Archive for May, 2010

DPI – We’ve got an app for that!

Thursday, May 20th, 2010 by Cam Cullen

As you can tell from my past blogs, I am a bit manic about devices and applications. The new business models created out of thin air by Apple – starting with iTunes, carrying forward with the iPhone, and now the iPad – have either saved or revitalized the music industry, small application/game developers, and the mobile handset market. There have a been a number of articles written on these topics, so I won’t dwell on it, but I think it is fair to say that entirely new options exist for innovation and revenue now that these products are on the market. They also inspired other vendors to attempt to compete with Apple, and the overall market for similar devices has grown as a result (the size of the smartphone market alone has grown at astounding rates).

What does this have to do with DPI? In the past, DPI was used to manage traffic (Peer-to-Peer mainly) and to provide visibility into what was happening on your network.

But this is not your father’s DPI …

With the advent of subscriber management for DPI systems, network operators have an entire new universe of possibilities on how to use DPI. We have operators around the world that have come up with very clever uses of DPI that enable them to operate their networks more efficiently, comply with regulatory mandates by governments, or generate additional revenue. It has also allowed them to create new types of service plans, not only ones that cost more money for subscribers, but also ones that SAVE money for subscribers.

A perfect example of this might be a service plan that voluntarily restricts the bandwidth for file sharing or video streaming in exchange for a lower monthly fee. A provider could offer this plan for potentially half (or less) the cost of a normal plan, because that user would introduce a much lower load on the network than a “normal” user.

Another hot topic is flat rate plans versus usage based plans, with some users being extremely vocal and speaking with their wallets. Why not combine the two? Offer a flat rate for web browsing and email, but usage-based pricing for streaming video or file sharing? This would increase the overall market for data services, as more casual users would be willing to purchase these data plans versus being afraid of the big leap in price for an “unlimited” data plan. This could even be extended between mobile service providers for reduced data fees for roaming – a huge sore spot for smartphone and data users that travel internationally.

An interesting application is the ability to offer multiple services simultaneously for each subscriber. Hmmm….what exactly does that mean? What if a subscriber wants a Parental control service, a managed security service, and to take advantage of a video caching service all at the same time? In most current network architectures this is not easily achievable – especially if the decision is made per-subscriber and per-application (i.e. Parental Control only on web browsing, video caching only on streaming video, and email to the virus scanner). DPI understand both applications and subscribers, and can effectively re-direct traffic as needed to the correct service (and even load balance between the servers!) – vastly simplifying the network operations, and enabling a service combination that is not possible today for operators.

We love it when our customers bring us new ideas. More than one customer has taken a look at what capabilities we have inside our LiewView application and came up with an entirely new idea for a service plan or a new network report that directly led them to a new service offering since they can better understand how their subscribers are using the network.

Got any ideas?

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Industry, Products, Technology | No Comments »

Does Network Neutrality impact DPI?

Friday, May 7th, 2010 by James Brear

FCC Chairman Genachowski’s recent letter has instigated a lot of talk about Net Neutrality, some of it apocalyptical (“The end of the Internet is here!”), some of it reasonable (“Nothing has changed, business as usual”). Both sides of the discussion have valid points to their arguments, but what really is the impact?

Without going into details (I will leave that to the experts), the FCC has reset the status quo to what it was before the Comcast court decision. As Genachowski himself states in the document “…this approach would restore the status quo”, resetting the ability of the FCC to manage broadband as they have in the past, preserving the FCC’s mission.

This is not “the nuclear option” that had been proposed by some, which would have made every aspect of broadband service open to regulation and restriction, and it is also not a capitulation to the Comcast ruling which would essentially make the FCC powerless against ISPs. Instead, as Genachowski himself headlined in his letter, this was a third way to look at the problem. Under this framework, the FCC would ensure that open access to networks is maintained, and focuses on the connections to the network, and not the content or services that run on that transport.

So now we are back to where we were before the Comcast ruling. However, there still are some concerns about stifling innovation and curtailing investments in broadband, but I think much of the uncertainty has been removed for ISPs (Procera customers) that want to continue to invest in their infrastructures because the evolving needs of their customers require it.

But….we are not exactly back where we were two years ago. Several changes have already come about because of this whole exercise.

  • ISPs know that they MUST be transparent in what they do on their networks, and consumers are watching them very closely, so no funny business is likely to slip by end users. This is a very good thing for consumers, and will force ISPs to think twice before they implement new policies, as they will be tried in the court of opinion well before any court case could be filed, and consumers will vote with their wallets and switch if practices are not to their liking.
  • There is general agreement that applications should not be discriminated against during normal operations (I qualify that because congestion management is still a problem, especially for real-time services).
  • Reasonable network management is OK. Although “reasonable” is open to interpretation, I think again the court of public opinion and consumer’s wallets will guide ISPs to a mutually agreeable definition (and this is also where congestion management is again an issue).
  • The door is open to ISPs that want to be creative and find ways to have service plans that innovate new services and deliver LOWER cost options for subscribers that use the network less and higher cost for the users that consume more resources.

So what is the impact of Net Neutrality on Procera?, neutral to positive. I don’t see any ISPs “behaving badly”, and no application vendors claiming discrimination. I do see smart phone customers still complaining, and some broadband customers concerned about video and voice performance, but our “reasonable” network management solutions can help ISP’s take their service to the next level.  Creating better customer experiences and evolving their networks to keep up with the innovations of technology.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Industry, Technology | No Comments »