VoIP Network Architectures
VoIP Network Architectures
VoIP Network Architectures
net/publication/242344986
CITATIONS READS
4 5,939
2 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Thomas Plueckebaum on 21 April 2014.
1. Introduction
The use of voice over internet protocol (VoIP) services has seen important growth over
recent years[1]. People have become more aware of the benefits that VoIP offers in terms
of cost and ubiquity, and many corporate and residential users are familiar with this
technology. For example, as of December 2007, VoIP-originated calls in the European
Union represented 8 percent of the traffic in the fixed sector (Commission of the European
Communities, 2009). In The Netherlands and France, this rate was 32 percent and 27
percent, respectively[2]. For voice operators, the provisioning of VoIP services can be
The authors would like to thank
the reviewers for their useful commercially, economically and technically beneficial. In an environment of convergence
comments. of telecommunications networks, data, voice and video signals are transmitted over the
This article represents the same physical link. Network operators can then save costs by employing only one network
opinion of the authors and does for different services. For instance, there can be CAPEX savings by using high-speed
not necessarily represent the
opinion of WIK-Consult. Gigabit Ethernet interfaces of 10 Gbps, instead of the E1 links of 2 Mbps. Moreover, there
can be OPEX savings when using the well-known IP network, which will enable the
Received: 15 October 2009
Revised: 10 December 2009
management of only one network instead of the management of separate voice, video and
Accepted: 18 January 2010 data networks. VoIP, as a consequence, has been or will be implemented by current and
DOI 10.1108/14636691011040486 VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010, pp. 59-72, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1463-6697 j j
info PAGE 59
prospective telephony operators. In this sense, several circuit-switched telephony
operators have begun plans to migrate to VoIP. In many of these migration plans, VoIP
is used initially in the core network due to the high investment associated with the
deployment of broadband in the access network, which is one of the main prerequisites for
the provisioning of VoIP services. Furthermore, for a number of new voice operators, VoIP is
the underlying technology[3].
In many countries, the fixed and mobile telephony operators follow a calling party’s network
pays (CPNP) rule, which obliges the network operator that initiates the call to pay a
termination fee to the network operators where the call is terminated. Competition and
regulatory authorities consider that there is a form of market power, which is named a
‘‘termination monopoly’’, because a call can only be terminated by the service provider that
controls the addressed telephone number. By regulating the termination fee, regulatory
bodies have a tool to limit the inadequate use of this market power. Therefore, several
National Regulatory Agencies (NRAs), government bodies and telephony operators are
interested in determining the cost of the termination fee. It is foreseeable that the termination
monopoly will continue in VoIP networks, and in any type of broadband network, such as the
Next Generation Network (NGN), where the VoIP service is provided (Marcus and Elixmann,
2008). In this way, the termination fees will remain for a still longer period and, as a
consequence, telecommunications regulators and voice operators will have to determine
the cost of such rates in VoIP networks[4].
One of the first steps when calculating termination rates is the definition of the network
architecture that will be used in the cost model. Cost modellers have wide experience in
the cost elements that should be taken into account in legacy networks, such as fixed and
mobile circuit-switched telephony networks. Nevertheless, VoIP is a disruptive technology
and there are still several uncertainties about the cost elements typical for a VoIP network.
A few authors have already described the cost elements of corporate VoIP networks
(Hersent et al., 2005; Kaza and Asadullah, 2005). However, a VoIP network operator that
receives a license of public telephony services has to meet different requirements that will
have an impact on the cost of the service, such as calls to emergency services, lawful
interception, data retention or quality of the call. So far, the regulatory implications of VoIP
have been described, but not from a cost modelling perspective (Elixmann et al., 2008;
Graham and Ure, 2005; Meisel and Needles, 2005). As there is a dearth of information on
this subject in the existing literature, this article describes the impacts on costing of VoIP
network architectures that provide public voice services. The information and the analysis
provided in this article can be of interest to policy makers, telephony operators and
researchers.
To carry out the analysis, the article contains a discussion of the importance of different
aspects of VoIP network architectures. In several countries, Long-run incremental cost
(LRIC) models based on an efficient network are used for the assessment of termination
fees[5]. For this reason, it is necessary to identify which VoIP network architecture can be
used as an efficient network. Section 2 explains the most relevant VoIP techniques: VoIP
architectures and protocols, nodes and systems for the provisioning of VoIP services, the
importance of VoIP traffic in shared channels, and quality of service (QoS) in VoIP networks.
The purpose of this section is not to identify the most suitable VoIP technique, but rather to
describe the technological options that are pondered by network operators when designing
a VoIP network. Section describes the implementation of the following features in VoIP
networks and their impact on cost modelling: provisioning of telephony features (e.g. voice
mail and caller identification), number translation, number portability, access to emergency
services, security issues and additional systems such as the network monitoring system.
Section 4 deals with the following two issues related to the interconnection of VoIP networks:
the interconnection interface, which can be a circuit-switched network interface or an
IP-based interface, and the cost implications of the location of the point of interconnection.
Finally, section 5 discusses the conclusions.
j j
PAGE 60 info VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010
2. VoIP techniques
Unlike in the circuit-switched telephony world, where the technology used for the
transmission and interconnection of telephony services was defined many years ago and is
implemented on a national basis, VoIP operators have several possibilities at the moment of
choosing the VoIP technique that will be implemented in their networks. So far, there is not a
widely accepted standard for the provisioning of VoIP services. Standardization bodies such
as the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and the Internet Engineering Task
Force (IETF) have defined VoIP architectures and protocols that have been deployed during
the last two decades. A specific VoIP system will be used, depending on the business
strategy of the voice operator. The importance of the definition of the VoIP technology that is
implemented lies in the fact that LRIC cost models are based on efficient network
architectures. This chapter describes a few of the most well-known technologies used by
VoIP operators for the provisioning of voice services, as well as the relevance of VoIP traffic
and quality of service in cost modelling of VoIP services.
j j
VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010 info PAGE 61
communication is stored in the SIP end user’s device. Network operators have implemented
different versions of SIP.
The ITU-T standardized the H.323 architecture, which defines the protocols, procedures and
components of devices for the provisioning of real-time audio, video and data
communications (ITU-T, 2006b). The main elements of the H.323 architecture are the
terminals, the gatekeepers, the gateways and the Multipoint Control Unit (MCU). An H.323
terminal requires the following components for interworking with other H.323 terminals: the
H.245 protocol for the negotiation of channel usage and capabilities; the Q.931 protocol for
call setup and signalling; the Registration/Admission/Status (RAS) protocol for
communication with the gatekeeper; and RTP/RTCP for the delivery of audio and video
packets. Within an H.323 zone, a gatekeeper is the central point of the call and is used to
provide registered H.323 endpoints with call control services. The gatekeeper functions
include address translation, bandwidth control and management, zone management,
call-control signalling, and call authorization and management. The gatekeeper is needed to
control the gateways, which are utilized for the interconnection of H.323 and non-H.323
networks. The MCU enables the provisioning of conferences of three or more H.323
terminals. In the H.323 architecture, the H.323 terminals exchange VoIP packets directly by
using RTP and the User Datagram Protocol (UDP), whereas the H.225 and H.245 protocols
are employed for controlling the call.
The Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP) is a VoIP signalling and call control protocol
that was defined by the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force, 2003b). The components of
the MGCP architecture are the Media Gateway Controller (MGC), the Media Gateway (MG),
and the Signalling Gateway (SG). Megaco is another call control and signalling protocol that
resulted from the cooperation between the ITU (ITU-T, 2006a) and the IETF (Internet
Engineering Task Force, 2003a).
Several VoIP manufacturers have implemented their own VoIP solutions based on
proprietary network architectures and protocols. For example, the basic VoIP network
architecture of the company Skype contains three basic nodes:
1. a Skype login server;
2. a super node; and
3. an ordinary host.
In the peer-to-peer Skype network, the Skype login server is the only central component
(Baset and Schulzrinne, 2006). For cost modelling purposes, the Skype login server is the
relevant cost element to be considered, since the super node and the ordinary host are not
paid by the Skype company, but by the customers.
Another example of a proprietary protocol is the Skinny Call Control Protocol (SCCP), which
is used by Cisco in its VoIP Call Manager solution. SCCP is a network terminal protocol used
as a messaging system between the Cisco Call Manager and a Cisco terminal such as the
Cisco 7900 series IP phone (Cisco, 2009a).
As has been explained, there are several VoIP network architectures and each one has
different hardware and software requirements. For cost modelling purposes, it is necessary
to define an efficient network architecture and calculate the usage factor of all the network
elements involved in a VoIP call[7].
2.2 The role of the softswitch and the IMS in VoIP deployments
For the provisioning of VoIP services, many operators have chosen the softswitch and/or the
IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), which are explained below.
The softswitch is a piece of software that switches calls by using software instead of a
hardware device. A softswitch can be used for controlling VoIP calls inside a VoIP
network and also for the interconnection of a circuit-switched telephony network with a
VoIP network. As is depicted in Figure 2, the softswitch architecture is composed of a
j j
PAGE 62 info VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010
Figure 2 The Softswitch architecture
Media Gateway Controller, which is the softswitch itself, and Media Gateways and
Signalling Gateways. A Media Gateway helps convert circuit-switched voice calls into
VoIP packets and vice versa, whereas the Signalling Gateway adapts the Signalling
System 7 (SS7) circuit-switched signalling protocol to a VoIP signalling protocol. Several
signalling protocols can be used by the softswitch, e.g. H.323, SIP or MGCP. However, as
SIP is being adopted by a number of voice operators, the manufacturers tend to
implement SIP in the softswitches.
The IMS is a network architecture designed for the provisioning of services in a converged
multimedia environment. It is a platform that manages multimedia services, among which
voice is just another service that can be provided. SIP is one of the key protocols in the IMS
network architecture. In the horizontal architecture of the IMS, the application, control and
access/transport layers are clearly separated and they do not necessarily belong to the
same operator. The IMS network architecture is shown in Figure 3. The fundamental nodes of
the IMS architecture are the Home Subscription Server (HSS) and the Call Session Control
Function (CSCF). The HSS contains the user profile database for authentication and
authorization purposes (Poikselka and Mayer, 2009). The CSCF node controls the signalling
by using the SIP protocol. The Serving-, Interrogating- and Pro-Call Session Control
Functions (S-CSCF, I-CSCF and P-CSCF) are the roles of the CSCF node. For the
interconnection with the General Switched Telephony Network (GSTN), two nodes are
employed:
1. the Media Gateway Control Function (MGCF); and
2. the Media Gateway (MGW).
The MGCF manages signalling information and controls the Media Gateway. The Media
Gateway translates RTP/UDP/IP packets into TDM signal streams. The Breakout Gateway
Control Function (BGCF) chooses the route of the telephony session and the Session Border
Controller (SBC) is an IP-to-IP gateway.
The difference between the capabilities of the softswitch and the IMS lies in the type of
service that will be provided. If an operator is interested in providing end-customers with a
voice service with few related applications, then probably the softswitch is the better
alternative. The IMS is an architecture that helps create and deliver different types of
services in an easy way. If an operator is planning to offer multimedia services, then the IMS
could be the best alternative. Current cost models of VoIP networks could consider the SIP
softswitch as the relevant node for the management of VoIP communications. However, as it
is expected that operators will provide customers with multimedia or advanced services in
j j
VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010 info PAGE 63
Figure 3 The IMS network architecture
the future, and as fixed and mobile networks will converge, the IMS could be regarded as the
future call control node in cost models.
j j
PAGE 64 info VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010
Figure 4 FTTC/VDSL2 access network
1. prioritisation;
2. capacity reservation; and
3. over-dimensioning.
For the prioritisation of data, the Differentiated Services (DiffServ) technique can be used
(Internet Engineering Task Force, 1998). Packets with the DiffServ feature have
information in the packet header about the type of service the packets belong to,
which will be used by routers to give packets a corresponding priority at the moment of
forwarding them to one of the links attached to the router. For the reservation of traffic
capacity, the Integrated Services (IntServ) technique can be used. One of the most
important techniques used in the Integrated Services architecture is the Resource
ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) (Internet Engineering Task Force, 1997). This protocol
reserves capacity along the path between the sender and the receiver before a
transmission takes place. However, Integrated Services techniques have major problems
of scalability in large networks[10]. The trend in the industry is to use DiffServ instead of
IntServ. For the over-dimensioning of transmission capacity, the operator deploys more
capacity in terms of additional links and nodes.
In many IP networks, it will take some time until VoIP catches up with the quality of voice of
current circuit-switched networks. Probably, this enhancement of the VoIP quality will be
achieved by deploying broadband networks with more capacity and by using QoS
mechanisms. If the VoIP provider is the owner of the VoIP network, then it can manage the
Quality of Service inside the VoIP network. The different characteristics of the services that
are provided are detailed in the Service Level Agreement (SLA) that is signed by the VoIP
provider and the end-customer[11]. To meet the strict time delay requirements required by
VoIP connections, the VoIP operator could deploy routers or switches that support QoS
mechanisms. The capacity of the links or systems could also be expanded. In any case, the
deployment of QoS mechanisms, which could entail hardware and software acquisitions, will
have an impact on the cost of the service and, therefore, cost models should calculate this
additional cost. A few of the issues that should be addressed in cost models are the
following:
B What is the cost (CAPEX and OPEX) of a high-quality voice service that uses QoS
mechanisms?
B What is the cost of a VoIP service that is not reliable all the time and that is provided over a
best-effort IP network?
The degree to which the implementation of QoS mechanisms affects the usage factor of
network equipment should also be analysed.
j j
VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010 info PAGE 65
3. Features of VoIP networks
A telephony operator needs to offer a set of services and meet a few legal requirements to be
able to provide the telephony service. As will be explained, the provisioning of these
services and features entails the deployment of additional equipment. The services and
features described in this chapter need to be considered when calculating the costs of
telephony services in IP networks.
j j
PAGE 66 info VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010
‘‘consists wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals on Electronic Communications
Networks’’ (The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, 2002a). A
member state of the EU can define whether the VoIP service belongs to the PATS or ECS
category.
The difficulty in providing access to emergency numbers lies in the fact that it might be
technically complex to determine the location of the VoIP user (Elixmann et al., 2008;
European Regulators Group, 2007). When a customer contracts a VoIP telephony service,
usually the VoIP user gives his/her address during the registration process. If the VoIP user is
non-nomadic and generates an emergency call from the address that was registered with
the VoIP operator, then it is technically feasible to route the call properly to the next Public
Safety Answering Point (PSAP). Conversely, an emergency call generated by a nomadic
user from a location different to the address provided to the VoIP operator may have
technical difficulties in being routed properly. There are ongoing efforts that propose
solutions to overcome this inconvenience. For instance, the IETF ECRIT Working Group has
proposed mechanisms for the routing of emergency calls with Internet technologies (Internet
Engineering Task Force, 2009a). However, for the moment, this matter remains an open
issue and time will pass before a standard can be widely accepted by internet service
providers (ISPs) and VoIP providers. For cost calculation issues, it should be considered that
the network nodes that provide the VoIP service, such as the switches, routers and servers,
have to be able to route emergency calls to the proper PSAP. The usage factor of these
network elements, a possible increase in signalling traffic volume and the possible effect of
QoS mechanisms will have an impact on costs[13].
j j
VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010 info PAGE 67
servers and databases[14]. If these costs are refunded, then they should not be taken into
account in the calculation of termination rates.
5. Conclusions
The deployment of VoIP networks raises a number of technological, economic and
regulatory issues that affect the determination of voice termination rates. This article
j j
PAGE 68 info VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010
provides an overview of the features of VoIP network architectures that will have an impact on
the cost modelling of termination rates. The analysis covers three aspects:
1. VoIP techniques;
2. features of telephony services in VoIP networks; and
3. interconnection of VoIP networks.
First, one of the aspects to be considered by network cost modellers is the definition of
the network architecture. Unlike circuit-switched telephony networks, where there are a
limited number of standards that are adopted by most operators, VoIP operators have
several possibilities when selecting the VoIP systems and protocols (e.g. H.323, SIP, and
MGCP). Even though there is no precise answer about which is the best VoIP technology,
the SIP softswitch seems to be the current state-of-the-art architecture and it could be
considered as an efficient reference model architecture. The usage factor of the network
elements involved in a VoIP call should be calculated. The traffic volume generated by
VoIP users should also be considered appropriately in cost models. As the VoIP service
requires strict levels of loss, delay and jitter delay, Quality of Service techniques could be
implemented. If this is the case, the implementation of QoS could lead to costs that
should be taken into account.
Second, the features of a telephony service provided by a VoIP operator require the
deployment of appropriate servers and databases. Examples of cost elements that should
be considered are typical telephony services such as voice mail, caller identification, call
waiting, etc.; telephone number translation; number portability; access to emergency
services; security systems; and network monitoring systems. The provisioning of these
features will have an effect on the usage factor of a few network elements and on the traffic
volume, especially the signalling traffic, that will be generated.
Third, the definition of the point of interconnection is an issue that can entail costs for the VoIP
provider. Depending on the regulatory framework of every country and on the agreements
signed between telephony operators, it would be possible to use an IP-based or/and a
circuit-switched SS7 interface for the interconnection. If SS7 is mandatory, then a VoIP
operator will probably have to assume the costs of the corresponding signalling and media
gateways. The location of the point of interconnection has implications for the costs because
it could be necessary to consider the cost of the transit service from the point of
interconnection of the originating network to the closest point of interconnection to the
addressee.
In sum, the findings of this study could help cost modellers to reflect on the particularities of
VoIP networks. A future study could entail the elaboration of a cost model that includes the
cost elements described in this article.
Notes
1. In this article VoIP is considered a service that has to meet a few specific technical and regulatory
requirements and that needs a license to operate in a country. Some authors prefer to use the term
‘‘telephony over IP’’ when they refer to the same type of service. In this study the terms ‘‘telephony
over IP’’ and ‘‘voice over IP’’ refer to the same service.
2. Peer-to-peer (P2P) VoIP traffic was not considered in the VoIP statistics published in Commission of
the European Communities (2009). Therefore, the figures of total VoIP traffic generated might have
been higher.
j j
VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010 info PAGE 69
6. VoIP open standards such as the Inter-Asterisk eXchange protocol version 2 (IAX2) (Internet
Engineering Task Force, 2009b), which works with the Asterisk open source Private Branch
eXchange (PBX) server, are not described in this section. The reason is that IAX2 is suited to private
VoIP networks with low-budget limitations, and it is not expected to be used by major VoIP service
providers.
7. The usage factor (or the routing factor) measures the intensity of use of a network element by a
specific service.
8. For example, a voice codec could generate a VoIP payload of 6 Kbps, but with the corresponding
IP/UDP/RTP headers, the packet could require in practice a bandwidth of 50 Kbps or more, even if
compression mechanisms are used.
9. Frederiksen (2006) studies the case of VoIP suppliers with and without QoS and concludes that ‘‘it is
an unanswered question how important it is for the customers to have a guarantee for QoS’’. Later,
Constantiou and Kautz (2008) in an analysis of IP telephony in the Danish market find evidence that
price would be more important than quality of service. However, both studies do not neglect the
importance of QoS for the improvement of VoIP service provisioning.
10. Even though there are proposals that help alleviate the scalability problem in IntServ architectures,
they have not been widely deployed.
11. A VoIP service provider can also negotiate with network operators a service level agreement for the
provisioning of voice services with specific levels of quality.
12. In this case, it is assumed that the interconnection is done through circuit-switched SS7 interfaces.
Section 4.1 sheds light on the technologies used in the interconnection interfaces.
13. The calls to emergency services will probably be treated as a higher priority and, as a
consequence, they could belong to the highest QoS class.
14. The storage systems that keep information about customers’ communications are mostly
databases.
15. In many countries it is mandatory to use SS7 signalling for the interconnection between voice
operators.
16. Small VoIP operators could probably prefer to interconnect by means of IP-based protocols and
hence avoid the investment on circuit-switched interfaces.
References
Baset, S.A. and Schulzrinne, H. (2006), ‘‘An analysis of the Skype peer-to-peer internet telephony
protocol’’, paper presented at INFOCOM, 25th IEEE International Conference on Computer
Communications.
Cisco (2009a), ‘‘Skinny Call Control Protocol (SCCP)’’, available at: www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/
tk701/tk589/tsd_technology_support_sub-protocol_home.html (accessed December 9, 2009).
Collins, D. (2003), Carrier Grade Voice Over IP, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Commission of the European Communities (2009), Progress Report on the Single European Electronic
Communications Market (14th Report), SEC(2009)376/2, Volume 1, Part 2, Commission of the European
Communities, Brussels.
Constantiou, I.D. and Kautz, K. (2008), ‘‘Economic factors and diffusion of IP telephony:
empirical evidence from an advanced market’’, Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 32, pp. 197-211.
Elixmann, D., Marcus, S. and Wernick, C. (2008), ‘‘The regulation of voice over IP (VoIP) in Europe:
WIK-Consult study for the European Commission’’, available at: ://ec.europa.eu/information_society/
policy/ecomm/doc/library/ext_studies/voip_f_f_master_19mar08_fin_vers.pdf (accessed December 9,
2009).
j j
PAGE 70 info VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010
(The) European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (2002a), Directive 2002/21/EC on a
Common Regulatory Framework for Electronic Communications Networks and Services (Framework
Directive), The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, Brussels.
(The) European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (2002b), Directive 2002/22/EC on
Universal Service and Users’ Rights Relating to Electronic Communications Networks and Services
(Universal Service Directive), The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union,
Brussels.
(The) European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (2006), Directive 2006/24/EC on the
Retention of Data Generated or Processed in Connection with the Provision of Publicly Available
Electronic Communications Services or of Public Communications Networks and Amending Directive
2002/58/EC, The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union, Brussels.
European Regulators Group (2007), Common Position on VoIP, ERG(07) 56 rev. 2, European Regulators
Group, Brussels.
Frederiksen, J. (2006), ‘‘The change to VoIP and the introduction of TVoIP via xDSL’’, info, Vol. 8 No. 5,
pp. 13-22.
Graham, T. and Ure, J. (2005), ‘‘IP telephony and voice over broadband’’, info, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 8-20.
Hersent, O., Petit, J.-P. and Gurle, D. (2005), IP Telephony: Deploying Voice-over-IP Protocols, Wiley,
New York, NY.
Internet Engineering Task Force (1997), Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP), RFC 2205, Internet
Engineering Task Force, Fremont, CA.
Internet Engineering Task Force (1998), An Architecture for Differentiated Services, RFC 2475, Internet
Engineering Task Force, Fremont, CA.
Internet Engineering Task Force (2002), SIP: Session Initiation Protocol, RFC 3261, Internet Engineering
Task Force, Fremont, CA.
Internet Engineering Task Force (2003a), Gateway Control Protocol version 1, RFC 3525, Internet
Engineering Task Force, Fremont, CA.
Internet Engineering Task Force (2003b), Media Gateway Control Protocol (MGCP), version 1.0, RFC
3435, Internet Engineering Task Force, Fremont, CA.
Internet Engineering Task Force (2009a), Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies
(ECRIT) Working Group, available at: www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/ecrit-charter.html (accessed
December 9, 2009).
Internet Engineering Task Force (2009b), IAX: Inter-Asterisk eXchange version 2, RFC 5456, Internet
Engineering Task Force, Fremont, CA.
Internet Engineering Task Force (2009c), Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Working Group,
available at: www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/enum-charter.html (accessed December 9, 2009).
ITU-T (2002), Rec. Y.1541 Network Performance Objectives for IP-based Services, International
Telecommunication Union, Geneva.
ITU-T (2006a), H.248.1 Version 2 Implementors’ Guide, International Telecommunication Union, Geneva.
ITU-T (2006b), Recommendation H.323, International Telecommunication Union, Geneva.
Kaza, R. and Asadullah, S. (2005), Cisco IP Telephony: Planning, Design, Implementation, Operation,
and Optimization, Cisco Press, Indianapolis, IN.
Marcus, S. and Elixmann, D. (2008), ‘‘The future of IP interconnection: technical, economic, and public
policy aspects: WIK-Consult study for the European Commission’’, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/
information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/library/ext_studies/future_ip_intercon/ip_intercon_study_final.
pdf (accessed December 9, 2009).
Meisel, J.B. and Needles, M. (2005), ‘‘Voice over internet protocol (VoIP) development and public policy
implications’’, info, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 3-15.
Poikselka, M. and Mayer, G. (2009), The IMS: IP Multimedia Concepts and Services, 3rd ed., Wiley,
New York, NY.
Szigeti, T. and Hattingh, C. (2004), End-to-end QoS Network Design: Quality of Service in LANs, WANs,
and VPNs, Cisco Press, Indianapolis, IN.
j j
VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010 info PAGE 71
About the authors
Juan Rendon Schneir is Senior Consultant in the Cost Modeling and Internet Economics
Department at WIK-Consult, a regulatory research institute located on the outskirts of Bonn,
Germany. He obtained a PhD degree in Telecommunications Engineering from the
Polytechnic University of Catalonia in Spain in 2001. From 2001 to 2008 he worked initially as
Lecturer and then as Assistant Professor in the Department of Information and
Communication Technologies at Pompeu Fabra University in Barcelona, Spain. From 2005
to 2007 he was a Visiting Professor at ITAM University in Mexico, and in 2002 he was a
Visiting Researcher at Karlstad University in Sweden. He previously worked for the
telecommunications companies Telefónica and Italtel. He has worked in the field of the
optimisation of transport protocols for GPRS, UMTS and 4G. As part of his activities at
WIK-Consult, he has advised telecommunications regulatory bodies in Europe, Latin
America and Oceania on issues related to NGN/VoIP interconnection and cost modeling.
Currently, his research interests include telecommunications policy regulation (NGN, VoIP,
etc.), technology adoption and business cases for telecommunications systems (4G,
WiMAX). Juan Rendon Schneir is the corresponding author and can be contacted at:
jrendons@gmail.com
Thomas Plückebaum has worked for WIK-Consult since 2007 and leads the Department of
Cost Modelling and Internet Economics. He studied Electrical Engineering and Economic
Engineering at the RWTH Aachen. In 1982 he joined the Institute for Electro Technology and
Data Processing Systems as an Assistant Professor and finished his studies with a doctorate
in Electrical Engineering. Before joining WIK-Consult, he was director of technology for Arcor
Region West and until the finalisation of its merger with ISIS Multimedia Net in 2005, he was
CEO of ISIS, one of the German regional competitive access providers (‘‘City Carriers’’).
Between 2000 and 2005, he was executive director and responsible for the network
technology and the network roll-out of the regional carrier ISIS in the administrative district of
Düsseldorf. From 1995 to 2000, Dr Plückebaum held several responsibilities as an executive
director of o.tel.o communications and its predecessor, RWE Telliance. From 1988 to 1995,
he worked in the EDP department of Westdeutsche Landesbank, being responsible for
designing and realizing the worldwide data/voice corporate network. He has published
many major articles and has written a variety of studies and comments on regulatory
developments in Germany and the EU.
j j
PAGE 72 info VOL. 12 NO. 3 2010