especially when it comes to exchanging video clips.  In some cases, there are handset-specific user interface issues and in some markets the problem is enabling MMS operation, e.g. roughly half of the MMS-capable handsets in the Philippines haven't been "activated" (as the operator needs an SMS from the customer indicating their handset type).  Finally, there are markets where MMS inter-connection between operators.doesn't work, either technically or commercially.

But where there's a failure, other solutions emerge.  That's what I'll be talking about tomorrow.

I've written in the past about Voice SMS and about Video SMS, two services that fill the gap by being very simple to use and by working with every handset and every operator.

If you're interested, sign up here and listen in tomorrow.

eComm 2008 Panel: What Will Drive Wireless Innovation?

Here's the complete video of the panel discussion I ran at eComm 2008 in March, all 86 minutes.

My panelists were:

• Martin Geddes (STL Partners),
• Stanley Chia (Vodafone),
• Sumit Agarwal (Google),
• Jonathan Christensen (Skype),
• Christopher Allen (iPhoneWebDev.com),
• Benoit Schillings (Trolltech/Nokia)

Time permitting, I'll see if I can index some interesting highlights and have a follow up post with direct links — that's just in case you're hesitant to invest 86 minutes in the whole session...

China's 3G license delay is a smoke screen

Last week there was a flurry of stories about China's 3G plans after Jonathan Dharmapalan of Ernest & Young was quoted as saying he expected it to take 12 to 24 months from the start of China's commercial TD-SCDMA trials, i.e. from now, until 3G licenses were issued.  But there was little analysis or comment on what's really happening.

3G licenses are a formality.  They delay the deployment of 3GSM & CDMA 2000 which could otherwise happen rapidly — just plug new cards into existing radios and offer established handsets (already being manufactured, in China, for the world market).

China 3G is happening, without licenses.  China Mobile Group already has deployment-scale TD-SCDMA radio networks on assigned, but not "licensed" frequencies, in eight cities.  The bottleneck is TD-SCDMA handset silicon.  Commercial trials were finally enabled by the recent delivery of an initial batch of 60K handsets.  This also allows China to meet, at least technically, their pledge to have 3G service in time for the Olympics.

Dharmapalan is speculating that it will take 12-18 months of commercial trials to get the bugs out and the system to scale.  That's plausible.  If so, it will be 12-24 months before "licenses" are granted, i.e. before 3GSM and CDMA 2000 deployments are allowed to proceed in parallel with TD-SCDMA.

The problem is China's patent position.  The core patents for 3G and for 4G are already held by the likes of Ericsson, Nokia, and Qualcomm.  TD-SCDMA provided a way for China to obtain patents on a specific 3G implementation and the size of China's market makes that implementation interesting to Ericsson, etc.  Since China missed the boat on core patents for both 3G and 4G, expect TD-SCDMA and it's 4G successor to exist on a parallel path for the next 10-20 years.

The good new is commercial TD-SCDMA deployments have finally started.

I'm most interested in 3G applications.  China has a vibrant market in value-added services for 2G.  As more and better TD-SCDMA handsets get deployed, we should see some really interesting innovation coming out of China — innovation that will be applicable to any 3G technology, anywhere in the world.

Mobile video-on-demand Yes! Mobile broadcast TV not so hot

I have an article, Going Mobile (TV), that's recently been published by MobileIN, a wireless and mobile information site.  In it I basically argue that major investments in mobile TV broadcast capability are less likely to pay off than investments mobile video-on-demand.

The biggest trend in commercial television viewing is personal video recorders like TiVo.  People want to watch TV content when they want, not when broadcasters schedule it.  The only exception is major sports events (the Superbowl or World Cup matches).  Even the evening news is frequently rescheduled for later in the evening.

The second relevant trend is growth in YouTube and similar web-based video content.  Broadcast TV went from 2-3 channels in the 1950s to hundreds of channels on a typical cable system today.  But consumers are also interested in the long tail of millions of videos that can only be served over the Internet today and, potentially, over the mobile Internet in the future.

Finally, survey's of early adopters of mobile video show music videos, movie trailers, weather, sports action clips, comedy videos, cartoons and amateur video shorts – typically a few minutes long at most – are the most popular content. In addition, it appears 85 percent of mobile video viewers watched viral videos (content sent or pointed out by others) rather than content they found themselves.

All and all, mobile consumers are looking for video -on-demand, not pre-scheduled broadcast TV.

So what's the logic for massive investments in spectrum, followed by even more money in new wireless infrastructure, followed by the need to sell everyone new handsets that can receive the new broadcast mobile TV channels?

T-Ring: Audio logos promote mobile operator brands

It's not a new idea.  Short audio "logos" have been used to identify radio shows, TV networks, long distance phone companies (during the long distance wars in the US in the 1990s) and, most recently, podcasts.   But mobile operators have missed this opportunity, at least so far.

Now SK Telecom has introduced the idea in Korea and a number of other mobile operators are scrambling to leverage the idea.  In Korea it's called T-Ring and it's both a branding exercise and a key part of a special pricing bundle.

When you call an SKT subscriber, the first thing you hear is a 1.5 second sound clip — the SKT audio logo.  Then you heard the called subscriber's ringback tone (assuming they are among the 55% of Korean subscribers who pay for ringback tone service) or you hear normal ringing signal, until the subscriber answers.

Everyone hears the T-Ring sound, letting them know they are calling an SKT subscriber.  Even better, SKT has introduced a pricing bundle where subscribers get 50% off on calls to other SKT numbers.  As a Korean friend puts it,

Of course it is nice to hear the sound before the connection is made because your brain is naturally set to read "Oh 50% discount."

This is also good for NMS Communications, as the equipment is similar to that used for ringback tones and we already provide components and platforms to most of the major ringback tone suppliers worldwide.  :-)

US Mobile broadband access about to become extremely competitive

Gary Kim has a nice news update today on T-Mobile USA's plans for 3G in the US.

T-Mobile USA will launch commercial 3G services this summer, finally. The company blames spectrum issues for the delay (3G was supposed to launch mid-2007). T-Mobile invested $4.2 billion in 2006 to more than double its spectrum holding in the top 100 U.S. cities it serves.

If you read my column in Internet Telephony magazine last October entitled US Wireless Broadband to be Extremely Competitive, you know T-Mobile USA's launch of 3G is the market action that will tip us over from oligopoly to rampant competition.  By 2009-2010 we will have four credible national mobile broadband networks.  As I argued in last October's column, that will drive open Internet access regardless of any political or regulatory actions.

More on fishermen with mobile phones in Kerala, India

Two years ago, Robert Jensen presented work he had done on the economic benefits of mobile phone adoption among fishermen of the Kerala state in India.  Jensen showed that mobile phone adoption reduced price volatility in the fish markets and was able to show quantitative benefits for fishermen and for the fish consuming public in Kerala.  This blog post has a summary, some graphs and the pointers to his initial presentation.

Jensen's paper on this topic was subsequently published by the Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 122, Issue 3, August 2007.

Now there's new data from Kerala on the transition that occurred with the advent of mobile phone service.  In Volume 4, Issue 1 (Fall 2007 ) of Information Technologies and International Development, Reuben Abraham reports (PDF, registration required) the results of a series of focus groups conducted at 12 locations in Kerala India and interviews with nearly 200 local people associated with the fishing industry.  Using this data, he provides a good view of the fishing supply chain in Kerala, details on what happened when mobile phone service became available, and a nice summary of the implications for policy makers:

This article has provided an example of the value of communications technology, especially mobile phones, in making markets work more efficiently. This research also firmly establishes the role of ICTs in rural markets as one that reduces transactions costs. Investments made with the aim of reducing transactions costs are more likely to succeed than amorphous, ill-defined attempts to bridge the “digital divide.”

What I found interesting was the complexity of the fishing supply chain with separation between fisherman, boat owners, fishing cooperatives, brokers/commission agents and wholesale and retail fish merchants.  Apparently the economic benefits measured so far have come with little change in this complex supply chain.  However, Abraham notes:

... the power the middleman holds over the fishermen due to the monopoly on price information has lessened somewhat. The free flow of information ensures the fishermen get the opportunity to drive a harder bargain than before.

It will be interesting to see what changes happen over the next 5-10 years as ownership of capital assets (like boats) evolves and the market adapts to the new flow of information.  I'll bet that, increasingly, middlemen will be cut out and consumers will see even lower prices.

Similar motivations for mobile and Internet usage in rural Zambia

Over the years I've uncovered a number of serious studies of the social and economic impact of mobile phone adoption in emerging markets.  In fact, my list of links (embedded in various blog posts: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8) has become a reference for several people, for example here. I've been somewhat less organized regarding the social and economic impact of Internet access, but I've resolved to track such references as well. 

Here's something I stumbled on this weekend -- a study by Paula van Hoorik and Fred Mweetwa of TNO Information and Communication Technology in the Netherlands, entitled "Use of internet in rural areas of Zambia."

What struck me in this study was the parallels between the social and economic benefits they found and those conventionally associated with the adoption of mobile phones.

Based on our study, the most important social benefits are:
• Internet enables people to keep their network and enlarge it by communicating with friends, family and others
• Internet enlarges the world of people in rural areas by giving access to information
• Internet brings knowledge and supports education

The most important economic benefits are:
• Reduction of commute time
• Saving money in a lot of different ways, such as only traveling to pick up something when you know it is actually there instead of having to return multiple times
• Bringing new opportunities and using them, such as learning new farming methods or opening an internet café to make a living.

Most studies of mobile phone adoption in emerging markets, especially amongst the poor, show that social reasons - communicating with friends and family - come first, economic advantages come second.  And among both social and economic advantages, the ability to eliminate journeys, i.e. save time by not having to walk to the next village to ask a question, is extremely important.

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.  At root, they are both communications technologies and our use of such technologies is driven by basic human needs that are remarkably similar, for everyone, everywhere. 

How tiered Internet pricing could actually facilitate P2P

Time Warner Cable's planned experiment with tiered charging for Internet access has generated a flurry of coverage in the blogsphere, but no new insights (at least that I've seen).

The primary problem ISP's complain about is that 5% of their customers use 90% of the available bandwidth and when they examine this traffic, it's mostly peer-to-peer file sharing.  A reasonable question is how to allow as much of this traffic as possible without increasing an ISP's variable costs or slowing down their other users.

This may not be as difficult as it appears.   Indeed if Internet access was as competitive as mobile telephony, we might already have seen what I'm about to propose — a combination of bundled pricing equivalent to mobile's "free nights and weekends" and "free on-net calls" with a way to facilitate P2P traffic that leverages exactly these "free" periods.

An ISP's costs

ISPs have some costs which are relatively fixed and others that are tied to usage.  A network is a relatively fixed cost and when it's not full, the incremental cost of adding traffic is zero!  This is the reason mobile operators give away free nights and weekend.  They've built their mobile network for the peak daytime traffic, so it costs them nothing to run promotions that add incremental traffic at off hours.  Peak hours and off hours may be different for an ISP, but the concept is the same. When a data pipe is lightly loaded the ISP's cost of adding incremental traffic is zero.

On the other hand, some ISP costs are usage based, for example "IP Transit" or more properly, Internet Transit.  This is the ISP's upstream cost to send and receive traffic to/from the rest of the Internet.  However, even here, usage-based costs occur at heavy usage.  Light usage periods don't save money.  To understand what's happening, it's worth a digression on Internet Transit.

Internet Transit

Internet access is monopoly or duopoly or a heavily regulated industry.  The middle mile connections from the local network to the Internet backbone may or may not be competitive depending on where you are.  But the Internet backbone itself is extremely competitive.  If you can get to a major Internet Exchange Point in the US or Europe, there are many providers offering extremely competitive rates for Internet Transit.  Typically these services are priced on a megabit per second per month basis (Mbit/s/Month) with lower rates for higher volume commitments.  The other key idea is that charges are based on the 95th percentile of all the five minute data rate samples taken during the month.  So an ISP can have a few bursts above their typical rate, as long as they represent less than 5% of the sampled intervals.

But this also means there is no extra cost to run at or near the typical rate at all times.

Local traffic

Even more important, if file sharing is done with other computers on the same ISP's network, then there is no need to pay for Internet Transit at all.  The question is how to figure out which potential peers are "on-net" and which are "off-net."

Sending signals to P2P software

Most P2P file sharing software has relatively little knowledge of locality.  Some P2P software practices "prefix awareness," for example, Joost gives preference to peers in the same /24 IP address block when they are available.  But if a major operator provided an automatic way for P2P client software to determine whether a prospective peer's IP address was currently reachable "for free", it seems likely the file sharing community would leap on it, and if there's money to be saved, active file sharers would download the new clients immediately.

A standard way to present such information might be via an extension to the XML-based response codes in one of the whois information exchange proposals, e.g. from ICANN or from APNIC.  Also, while what I'm proposing might start as a pricing plan rather like a mobile operator's "free nights and weekends" and "free on-net calling," it's not hard to see extensions where an ISP could offer dynamic access to underused capacity to those programs that were prepared regularly interrogate an ISP's server and use just the advertised off-hours capacity.

In closing

People liked fixed price deals.  Unlimited is great, but there's plenty of experience with bundles of minutes and the idea of data bundles has already showed up in 3G mobile data plans.  The combination of several tiered data bundle prices with the availability of "free" connectivity for "on-net" peers and during off peak intervals is likely to appeal to file sharers and produce better results for both the sponsoring ISPs and file sharers alike.

Google is playing to win in the 700 MHz auctions

Many say Google will bid to lose in the upcoming 700 MHz auctions and many more are equivocating.  The idea is Google's entry alone will induce enough openness, and besides they couldn't afford to become an operator.  This shows a total lack of understanding!

Google is run by idealists who want to change the world and have the money to undertake grand projects.

They are already seeking to index, and make available, all the world's information. As part of this vision they are scanning all existing books and fighting the legal battles this implies.  When their own video repository failed to gain traction, they bought YouTube for $1.65B, and took on their legal hassles. Most recently their Palimpsest project is going to host enormous scientific databases for free.  In short Google is not afraid to spend money or take large risks, including legal risks, to accomplish something they believe in.

Critical for Google's vision, and for their business, is open Internet access.  Fixed access is relatively open today, but mobile is a big problem.  So Google won't seek a little opening on the part of some US operators.  Google needs open mobile access, i.e. dumb pipes, which means the total destruction of existing mobile operator business models.

They've already started from the edge with the Open Handset Alliance and the Android open-source mobile handset stack. Google's made a major investment here, not to compete for revenue on handset software or to control applications on edge devices, but to tip the balance from operators to the edge.  First and foremost, Android is an open platform to encourage innovation.  It's also free.  Google doesn't need or expect a direct return on this investment.

The 700 MHz auctions are just the next step.  Again, look for something unconventional.  Google doesn't need or want to become a mobile operator.  They want to create an industry where mobile dumb pipes are widely available.

 

Assuming Google wins, what might they do?

This is speculation on my part, but a good plan might be two fold. 

First pick the latest mass market technology for mobile broadband access, probably mobile WiMAX, and set up a program to foster numerous independent wireless ISPs (WISPs) rolling out services on Google's frequencies.  In the 1990s, the US had thousands of ISPs providing dial up access over traditional phone lines.  The goal here would be to duplicate that entrepreneurial flurry for both fixed and mobile wireless access.

You may argue fixed is OK as services are local, but for mobile you really need regional and national coverage.  Yes, but Google themselves could offer WISPs the opportunity to participate in a federation for national roaming, perhaps using Google Checkout for payments.

Second, formalize a set of rules for smart-radios based on the work they've been doing for open access to TV White Space.  Throw open their spectrum to anyone who's willing to use appropriate smart radio technology, thus fostering long term innovation.  Open access in the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands has certainly fostered innovation.  Google could achieve something similar.

These two steps, a mass market technology like WiMAX for rapid deployment, and open access for innovation, yield the maximum long term benefit for this spectrum and increase the likelihood that other countries will follow the US lead (as the world has done for 2.4 GHz and WiFi).

========================================================

 

Mobile VoIP in the context of mobile data capacity

When VoIP traffic began to grow in the late-90s, there was some worry that voice traffic would overwhelm the Internet.  Indeed at that time, voice traffic far exceeded total Internet capacity.  But the growth of Internet capacity has far outstripped the growth of voice minutes.  Today a substantial portion of long distance and international voice traffic goes via VoIP and increasingly, local traffic is moving to VoIP, yet VoIP represents only 1% of Internet traffic.  Voice traffic grew relatively slowly.  Total Internet capacity has expanded at ~100% per year during the 1990s and at greater than 50% per year since 2001..

So far, 3G mobile VoIP traffic is negligible and most mobile data traffic is confined to walled gardens.  But that's changing as mobile data capacity expands.  Today, laptops with USB 3G modems are driving 3G data revenues as people seek Internet access for their PCs.  Despite whatever Ts & Cs the operator may impose, what people want is open Internet access, i.e. a mobile dumb pipe.  And given the relatively vibrant competition in many mobile markets, increasing mobile capacity will lead to better and better "dumb pipe" offers.

The issues for successful 3G mobile VoIP are:

• capacity - if you have excess capacity, you don't need QoS.
• latency - round trip latencies must be below 250 ms to avoid a "push-to-talk" feeling.
• battery life - mobile VoIP may require some evolution to achieve the power efficiencies of the custom engineered protocols used for traditional mobile voice.
• devices - mobile VoIP will start on PCs, but must migrate to handsets to achieve volume.

Luckily battery life issues have been explored as part of implementing POC (push-to-talk over cellular) and should be well understood at this point.

The advent of HSUPA and EVDO Rev A radio technology brings latencies into the acceptable range.  Deployment of these technologies has begun.

That leaves capacity.  While there will be congestion during the "busy hour," daily traffic is cyclic.  During most of the day most cell sites have extra capacity.  And a 3G HSUPA modem handles 3-7 Mbps down and 1-2 Mbps up.  That's more than adequate headroom for VoIP.  In other words capacity is becoming available for most hours of the day.

Fixed VoIP took a decade to become pervasive and mobile VoIP will likely take as long, but the next 24 months should see early adoption flourish.

VideoSMS — Another cool service that avoids the problems of MMS

Video SMS, like Voice SMS, delivers an exciting service that works on any handset and any network.

Meanwhile, Multimedia Message Service (MMS) is mostly languishing.  In the US and much of the world, MMS is used for picture mail but hardly anything else.  There are several problems.  In most markets, there are a dearth of MMS capable (and appropriately configured) handsets, there are interoperability issues between handsets, particularly with video support or the lack thereof, and in some markets there are interoperability issues between service providers.

So new, simple, inter-operable services have emerged.  The first was Voice SMS, an audio messaging service that has taken off because it actually works with any handset and any network.  I’ve written about Voice SMS several times in the past as it’s a cool service and we supply platforms to many of the vendors in this market.

Today we had our first press release on a new service, Video SMS.  Maxis Communications, the leading operator in Malaysia, has launched their Maxis Video Avatar service in December, based on an application by NGC Systems and platforms from NMS Communications.

Like Voice SMS and unlike MMS, Video SMS is a messaging service that works with any handset.  If both subscribers have 3G handsets, the service leverages the 3G network to deliver an actual video message.  But in the more common case, where one or both of the subscribers are on 2G or 2.5G, the service still works.  Instead of an actual video message, the 2G user generates and/or the 2G recipient receives a voice message with an animated gif image of a lip-sync'd talking avatar.  If the recipient has a voice-only phone the service reverts to Voice SMS, but with a URL where recipient could view the lip sync'd avatar speaking the message if they can get web or WAP access.

From the user's point of view this is a cool new messaging service that serves the same needs as Voice SMS but with an added personalization element — animated avatars.  From the operator's point of view, it's a new revenue source with both message revenue and content revenue, as avatars can be sold just at ringtones and wallpapers are sold.

The key take-aways:

• Easy user interface
• Simple useful service
• Connects with any phone on any network

Smart Communications in the Philippines has also launched this service to their 27M subscribers. As they put it:

Video Avatar is a new P2P 3G video messaging service that combines lip-syncing fun avatars and a 30 second recorded message to create an expressive and memorable video message.

"TV white space" spectrum for backhaul - Yipes!

An RCR Wireless article reports:

Sprint Nextel Corp. and T-Mobile USA Inc. urged the Federal Communications Commission to embrace a plan to allocate vacant TV channels -- known as white spaces -- on a fixed-licensed basis for wireless backhaul services.

And quotes Sprint & T-Mobile from their FCC filing (italics are mine):

"Because backhaul comprises a significant cost for wireless carriers, and incumbent local exchange carriers’ special-access charges are exorbitant, Sprint Nextel and T-Mobile must find more affordable alternatives to the ILECS’s special-access offerings.  Despite this need, the amount of spectrum in the lower bands that is realistically available for the provision of wireless backhaul services has declined dramatically over the years. As wireless carriers expand the development of their 3G and 4G wireless networks, the need for reliable and cost effective backhaul will increase.”

Doesn't anyone see how ludicrous this is?

Cell sites are fixed locations.  The vast majority are in urban or suburban neighborhoods.  Their bandwidth requirements will continue to grow, indefinitely.  In any rational world, one would purchase dark fiber to most of these sites.  In the irrational real world that is the US today, one could at least raise hell about the existence of exorbitantly priced special-access services and the lack of dark fiber.

The root problem is we have given Verizon and AT&T privileged access to the public right-of-way, without requiring them to sell dark fiber, or lease dark fiber, or offer anything less than high level service bundles at "exorbitant" prices.

What would it cost for dark fiber to 95% of these sites, if it were part of a community-wide dark fiber build like that being planned in Singapore and already substantially built in many parts of Stockholm?  Construction costs for point-to-point fiber are 20% or so above those of passive optical networks (PON), but the cost of the dark fiber alone (no electronics) is perhaps 80% of the total construction cost, so it's all in the same ball park.  Verizon has directly and indirectly reported various costs for their FiOS construction (FiOS is a PON network), but all current estimates are below $1000 per home passed.

Even at $5K or $10K, the payback for a mobile operator would be measured in months.

Why isn't anyone talking about the root problem?  We've given service providers privileged, i.e. monopoly, access to our public right-of-way.  That might have made sense in 1900, but today we should only give such access to infrastructure providers. 

The only natural monopolies are the right-of-way, poles and conduits and, perhaps, the dark fiber. 

Let's have multiple service providers competing to offer services over dark fiber infrastructure, put wireless backhaul on fiber, and save the "whitespace" for innovative new services.

Emerging Communications Conference 2008

I'll in California quite a bit in March and April, but the highlight is my first week, when I'll be speaking at a new conference, eComm 2008, March 12-14.  While the conference in new, the community is established and fascinating.  eComm 2008 being put together by Lee Dryburgh, who was on the program committee for O'Reilly's eTel conferences.  When O'Reilly cancelled eTel 2008, Lee took the initiative to keep that incredible community alive.  He was soon joined by many others.

Click through the logo at the left for conference info.  Right now there's a board of advisors, an incredible list of speakers with more on the way, a wiki and a Facebook group with 170 friends!

The first thing I look for in a conference is interesting people, then new ideas.  eComm promises an abundance of each.  The focus is next generation personal communications and the schedule is set up for rapid fire delivery inlcuding many 5 minute and 15 minute sessions.  As far as new ideas goes, this will be a fire hose!

*** Correction: 12/21 ***

The conference is being held in the Computer History Museum in Mountain View.  This easily beats the typical conference facility, but it means there are only 300 paid admissions available.  Registration has opened, here.  If you register before the end of 2007, the $1495 registration fee is marked down to $1195.

I look forward to seeing you there.

Near universal access to telecommunications, even at the bottom of the pyramid

In a paper prepared for a conference in Sri Lanka last week, Harsha de Silva and Ayesha Zainudeen report on an extensive survey they did of telecom users at the "bottom of the pyramid" (BOP) in Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, the Philippines and Thailand.  Most interesting (to me) was their conclusion:

This study finds that almost everyone at the bottom of the pyramid in Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Philippines and Thailand have access to telecommunication services without having to spend any significant amount of time or money in getting to a telephone.

More specifically,

...of all those contacted (through the random selection process), more than 90 percent in all countries had used a phone at least once during the preceding three months...

Most of these people don't own their own phones, but they have access through friends, neighbors, family members or a public phone service. [The photo, courtesy of Kiwanja.net, shows a phone shop in Uganda.]

As recently as 2000 I was saying (with some justification) that more than half the people on earth had never made a phone call (at any time in their lives). 

Having near universal coverage and 90% usage is remarkable, and very encouraging progress.  Of course, it's due almost entirely to the spread of mobile phones, not the result of universal access programs.

Social benefits outweigh economic benefits

The second item that struck me was the summary of reasons why people wanted their own handsets.

I've written many times about the economic benefits of phone service but it turns out, when you survey actual users at the BOP, they perceive the benefits of phone ownership to be:

1.  increased security (a phone is helpful in an emergency), and
2.  better ability to maintain social relationships

As de Silva and Zainudeen put it, "users at the BOP do not seem to see how instant access to important information might be helpful in making decisions that could enhance one’s earning capacity or how gaining an hour (otherwise spent personally conveying a message by foot) could help reduce transactions costs."

As they go on to suggest, this is clearly an area where telecom operators could run marketing campaigns that would benefit all parties.

Who will unify my communications?

2 email accts/ 7 email aliases/ 4 IM accts/ SMS/ this blog/ Bloglines (238 feeds)/ BlogRovR (480 feeds)/ LinkedIn/ Facebook/ Myspace/ Twitter/ 23 other "social" networks/ 3 PSTN accts/ 2 mobile accts/ Skype/ FWD/ ... 

...accessed via 3 different PCs and 2 different mobile handsets, at least on most days.

These are not just information flows — most have associated directories of friends, business associates and other acquaintances.

One year ago I wrote:

...  I already run four instant messaging clients on my laptop.  A single client would be nice, but it's not that important.  Once we finally learn how availability should work from an existing player like Skype or from an entirely new overlay network (as Skype was a few years ago), then we can worry about consolidation.

Now I'm not so sure. 

Who will aggregate this flood for me, in some convenient and semantically meaningful way?

Where is the tool that lets me organize my diverse connections?

There's an opportunity here for a new class of solutions...

Ringback Tones Adoption Rates — Culture, Biz Model or Marketing Savvy?

Ringback tone services have been wildly successful in many parts of Asia and they are emerging as a major money maker, not to mention a major music distribution channel, in many other countries, but not in the US or the EU.

Nearly 55% of Korean subscribers have ringback tone service.  China Mobile has close to 50% adoption.  Yet, as of September, adoption rates in most of Europe were below 10% (the UK was at 2%) and US adoption was only 5%.  Since our LiveWire Mobile division provides white label managed ringback tone services and sells ringback tone service platforms, I'm obviously interested in understanding more.  And, with 30+ operators on six continents using LiveWire Mobile platforms or services, I have some access to comparative data.

A late start is only part of the story.  Korea went from 0 to 30% penetration in just nine months (April to December, 2002).  China took a bit longer as the service only became available in stages across China Mobile's 31 separate, relatively autonomous, provincial units.  That roll out took from mid-2003 to early 2004.  But by the end of 2004, China Mobile had 30 million ringback tone subscribers (then 69M by 12/05 and 144M by 8/06).  And yet after ~2 years of service, the US has only 12M subscribers or 5% penetration.

One clear difference in Korea and China, versus the US and EU, is the number of independent marketing organizations directly or indirectly promoting the new service.  I remember visiting Seoul Korea in January 2003 and having a billboard pointed out to me where a Korean rock star was advertising his latest hit and how you could make it your color ring tone. I was told there were more than 20 independent organizations providing content for SKT's Color Ring service at that time.  More significantly, revenue splits were such that these independent organizations found it worth while directly promoting their content to mobile subscribers.  That means there were 20+ marketing teams with independent activities that all served to increase subscriber awareness.

Compare this with the typical operator in the US or EU where the only source of information or content is the operator's portal and the only service promotion activities are those of the operator.  That means there is one product manager focused on ringback tones, they have a limited budget and they must compete with their associates for position on the operator's WAP deck.  Is it any wonder awareness is low?

Of course other factors also contribute to service success.  Our LiveWire Mobile team has accumulated a set of best practices based on discussions and consulting work with operators around the world.  They have a formal service offer of course, but I'll endeavor to summarize some of their learning in a future blog post.

LiveWire Mobile — new brand for well established business

This morning, NMS Communications launched LiveWire Mobile as a new brand for our mobile applications business.  I'm leery of re-branding exercises but this was long overdue as our mobile applications business is substantially different and independent of our traditional developer focused business.  Now LiveWire Mobile is operating as a distinct division of NMS with this new logo:

LiveWire Mobile focuses on mobile personalization services, including our well established ringback tones business.  That makes LiveWire Mobile a market leader from inception, as our ringback tone service is deployed with over 30 operators around the world.  The most recently new operator announcement also came today — it's Virgin Mobile USA.

Mobile Personalization

Mobile personalization services hit some years ago with ringtones and wall papers.  Many think of ringtones as a content business, and yes, there is a content sale in many cases.  But whether it's ringtones or ringback tones, the key motivation is the human desire to personalize our possessions and our environment. 

Today, ringtones are widespread and revenue growth is slowing.  However, ringback tones are still in the early growth phase, at least in Europe and North America.  Ringback tone penetration is over 55% in Korea, but less than 10% in the US.

Besides the established ringback tones base, LiveWire Mobile has plans for additional network-based message and subscriber-focused personalization services — stay tuned.

UPDATED:  Here's the link to a press release with more info (in PR prose...).

Mobile application innovation in EU

The second session at Connect 2007 in Madrid is Application Innovation with John Orlando, NMS CMO moderating and panelists:

• Gianluca Ferranti, Director of Marketing, Reitek S.p.A.
• David Springall, CTO, Yospace
• Colm Healy, CEO, XIAM
• Anssi Tauriainen, CEO, Aito Technologies

This panel is slide presentations and covers material that's interesting, but mostly already familiar to me.  So my comments will be brief...  (sorry).

Gianluca's focused on video infotainment which appears to be taking off in Italy.  While he's active in some really cool stuff, today's talk covered market statistics and more conventional applications.

Yospace has their "SeeMeTV" service running on 12 operators now, but David comments that it's been a struggle compared to launching a service on the Internet.  If you're not familiar with SeeMeTV, it's a service that allows subscribers to upload cameraphone videos via MMS.  Others can browse content that people have uploaded.  It costs 30 pence or more to download a clip.  The original contributor gets money everytime someone watches their clip.  The revenue share is 10%.  The SeeMeTV service bridges 12 operators, so contributors get cash back from users across multiple operators.  Paybacks to contributors are via PayPal, not the operator.  All-in-all, it's a mobile service which could be run over-the-top but, based on David's comments, they only work through operators because operator endorsed (on-deck) is the only viable approach today.  Even so, they don't get customer demographics from the operators, just billing and an on deck position.

Colm from Xiam is focused on mobile advertising.  Xiam's edge is in automated analysis of subscriber demographics so it's possible to target content to users when the price points is 30 cents or 1-2 Euros.  On the Internet, Amazon can show dozens of potential offers, but on the mobile phone there is only space and time to make a very few offers.  Currently they get 3X click through by targeted offers on mobile phones at Orange UK.

Anssi is founder and CEO at Aito is focused on providing customer analytics to mobile operators.  Their software mines the operator's data to figure out the services individual customers use and the constraints and problems they encounter.  The goal is to figure out specific problems that need to be fixed, both technical issues and communication issues.

Interesting, but running over slightly which killed the Q&A which would have been the best part.

...

Connect 2007 Madrid opens with panel on the mobile industry

The session was entirely Q&A (no slides) which resulted in a great discussion – broad ranging and much better than talking heads reading slides!  Luca has already written up his reactions.

I'm writing this after the fact as, at the last minute, I was tagged to participate, filling in for Vincenz Wagner of Jamba who's arrival has been delayed.  The opening session at Connect 2007 in Madrid was entitled "Industry Overview" with Joel Hughes, VP & GM of our Mobile Applications business moderating.  In the end the panelists were:

• Philip Kelley, Director, Mobile TV Standardization, Alcatel-Lucent
• Kari Lahtinen, Business Development Manager, Elisa Corporation
• Peter Karney, Senior Technical Marketing Manager, NEC
• Brough Turner, i.e. yours truly :-)

Since I was participating, I have only a few interesting items (at least interesting to me) that I noted during this discussion:

Philip commented that the predominate use of 3G is to connect PCs to the Internet, i.e. dumb pipe mobile Internet access.  Philip also mentioned Triple Play, which seems old hat to me, as innovative in (parts of) Europe.  I argued that this was marketing innovation (bundling), not really a new service.  We agreed the innovation was in cost and convenience of the services.

Several panelists seem to think that innovation would come by porting Internet applications to the mobile space.  I argued that was currently true, but only because the Internet was open and mobile was still closed.  There are many characteristics of mobile (like mobility and intimacy) that will foster new applications but we don't yet have the open environment that allows zillions of developers to experiment.

At one point, I made a derogatory comment about most VoIP being just digital POTS.  The ensuing discussion brought out the parallel between Skype (which combines voice and IM) with what's happened in mobile telephony, i.e. the combination of voice and SMS to achieve the same objectives.  Either way, people want to determine the actual availability of the person they are about to call and people need a way to communicate when they can't talk.

Off to Madrid for Connect 2007 Europe

The third and final Connect conference of 2007 is taking place in Madrid on Wednesday and Thursday, November 7th and 8th and I'll be there.  My blog comments on earlier conferences are here (& 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).

Day One has a heavy focus on mobile industry issues and mobile applications. And, it's conducted as panel discussions with few or no slides.  Perhaps this only works because there are good speakers, chosen to promote controversy and discussion, but it really works!  In both 2006 and so far in 2007, the nature of the discussion has been much, much better than at a typical industry show.  The session descriptions for November 7th are here and the speaker bios are here.  If you can be in Madrid on Wednesday, you should attend.

Day Two is a more traditional developers conference focusing on NMS technology and products that are used to create many of the applications discussed by the Day One executives.  Check out the Day Two program.

Belated Notes from VON

I'm an articles guy not a news blogger, so I didn't even try to compete with the numerous people blogging last week's VON conference.  In any event, I was double booked much of the time. The best part of VON is the people I meet and the one-on-one discussions but let me mention a few impressions of note:

• Social networking was everywhere, and not just because of Jeff's interest and/or the focus on Facebook in his kickoff speech.  Every combination and permutation is being tried, especially through Facebook applications.  I can't point to one application that's going to revolutionize IP communications in the sense Skype did, but I'm still hopeful.  At least these apps are a step forward from the digital POTS VoIP services like Vonage, AT&T CallVantage and the various cable VoIP offers.

• The convergence of Mobile and VoIP continues to be via work-around.  We're still a few years from true over-the-top IP communications on mobile, as today there's not enough upstream bandwidth, latencies for IP data are really something and, of course, there are mobile operator restrictions on VoIP over their networks.  Of course mobile voice telephony is still so expensive, especially internationally, that workarounds will abound.  But true mobile IP communications will be delayed a bit more...

One interesting tidbit:  I finally got to hear from ooma and get the answers to two questions that had plagued me about their distributed termination approach.  Distributed termination means calls, carried long distances by VoIP, can terminate in a remote city using another subscriber's local line.  My issues:

1. How do you handle the caller ID which will point to the local subscriber's line, not the original caller's line?  Answer:  they suppress CallerID, i.e. there is no caller ID.  That's not great, as I know my wife won't answer such a call.
2. What about people listening in on calls that are terminated through their local service?  Answer: the ooma equipment senses extensions going off hook and avoids routing calls through subscribers whose lines have a history of people listening in.  Well, that's certainly a partial answer.  It's easy to detect extensions going off hook as an extension telephone puts an additional load on the line.  But there are plenty of high impedance listening devices that don't load the line and can't be detected in any easy fashion.  Again, it's an answer, but not a great one...

The conference itself felt a little smaller than last year in Boston or last spring in San Jose, but booth traffic appeared to be good.  Also, there were more sessions and more tracks and more experimentation, as PulverMedia is obviously trying to reinvent itself and the show.  I have some specific suggestions which I will offer to Carl Ford, but it may be another week or two before I get a free moment to write them out.

Here's a photo of the show floor on Tuesday at lunch time.

Internet Connectivity in Guilin, China — Great China Firewall, plus engineering & capacity issues

I'm in Guilin China for the Connect 2007 Asia conference.  I've got the Tor bundle (Tor & Privoxy & Vidalia) installed on my laptop so I can get around the Great China Firewall (GCF) and that works well.  Tor starts up automatically when my PC starts, but I only use it for browsing (by clicking the Tor button for Firefox) if I can't reach a site directly.  Yes, it's noticeably slower going through Tor, but it always works.  For example, just now, seeking the URLs to paste in about the GCF, I could get Rebecca MacKinnon's post directly, but timed out on this from Gigaom.  I clicked the Tor button, hit retry and the Gigaom post loaded.  So, the Tor bundle is a good setup which I highly recommend if you are traveling to China.

The bigger problem for me at the moment is basic throughput.  The Sheraton Hotel Guilin (where the conference is being held) has wired Internet connectivity in the rooms for 50 Yuan ($6.65) per day and free WiFi in the lobby, but only WiFi from China Mobile (CMCC) in the conference area (100 Yuan per day through the hotel business center for those of us without a China Mobile phone number).

Performance is roughly equivalent for all three connections.  Early in the morning or late at night (perhaps during the night, but I do have to sleep sometime), everything works well.  It's not the blazing speed I sometimes see in Beijing, but it works. Here are the results in my room at 7:37am against a server in Shenzhen (300 miles away):

and here's a test against a server in Los Angeles:

Unfortunately, by 10am things begin to slow down and by noon yesterday, I was seeing greater than 50% packet loss and it became impossible to blog the conference live.  I was using the China Mobile WiFi but going up to my room didn't help.

My guess:  There's a significant capacity problem between Guilin and the rest of China.  Not surprising I suppose, considering Guilin is a tourist city, not a business city.