    <rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
     <channel>
        <title>ACCU  :: When Worlds Collide 2 - Circuit Switch Telephony and Packet
Switch Networks</title>
        <link>https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/843</link>
        <description>Professionalism in Programming</description>
        <dc:language>en-us</dc:language> 
        <dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator> 
        <admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.xaraya.org" /> 
        <admin:errorReportsTo rdf:resource="mailto:webeditor@accu.org" />
       <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
       <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
       <docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>




<div class="xar-mod-head"><span class="xar-mod-title">Internet Topics + CVu Journal Vol 17, #5 - Oct 2005</span></div>

<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0">
    <tbody>
    <tr>
        <td valign="top">
            Browse in :
       </td>
       <td valign="top">

                                            <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/">All</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c13/">Topics</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c69/">Internet</a>
<br />

                                            <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/">All</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c76/">Journals</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c77/">CVu</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c94/">175</a>
<br />

                                            <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c69-94/">Any of these categories</a>

                    -                        <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c69+94/">All of these categories</a>
<br />
</td>
   </tr>
   </tbody>
</table>




<div class="xar-error">
   <p>
 <strong>Note:</strong> when you create a new publication type,
the articles module will automatically use the templates
<em>user-display-[publicationtype].xt</em>
and <em>user-summary-[publicationtype].xt</em>.
If those templates do not exist when you try to preview or display a new article,
you'll get this warning :-)  Please place your own templates in themes/<em>yourtheme</em>/modules/articles . The templates will get the extension .xt there. </p>
</div>
<div class="xar-norm xar-standard-box-padding">
   <h1><strong>Title:</strong>&nbsp;When Worlds Collide 2 - Circuit Switch Telephony and Packet
Switch Networks</h1>
<p><strong>Author:</strong>&nbsp;</p>
<p>
<strong>Date:</strong> 02 October 2005 06:00:00 +01:00 or Sun, 02 October 2005 06:00:00 +01:00</p>
<p><strong>Summary:</strong>&nbsp;<p>Unless you work in the telecommunications industry your knowledge of how it works is likely to be quite limited, therefore it is worth describing the basics.</p></p>
<p><strong>Body:</strong>&nbsp;<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e20" id="d0e20"></a></h2>
</div>
<p>Telephones have been around a very long time. Alexander Graham
Bell patented the telephone in 1876, so the telephone was over a
century old before packet switch networking escaped from the
laboratory. Hence the telephony industry is one of the most mature
in the world of technology. In comparison, the computer industry is
young and immature - if you were to anthropomorphise it you might
see a troublesome teenager emerging from a difficult puberty.
Asking the two to work closely together is bound to be
interesting.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e24" id="d0e24"></a>Digital
Telephony Primer</h2>
</div>
<p>Unless you work in the telecommunications industry your
knowledge of how it works is likely to be quite limited, therefore
it is worth describing the basics.</p>
<p>The analogue signal from your home or work phone is frequency
limited to about 3kHz (very little content of speech is above this)
and converted to digital using 8 bit samples, 8000 times a second,
giving a bit stream of 64000 bits per second (64kbit/s). The
telephone network consists of digital circuits capable of carrying
64kbit/s signals, and switches that can connect one circuit to
another to form end-to-end paths. The basic building block of the
telephony network is therefore the 64kbit/s data stream. An
end-to-end circuit provides a dedicated path, it has a fixed
latency, a fixed bandwidth, and a fixed quality of service. The
resources allocated at every point in the network are fixed for the
duration of the call. The number of circuits is also fixed so that
once they are all in use all further calls have to be rejected;
there is no option to adjust the balance between quality and
numbers of calls.</p>
<p>Mobile networks are similar, although advances in processing
power in the handset allow more efficient use of bandwidth in the
access network so that the voice circuit between the handset and
the core network only needs 16kbit/s.</p>
<p>Telephony networks also have a signalling infrastructure to
control the calls carried over these 64kbit/s circuits. This is a
message-based network designed specifically for call control and is
often carried on the same physical media as the voice circuits.
Initially this signalling was just restricted to basic call set-up
and clear down - passing the called and caller numbers and
indicating when the call was answered and finished. As the number
of services provided by the telephony networks has increased so has
the number of type of messages carried by the signalling network so
now it is far more than just call handling. The short message
service (SMS) between mobile phones is an example of data carried
by this signalling network that is not related to a telephony
call.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e35" id="d0e35"></a>Circuit Switch
telephony networks</h2>
</div>
<p>Telephony networks have developed slowly over more than a
century, and until recently have been built, owned, and controlled
by mostly state-owned monopolies. This long heritage has led to the
characteristics of the modern telephony network that we are
familiar with today:</p>
<div class="itemizedlist">
<ul type="disc">
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Dumb terminals.</b></span> The modern
telephone has changed surprisingly little since the 19th Century.
It contains a microphone and speaker for the user to communicate
with the other end of the call, and a method to signal to the
network. The only significant change has been the replacement of
the rotary dial with a keypad. You can take a hundred-year-old
phone and use it to make a call to the latest model of mobile
phone, or vice versa - there are very few other technologies that
have remained compatible for such a long time. Even modern devices,
such as the modem, facsimile, or DECT handset, are based on the
same three components, transmit sound, receive sound, and a
signalling interface.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Intelligent networks.</b></span> As
services have been developed for the telephony world they have
mostly been introduced into the core network. With the intelligence
in the network, introduction and upgrade of a service does not
require a change to the subscriber's equipment, and the hardware,
software, configuration, and security is under control of the
network operator. This has been a great benefit to the network
operators in the form of increased revenue, to the subscriber in
the form of a rich menu of services, and to third parties in that
they can sell services to everyone with a phone, no matter how
basic.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Metered charging.</b></span> Calls are
usually charged by time from the time of answer to the end of the
call. This means that the cost of a call is transparent to the end
user. Today's networks support fixed price or unmetered charging,
but these are a recent development and are only reluctantly
implemented by network operators as they threaten existing revenue
streams.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Distance charging.</b></span> Long
distance calls have always cost more than short distance calls.
This is based on the idea that the more pieces of equipment, or
exchanges, the call passes through, the more expensive it is for
the network operator, and that expense is passed to the end user.
Additionally, interconnect charges are a valuable source of revenue
so operators charge a premium for other operators to access their
network, and therefore international and cross-network calls are
relatively expensive.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Fixed Bandwidth.</b></span> The building
block of the telecom network is the 64kbit/s channel. This has led
to data connections using the circuit switch network reaching their
limit at about 56kbit/s for analogue modems and 64kbit/s for
end-to-end digital. Exceeding this limit requires more intelligence
at the end terminals, for example, 128kbit/s ISDN is achieved by
concatenating two 64kbit/s channels (charged by the Telco as two
separate calls) and video calls by using 6x64kbit/s channels.
Although there is some support in the network to route the
concatenated channels via the same path, most of the functionality
is implemented at the data terminal.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Fixed Latency.</b></span> The nature of
the dedicated 64kbit/s channel is that every bit takes the same
time to transverse the network, and therefore the latency for a
connection remains constant. This is particularly important for
voice communications as the human ear/brain is reasonably tolerant
of delay, but not of jitter. The worst-case latency within a
network in a medium sized country (e.g. BT in the UK) can be as
little as 10-15ms.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Partitioned Signalling.</b></span> The
circuit switch signalling network is partitioned into core network
signalling and access network signalling. In the core network
Signalling Scheme Number 7 (SS7 or C7) provides a trusted message
transfer and relay mechanism. Access to the messaging in the core
network is protected by having protocol conversion from an access
network (typically ISDN signalling) that validates message content
as well as providing supplementary services.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Standards.</b></span> The international
telephony networks conform to nationally and internationally
ratified standards from organisations such as ITU-T, ANSI, and
ETSI. Standards are agreed at national or international level and
then implemented by manufacturers and operators. The process is
hierarchical and participation expensive, leading to domination by
a small number of large organisations. There is also a historical
global division resulting in a different set of standards in North
America and (most of) the rest of the World.</p>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e81" id="d0e81"></a>Packet Switch
Networks</h2>
</div>
<div class="itemizedlist">
<ul type="disc">
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Intelligent Terminals.</b></span> Even the
first networked computers were substantially more complex than a
telephone. Even just providing the network interface required
considerably more hardware and software than even the most advanced
phones of the day. With intelligence in the terminal equipment, new
services and features require modification to that equipment,
resulting in costly and time-consuming upgrades. When a new service
is rolled out, it is only available to those end users with the
equipment that supports it, or those who are willing to upgrade
their equipment.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Dumb network.</b></span> In packet switch
networks the network is purely a transport mechanism. Most of the
intelligence that seems to be in the network is actually provided
by devices attached to the network, and each terminal device needs
to know how to access network resources.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Per packet or bandwidth
charging.</b></span> The charging model for access to packet switch
networks traces its origins to the government (military) or
academic use, which is often perceived as free. In practice,
because most packet networks have a high infrastructure cost and
low per-use costs, charging has been on a bandwidth basis, except
where bandwidth is scarce when per-packet charging encourages
efficient use. Where access to a packet switch network such as the
Internet is provided by another network, such as dial up telecom
access, the access charge is that of the access network.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Distance independent charging.</b></span>
It is rare in the packet switch world to be charged by distance.
Users of the Internet are often unaware of the location of the
service they are accessing, so charging by distance could not be
transparent and therefore would be unacceptable to most users.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Flexible bandwidth.</b></span> The usual
method of sharing the bandwidth over packet switch networks is on a
first-come first-served packet-by-packet basis. This means that a
heavy user such as a batch file transfer will significantly affect
a light traffic interactive user, and that the available bandwidth
can vary during the lifetime of a connection.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Variable Latency.</b></span> Another
consequence of the shared bandwidth is the variations in latency
depending on the type of traffic sharing the bandwidth. This makes
the transport of voice over contemporary packet switch networks a
hit and miss affair.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Transmission Delays.</b></span> The
packetising delay and anti-jitter buffering alone is often more
than the end-to-end delay of circuit switch networks. There is a
trade off between packet size and transmission delay as larger
packets make more efficient use of the bandwidth at the cost of
delayed transmission. Mixing bandwidth efficient traffic and
latency-sensitive traffic on the same transport network requires
more intelligence at intermediate nodes.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>End-to-end signalling.</b></span> In most
packet switch networks the intermediate nodes only deal with
destination routing decisions, leaving all higher-level protocols
to the endpoints. With the exception of HTTP, it is rare to
validate the communication at any point within the network.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><span class="bold"><b>Signalling Standards.</b></span> The vast
majority of packet switching protocols are defined by the IETF
(Internet Engineering Task Force) via RFC (Request for comments)
documents. This is an &quot;implement first, then document what works&quot;
co-operative method of standardisation that allows anyone to
partake without significant barriers to entry. Standards are mostly
global although they tend to have a North American cultural and
language bias.</p>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e130" id=
"d0e130"></a>Collision</h2>
</div>
<p>The two worlds of circuit switch and packet switch are
increasingly meeting and overlapping, and both are highlighting the
other's limitations when in the wrong domain:</p>
<div class="itemizedlist">
<ul type="disc">
<li>
<p>In the telecom arena the demands of packet over circuit is only
possible by abandoning the current lucrative charging model and
therefore disrupting the business model of traditional Telcos. The
drive to extract higher transfer rates of data over the telephone
access network has reached a limit at 56-64Kbits/s per circuit, and
end users are demanding much more. The Telcos have always provided
high bandwidth point-to-point circuits for business, but at a
price. The charge for a 2Mbit/s E1 (1.5Mbit/s T1 in North America)
is charged at thousands of pounds or dollars per month, depending
on location and distance. Telcos have the choice of ignoring the
demand and watching someone else take their market, or lowering the
price and seeing the revenue stream dramatically reduce.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The computer industry has until very recently always been forced
to use the Telcos for anything other than on-campus connections. In
many developed countries the stranglehold of the monopolies
prevented companies from even linking two of their own buildings if
they didn't own the land between, no matter how narrow. This has
made wide area networks expensive and time-consuming to install and
run, leading to frustration and resentment of the Telco's monopoly
position. It is hardly surprising that the computer networking
community, and more recently computer users, have taken every
opportunity to circumvent or eliminate the Telco's networks. At the
extreme this has led to the technically crazy and inefficient use
of voice over IP packet over digital voice circuit!</p>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
<p>It is not surprising then, that the telecom industry is looking
at moving its network infrastructure to packet switch, and the
computer industry is increasingly providing services previously the
exclusive domain of the Telcos.</p>
<p>For the telecom industry, packet switch allows them to satisfy
the demands of IP based equipment connecting over their networks,
carry traditional telecom traffic, and introduce new services to
open up new sources of revenue. Unfortunately, the characteristics
that make telecom networks reliable and predicable are mostly not
present in packet networks, and retrofitting them is proving
challenging.</p>
<p>Similarly, for the computer industry, retrofitting the reliable
and predictable performance that has resulted from a carefully
regulated telecom environment to their anarchical culture feels
like a paradigm change too far.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e148" id="d0e148"></a>Quality of
Service (QoS)</h2>
</div>
<p>The quality of service provided by the fixed line telecom
networks in all developed countries is taken by granted by most
users to such an extent that customers have become intolerant of
dropped calls, lack of dial tone, and expect to get through first
time, every time. Compare this with the computer industry where
crashes are tolerated, perhaps almost expected, and modems dropping
the line, missing web pages, and unavailability are taken for
granted. The idea of a telephone exchange running for 25 years
without a reboot is so foreign to the computer community that they
have difficultly believing such things are possible. There is
therefore a gulf between the expectations of telephone users and
computer users, even when they are the same people. This gulf could
be bridged by improving quality of service in computer networks up
to that expected by telecom users, or reducing the expectations of
the telecom users. Fortunately for the telecom industry, two
technologies have become widespread in the last decade that have
done much to lower the expectations of the telephone user: mobile
phone networks and IVR (interactive voice response) systems
fronting call centres. But can the quality of service in packet
switch networks be improved significantly to allow them to match
the now reduced expectations of the telephone user?</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e153" id="d0e153"></a>Voice over IP
(VoIP)</h2>
</div>
<p>VoIP is a much-misused term, often being confused with Internet
Telephony. Although the technology has been around for many years,
QoS issues are hampering its deployment. In order to provide a QoS
comparable with the existing telecom networks, the underlying IP
network needs to be carefully designed and managed, particularly
with regard to capacity and shared traffic. In practice VoIP
networks need to be grossly over-specified and dedicated to VoIP
traffic, especially when using IPv4 (IPv6 solves some, but not all,
of the QoS issues). It is simply not possible to just piggy-back
voice traffic on an existing IP network and expect it to work
reliably; either the network needs to be extensively upgraded, or a
new VoIP network commissioned, both of which negate any perceived
cost advantage of using an IP network. Despite the difficulties,
VoIP is slowly being deployed, albeit mainly in two locations,
PABXs, and IP islands in core telecom networks, both of which are
controlled environments where QoS and other issues can be
managed.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e158" id="d0e158"></a>VoIP and the
PABX</h2>
</div>
<p>If a company needs to upgrade both its LAN and internal
telephone infrastructure, there are significant cost-savings, both
up-front and on going, by converging the two. Vendors offering
solutions for the integrated corporate market will dominate a
Google search for VoIP, and technical news feeds frequently relay
press releases of companies making this change. Although this
closed environment is a success story for VoIP, it is not the VoIP
technology that is driving it, but the cost-savings from avoiding
duplication, and often the biggest savings are in the physical
wires rather than the protocols carried by them. It is highly
likely that VoIP will be the dominant technology for providing
voice services in the SME space by the end of the decade.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e163" id="d0e163"></a>VoIP islands
in core networks</h2>
</div>
<p>While in most of the VoIP world the publicity and hype precedes
the implementation, the major telephone operators are quietly but
steadily installing VoIP networks, if not as islands in their core
network, at least in their test plant. My interpretation is that
they believe VoIP is going to very important in the near future,
but there are still significant technological, logistical and
financial barriers still to break down, and that giving out too
much information about the technology they are using would allow
their competitors, especially the new entrants to the market, to
piggy-back their research. Similarly, the major telecom equipment
manufacturers, once you delve beyond the marketing hype, are vague
about the direction they are taking, lest the big IP equipment
manufacturers steal their market.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e168" id="d0e168"></a>Internet
Telephony</h2>
</div>
<p>Most references to VoIP are actually referring to using the
Internet for cheap telephone calls. On the surface this seems an
easy way to avoid paying Telco charges, especially for long
distance and international calls. In practice it is small niche
application beset with problems. The variable, sometimes long, and
unpredictable propagation delays of the Internet result in a low
quality relegated to those who are willing to trade quality for low
price. Unless the person you are calling is in one of the few areas
with free Internet to telephone network gateways, you are limited
to calling people who are close to their powered-up computer.</p>
<p>Despite these difficulties, a number of companies are providing
Internet Telephony products. Noticeably the big players, such as BT
with Broadband Voice in the UK, are by-passing existing desktop
computers and supplying dedicated boxes plugged into the customer's
LAN and providing interfaces to the public telephone network,
albeit not at zero cost.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e175" id="d0e175"></a>The Catch -
Signalling</h2>
</div>
<p>VoIP is easy. Taking a digital voice stream, putting it into IP
packets, and pulling it out at the other end is almost trivial, and
the necessary supporting features such as codecs, jitter buffers,
and echo cancellation are available both in hardware and as
software algorithms. The element that makes VoIP usable but
technically complicated is the signalling. Both the traditional
telephony and the emerging IP telephony worlds have many copious
standards, but whereas the traditional telephony world is in
general agreement in which standards and options to apply where,
there is no consensus in the IP world and each vendor is pushing
its own favourite. Many of the IP telephony signalling protocols
were developed before the current explosion in public internet use
and the subsequent security and abuse problems, and as a
consequence, do not co-exist well with the partitioning of the
Internet such firewalls and NAT routers.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e180" id="d0e180"></a>Security</h2>
</div>
<p>In its spring 1999 issue, the hacker magazine &quot;2600&quot; published
an article entitled &quot;SS7 explained&quot; in which author Friedo
describes in detail how SS7 works. He explains: &quot;the hackability of
SS7 does not at first appear possible, unless someone could figure
out how to interface directly with the SS7 network&quot;. Telecom
service providers have been very protective about their internal
system since the early 70s when John Draper discovered a toy
whistle allowed users to circumvent billing systems for
long-distance calls in the US and the resultant development of the
so-called &quot;blue boxes&quot; sold to make it easy for end users to phreak
the network. Even with the proliferation of mobile telephony
networks and the licensing of many small operators, the security of
the public telephone network is many orders of magnitude better
than the Internet and the other IP networks connected to it. The
public telephony network not only provides access to the emergency
services but also provides many other critical links such as
intruder detection alerts. The reliability and availability of the
telephone network really is a life and death matter. It is simply
not possible for IP based networks to replace the existing circuit
switch telephony networks unless the security of IP is improved by
orders of magnitude. This either requires an IP telephony network
completely separate from the existing IP data network, which
negates much of the advantage of an integrated system, or there
needs to be a landmark change in how IP networks are deployed and
secured.</p>
</div>
<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e185" id="d0e185"></a>The
Outlook</h2>
</div>
<p>There is already enough momentum in the direction that telephony
and data networks are moving that by the end of the decade it will
be impossible to tell where one network type ends and the other
starts, and a time when there is no longer any concept of separate
networks for telephony and computers is not far off. This brings
great challenges all of us: The telephony world needs to shed the
legacy of its monopoly position and gentle pace of technological
change, particularly in the way it charges its customers and
rations access to new technology. The computer industry needs to
take a grown-up attitude to reliability, availability, and
security; reboots, denial of service and viruses are simply not
acceptable when dealing with universal public services and life and
death situations. The most popular clich&eacute; at the moment is
&quot;wake-up call&quot; - if you are in the telephony or data networks
industry, this is yours.</p>
</div>
</p>
<p><strong>Notes:</strong>&nbsp;</p>
<p><em>More fields may be available via dynamicdata ..</em></p>
</div>
</channel>
</rss>
