Alternative providers blast past carriers in fixed mobile convergence

North American service providers are finally beginning to make waves in fixed-mobile convergence (FMC) – technology that combines wireless and wireline networks for a richer end-user experience. But judging from discussions at the VoiceCon conference in Orlando earlier this month, the telcos might be too late.As AT&T Inc., Rogers Communications Inc. and T-Mobile USA Inc. ramp up FMC applications, companies such as DiVitas Networks and Siemens AG present FMC that end users can implement themselves, without any help from telcos. "It’s not anti-carrier," said Vivek Khuller, CEO of DiVitas, during a VoiceCon panel. "It’s practical."Carrier intervention used to be one of the missing pillars of FMC. While some equipment vendors offered flavours of the technology that provided parts of the experience, they often said full-fledged FMC wouldn’t come about without the service providers. One sticking point was the network-to-network handoff. FMC is supposed to support cross-network hops: users would jump from a wireless LAN to a cellular network and vice versa, for instance, without dropping the call. Common wisdom said the telcos would have to play a role in the cellular-to-LAN connection. You’d need carrier control to transfer from cellular to Wi-Fi.Despite this new approach to FMC that doesn’t require telco involvements, the carriers are making important strides. Ebrahim Keshavarz, a VP at AT&T, said his company is installing an FMC-friendly platform, the IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS). AT&T plans to test FMC services through 2007 and 2008. T-Mobile is trying its HotSpot @Home system in various US cities, providing both in-home Wi-Fi and outdoor cellular on one handset. In Canada, Rogers plans a similar service, while British Telecom in the UK is well down the FMC road with BT Fusion.But firms like DiVitas have a different answer. Their FMC systems provide the network-to-network handoff without carrier intervention.According to Khuller, the method is simple: a client on the handset sniffs for its home wireless LAN, even when the user’s on a cell call. If the handset finds the LAN, it registers with the back-end FMC hardware, the DiVitas Mobile Convergence Appliance. The appliance recognizes the handset, instigates a wireless LAN connection, migrates the voice traffic onto the new path, and chops the cell connection.Siemens’ HiPath Mobile Connect operates much the same way, although the company touts its end-to-end capabilities with phones, a VoIP system and mobile clients designed to work together.With vendors stepping up with their own FMC solutions, one has to wonder whether carriers need to get into the FMC game.Tammy Wheat, representing Ericsson’s enterprise group, said it depends on the situation. Some users, be they businesses or consumers, will want to install FMC on their own. Others, comforted by carrier presence, will seek a service provider. "There are different solutions for different opportunities," she said.But just how those opportunities will manifest is anyone’s guess. The FMC landscape is changing, even so early in its formation. For instance, discussions of the technology used to focus on cost savings and revenue depletion: users would jump onto wireless LANs to save cell airtime charges, and that would hurt carrier coffers. Now, carriers say cost savings aren’t the point. Airtime charges are dropping. "The desire to reduce cell minutes 10% or 20% just isn’t there anymore," said AT&T’s Keshavarz.Instead, users want ubiquitous coverage, and the telcos are eager to provide it. If FMC keeps people talking, all the better.As well, there used to be some debate about what kinds of service providers would embrace FMC. Wireless providers might do so for enhanced coverage and improved user experiences, but they’d shy away from it for the revenue implications. Wireline providers might embrace FMC to curtail local service losses.These days that debate seems moot. Wireless and wireline service providers are consolidating, and in Canada they’re one and the same – Bell Canada and Bell Mobility, Telus Corp. and Telus Mobility, Rogers and Rogers Wireless. Their agendas aligned, it wouldn’t matter which part of the organization implemented FMC. Both sides would take the risks and the rewards.Still, sides dictate architecture. According to Daniel McHugh, solutions manager at Alcatel-Lucent, wireless providers – particularly GSM operators – favour UMA-based FMC because it keeps all calls, whether Wi-Fi or cell, flowing through the cell network. Carriers can monitor, massage and charge for the traffic. Wireline operators prefer IMS-based FMC, because it’s a platform for application integration and potentially better end-user services.But many aspects are unknown. Number portability might not work with FMC. Quality of service, security and handset clients are not standardized.Nonetheless, carriers are getting ready. "Within 2007, you’re probably going to see all of the major providers offering something," McHugh said.

Alternative providers blast past carriers in fixed mobile convergence

News | 03/19/2007 4:00 am EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us