Video Share – the work ahead
October 17, 2007
The first interoperability event for the IMS Activity Group, and now the real work begins. We know where we are and what we want to achieve.
There were 6 of us there. Companies with implementations of video share. It seems like each one has interpreted what are the requirements on the SIP level a bit differently, and this caused some issues. We had issues in various messages that were sent as well as with accessing and registering to a P-CSCF (a SIP server). I wouldn’t delve here into details, but I’d like to say that we’ve made some good progress this week.
The general feeling in the group is that now we have substance to talk about, and a lot of work ahead of us.
So what’s next?
- We need to start drafting out the baseline scenario test case with as much detail as possible – especially in the areas where we found issues between companies. Having that would assist us in our next steps and will provide a good starting point for new members.
- Outline the requirements from operators and IMS core networks. We had some issues with the 3G network we used and its firewall configurations. As we plan to have more events in the future, we better get these requirements into an official working document for our group.
- See if we can somehow find a solution that would allow our group to test not only during face to face events, but also remotely throughout the year.
- We’re already planning the next event. We’re targeting the beginning of 2008 for it. I am sure we will make good progress there.
Technorati Tags: IMTC, IMS, Video Share, Interoperability, Tsahi Levent-Levi, F2F
.
The First IMS AG Face2Face Event is Here
September 25, 2007
It’s about time this happened. We’ve been working for several months now in the IMTC IMS AG for this moment – the first face-to-face interoperability event of our group.
Why is this important?
Up until today, no real IMS testing was done for the client side in any methodical way. Sure, the IMS Forum is doing PlugFest events and the GSMA is also doing some basic interoperability testing for their specification. Nevertheless, there’s no real place where handset vendors and middleware/software providers for handsets can gather around on a regular basis and deal with interoperability. The IMS AG is just that place.
What do we focus on?
We currently deal with Video Share as an IMS service that we are testing, focusing on the client itself. Not what is required on the network side and how billing is done but rather how two mobile clients can call each other, negotiate the parameters they will use for the call and share a video session between each other. We will be moving on to additional client-side service aspects as they develop – we started with Video Share simply because it seems like one of the services of IMS that will be deployed first – I believe AT&T is the first of many operators that will focus on Video Share in the next couple of months.
What do we do?
We talk once a week or two, depending on availability. Companies in the group join a conference call to discuss matters at hand. In these calls we discuss a wide range of topics:
- Drafting out our test case document
- Establishing and discussing liaison connections with other organizations (GSMA, IMS Forum, OMTP and others)
- Scheduling interoperability events
Our goal?
To make sure that once operators decide to deploy services such as Video Share, they will be able to choose any phone vendor they want and be confident of the level of interoperability provided. This means that operators would rather take handsets from vendors who are actually test interoperability in the IMTC IMS AG.
October interoperability event
Our first event is scheduled for October 10-12 this year. RADVISION, my company, is hosting this event along with the 3G-324M AG, which will do their own interoperability testing there.
We are planning to convene after the event and publish the first official test cases document for Video Share from the IMTC. As usual, I am sure we will have some comments to the 3GPP and the GSMA that might require some clarifications or changes to the specifications – that happens when an activity group in the IMTC starts doing interoperability and places a specification under its magnifying glass…
If you do develop communication products, you must know that interoperability is important. What do you do to close this gap of interoperability in your products?
Technorati Tags: IMTC, IMS, IMS Client, Video Share, GSMA, IMS Forum, OMTP, 3GPP, Interoperability, 3G-324M, Tsahi Levent-Levi
.
IMS, 3GPP and IETF: A standardization complexity
September 3, 2007
How do we get those specifications for IMS? In a complex way.
It started off as a set if requirements for a Next Generation Network (NGN). The 3GPP wanted an all-IP network for its mobile infrastructure, calling it IMS (IP Multimedia Subsystem). As there’s no need to reinvent the wheel, the 3GPP decided to select an existing standard to do the work, and SIP was there – all young and fresh. But SIP is an RFC. It is handled and standardized by the IETF. This need not be changed.
So what does an organization like the 3GPP does at this point in time? Use the IETF as a subcontractor.
Have you ever worked with a subcontractor? I have never heard of anyone who liked the experience… you provide requirements for a rocket to space, and you get a fire cracker. You want a match, and you get a rocket instead. Time is not time, effort estimations are far from true (sounds like regular development, but it is always harder with a subcontractor).
So we have the 3GPP providing the requirements, while the development of new RFCs (=standards for IMS) done by the IETF, including modifications to RFCs when needed.
The result?
- We have a whole lot of RFCs coming from the IETF. Some colliding each other, others solving the same problems, but a bit differently.
- We have a bunch of 3GPP specifications, which point to RFCs (and a lot of drafts!) that are used by the 3GPP’s IMS network – in a way, a selection of the RFCs that are needed.
- But then, it is not always understood which features from the IETF, or the 3GPP you really need to build an application. And as usual, I haven’t covered GSMA, GCF, OMTP and other organizations.
We at the IMTC IMS AG are actually facing these issue each day. We are currently unraveling the set of specifications required for the implementation and interoperability of the Video Sharing service that is gaining momentum.
Technorati Tags: IMS, IETF, SIP, SigComp, 3GPP, Standardization, Tsahi Levent-Levi
.
AT&T and Video Share
June 21, 2007
I totally missed this one!
I’ve been to NXTcomm. I sniffed around. I searched for IMS. I came back empty handed.
But then – AT&T actually announced their Video Sharing service during the show. And on the same day I was there…
I first found out about it in MobileCrunch blog – good I’m reading others. Two days after it was posted there, my Google alerts went jiggling happily about this service. It’s so good to know that operators are going to offer Video Sharing as their first IMS service.
To those of you who don’t know what Video Sharing is and those who would like to understand what can be done with this technology, AT&T were kind enough to have some mockup demos in their site – they’re quite good.
The interesting this is that they will be doing that over their WCDMA network and not CDMA2000 EV-DO one. The reason for that is the way these two technologies differ from one another.
In WCDMA, you can utilize both the circuit switched and the packet switched networks at the same time. This means that you can do an audio call over the circuit switched connection (as it is done for every audio call today), and then you add the video over the packet switched network (the data capability of the network).
But in EV-DO, this is impossible. You either do voice calls over circuit switching or data of some kind which would be packet based. So to do Video Sharing over EV-DO would require doing the voice over IP as well – and that’s a whole different ballgame.
So Video Sharing it is.
Let’s see which operators jump on this one next.
Additional coverage – Wired News, AT&T Site
Technorati Tags: NXTcomm, Video Sharing, IMS, Tsahi Levent-Levi
.
Testing IMS Video Sharing in the IMTC’s SuperOp!
June 19, 2007
Hello friends.
I’m now facing a difficult task. I have to write enough material about our tests during SuperOp! 2007 to make this post interesting, and at the same time I have to keep the actual result and outcome secret, due to disclosure agreements. Let’s see how I do.
First of all, there was no scheduled test time dedicated to CSI (or VideoShare) during SuperOp! 2007. The testing we did was outside ordinary schedule. But still, we received lots of help from the fine people arranging this event, setting up environments, provisioning SIMs and so on. Thanks to everyone who helped out.
After having tested connectivity and server environments during Thursday evening, the actual testing began early Friday morning. A few hours later, we were forced to cut off, since networks were going down and plugs were being pulled. Nevertheless, we are happy with the outcome. We have tested according to the test specification, and we have some issues that should be addressed. Video has been sent, and video has been received.
Saturday morning we had our first F2F meeting. Finally. Due to some last minute changes, only five companies were represented. But we are still satisfied, we now have momentum. Several details were discussed regarding the test document, and we started planning a new test activity sometime during August/September. This time it will be an isolated CSI test activity. We will focus solely on the services that the group is involved in. Sweden or Israel seem to be hot candidates. Hope to see you all there!
All in all, it’s great to see the recognition we are gaining, after all our hard work. If we keep going like this, we are on our way to success. New companies are joining the group, and our liasons are welcomed by everyone. Hopefully, more test events will be reality soon, and we are also glancing at other features similar to CSI that we would like to bring into our group. Please join, you could be in for something good!
Take care!
Kristofer Jarl
Sony Ericsson Mobile Communication
Technorati Tags: IMS, SuperOp, Video Sharing
.
What is your client strategy?
March 26, 2007
Whenever I visit customers in Asia Pacific, it always amazes me how different companies that are developing the same product can go about it in so many different ways. OK, maybe not exactly the same product. One handset weighs in at 170 grams and their competitor’s handset at 164 grams. One handset could also have a metallic color, and the other shiny gray. Go figure.
In trying to understand this phenomenon, I came to the conclusion that all these different approaches are a result of a fundamental difference in R&D philosophy.
Let’s assume you are a developer, and you have been given the daunting task of developing a mobile handset. And YES; it should be an IMS handset. The applications you need to support promise you a major headache:
– VoIP calls (audio and video)
– Presence
– IM (Instant Messaging)
– VS (Video Sharing)
- VCC (Voice Call Continuity)
By the time you’re finished, you assume the whole world speaks in “acronym”…
And now for the 50 million dollar question: How would you approach this development task?
Rest assured I won’t let you think too much while reading this post. Take it from me… I’ve seen primarily two kinds of companies – the “top down” kind and the “bottom up” kind.
Essentially, if you need to build an IMS client (that’s a mobile phone that does IP), first and foremost you need a solid SIP IMS implementation. Not your average-Joe “IMS-ready” or “IMS-lite” one. You also need engines for all those fun applications that will enable you to do VoIP calls, presence, etc. And to top it off, you need a user interface that can be stitched into Windows Mobile, Symbian or whatever operating system you’re using.
Illustrating it in a diagram, you get the following result. 
If you are one of those “bottom up” companies, then you believe that infrastructure is the key. You search for the right SIP stack, with all those nasty IMS extensions. You make sure your RTP implementation can handle all those necessary bandwidth and retransmissions for IMS. And you select a good codec vendor that can deliver on the promise of encoding H.264 in CIF resolution using only 80 MIPS (I wish…). Once you have that part figured out, the next step is to look for the engines you need to build your applications!
If you are one of those “top down” companies, you believe that the world is a set of applications you can mix and match… and all is well in the land of computing. You see SIP, RTP and those codecs as commodities. And for you, IMS is just another one of those things that you’ll figure out in the future. So out you go to seek your fortune in the market. You find a slick brochure of engines and applications, and choose what looks nicest. Presto! You have a really cool demo application running that really works. Until you look under the hood or try to plug it into a real network with other users.
In case you haven’t figured it out, I tend to side with the “bottom up” guys. I’ve seen too many projects leave the gate and start out running too fast… just to find out (pretty soon) that they were heading in the wrong direction. And now they are left with a lot of catching up to do.
What kind of company do you work for?
