Bytemobile T 3000 series & Unison update

Bytemobile released this week a new platform (T3000) and a new product (T3100).
With more than 40 operator deployments, Bytemobile is the leader in the video optimization market. The new platform is launched to allow Bytemobile to address the intelligent traffic management market .

Mikko Disini, in charge of the new T 3OOO series and Unison platforms discussed with me the rationale behind the introduction of the new product and how it complements Unison.

T3000 series has been created in an effort to provide more monetization options for mobile broadband operators. For those familiar with Unison, which is essentially a web and video proxy and optimization gateway, T3100 expands beyond browsing to proxy and manipulate all traffic, including UDP based applications, P2P, video chat, RTSP, etc..
While Unison remains a software based solution, on off-the-shelf IBM blade center, T3000  series is a purpose built IBM hardware based appliance. T3100 combines load balancing, DPI, PCEF and traffic rules in one package. Bytemobile is planning to introduce new products on the T3000 platform in the future.

Mikko commented that the rationale behind the hardware based approach is to be more channel-friendly. " It is easier to deploy, package, explain, it is an easier sale".

My opinion is that Bytemobile makes a smart move to expand their product portfolio with new verticals. While there is a large level of overlap between Unison and T3100 today, Bytemobile can upsell their installed base with purpose-built solutions. While in the past, Unison was a Swiss Army knife, for a market who was looking for a quick solution, that had a bit of everything, the growth of the traffic is forcing many vendors to separate applications to have more granular scalability.


With T3000, Bytemobile moves more decidedly into the DPI, load balancing, PCEF space than with Unison. Additionally, moving to a hardware appliance model is going to enable them further to resist price erosion, reusing the Unison tactics of bundling several applications and features together with different market prices and models.
What remains to be seen is how effective the strategy is going to be in acquiring new channels, beyond IBM, NSN and TechMahindra now that T3000 is sure to encroach on some bigger players such as F5 and Cisco... or maybe, this is the strategy?

BBTM Part 4:TIM & BitTorrent

TIM

Telecom Italy is facing the same issue most mature operators see today:

• Mobile video traffic is growing explosively, threatening to overcome current capacity
• LTE is a few years away and requires a completely new network overlay
• The introduction of tablets and smartphone is accelerating the phenomenon

Additionally, TIM is lobbying GSMA to implement fast dormancy directives so that device manufacturers and apps can optimize signalling by batch sending messages rather than on an ad hoc basis.

End to end QoS via CDN interconnection and QoS guaranteed on a private backbone (IPX) is high on their agenda for video services.

TIM is answering these issues in a somewhat classic manner, introducing fair usage caps (daily, monthly), throttling, video optimization and policy management. The innovative part is in the introduction of tiered QoS (speed, duration) per class of service, urging the subscribers to select the speed and capacity the most adapted to their current or projected usage.

An interesting data point from TIM's presentation is related to signalling congestion. In many cases, signalling is as much an issue as actual bandwidth in congested network. Signalling is not only a function of the number of subscribers in a cell, but also the type of device and type of apps being used. For instance, Angry Birds on Android  represents a +351% signalling increase compared to the iOS version, due to in-app advertising. The app polls and displays an ad at each level change, creating signalling overload.

 

 
BitTorrent

Eric Klinker, CEO of BitTorrent, walked in the room like a man with a target on his back. Seen as many as a powerful threat to the business model of content owners and telcos globally, BitTorrent is now advocating the use of their technology (mTorrent) as a highly scalable, secure way to transfer files, with a priority.

The plan for world domination means the replacement of TCP by P2P transfer, to allow capacity for the rest of the traffic.

 

What is interesting, is that BitTorrent has worked and is looking to work increasingly with carriers to help with P2P bandwidth consumption and traffic steering. For instance, in New Zealand,  BitTorrent works with Telecom New Zealand to prioritize to prioritize peer traffic on the island, reducing offshore traffic and associated costs .
Another example of opportunities for policies to transcend the core network, towards content and app providers.

BBTM: The value circle and content based charging

Broadband traffic management North America took place in Boston, on June 21, 22.
Here are my notes from the event and highlights from the conference.

This is the first year that Informa holds this event in North America. After the great success of the UK edition last November, they decided to create regional offspring of the show in Middle East, North America and Asia, with the global edition still planned in the UK this November.


The show, like in the UK, featured most of the subjects that are relevant in Mobile Broadband:

• Data offload,
• Policy management and charging,
• Video optimization,
• Femtocells,
• Traffic optimization...

The attendance and presentations were mostly vendors, with only a few carriers represented (AT&T, Verizon, Cricket, Telecom Italy). No doubt the ratio will change in the future as the show takes on a more visible role in North America.


Here are a few of the highlights from my perspective:


Jeff Eisenach - Navigant Economics
Jeff is a veteran of the US regulatory forums. He had an interesting presentation about the change from value chain to value circle in wireless. Forcing carriers to reconsider old notions such as "owning the customer".



















I quite like the concept. Now customers actually have relationships with content owners, aggregators, phone manufacturers and carriers... No one owns the customer, they are shared and in my mind it will force more concessions from carriers in the future beyond the revenue shares that we have seen between the likes of AT&T and Apple for iPhone.


My panel:
How Can Carriers Move Away From Unlimited Data Plans While Keeping Customers Happy?
with:

• Mike Coward, Co-Founder & CTO, Continuous Computing
• Fred Kemmerer, CTO, Genband
• Chris Hoover, VP Product Marketing and Management, Openet

There are still a lot of talks about content-based charging from PCRF vendors. It seems to be the projected cure for all that ails mobile networks. Too much OTT in your network? Content-based charging is the solution. Too much P2P traffic? Content-based charging is the solution....


 When I asked how you reconcile content, transport and application offering the following example, it was clear that there is still a lot of work to do by charging and policy vendors to enable true content-based charging.


On my iPhone, I can watch video from the browser or from an app. Some apps, before serving you content ask your permission to push notifications or to use your location. If an app invokes a content and invokes gps or other network based service, how does the network operator is to understand that this video is YouTube, from the app, not the browser, invoking gps for location targeting and charging for the overall service?
Today, inevitably, the user gets charged for data transport of the video and the GPS call. Even if an operator offers all-you-can-eat YouTube, you still get charged for the GPS call, right? Because the network is not intelligent enough to make the contextual difference between me using my map app and invoking GPS or a third party app invoking GPS.

As more and more discussions about content based charging ensued, I offer that an operator attempting to derive revenue from OTT service will inevitably need to get closer to content and app providers.
Content providers will demand revenue share on revenues generated from their services. Otherwise, you will see content providers encrypting the traffic in an attempt to keep control of the user experience and to deny the operator the capability to throttle or mangle the content delivery.


Next generation DPI, traffic management, pcrf and proxies are necessary.
I believe that operators will have to extend quality of service (QOS) and quality of experience (QOE) control to the content provider, beyond the operators' walled garden, if they want an efficient revenue share or load share model.

The best way to deliver video to mobile?

An article form Gigaom's Ryan Lawler recently caught my eye as a potential game changer in the mobile video delivery market and got me thinking.

As a user of mobile video, I get often frustrated by latency, stop and go, long loading times, etc...
I can't imagine that content owners can be too happy about video experience being mangled for their customers.

If we look at the trend for content control and compression, the early way to reduce content size, at the time of dial up and mobile narrow band was compression and encryption.
The main problem was that it required a client. Clients were difficult and expensive to update, fix, maintain over the air, so the business model died.

Fast forward 10 years later, seemingly everyone walks around with a smartphone or wants one. One of the major catalysts for the smartphone adoptions has been the apps explosion. Apps are nothing more than standardized clients that can be downloaded, upgraded over the air...

My YouTube app is a client with an embedded player that allows me to navigate and select content in a predefined manner. It is similar to my browser experience but at the same time a little different. In a browser, Google, Microsoft, Apple control my user experience. In the YouTube app, YouTube controls my user experience.

In the case of mobile CDNs, there is an additional potential benefit to reduce cost of delivery by hosting, caching, delivering content as close to the user as possible.

If you add to this the trend towards using P2P technology for video delivery,YouTube, Dailymotion, Akamai, Limelight... could decide to encrypt and tunnel the traffic, to try and keep control of the user experience.

I will examine the potential implications of this scenario in a future post and look at possible alternatives.