6 Conclusions

Risks and Recommendations

Risks for IPTV Operators

According with my experience, I have analyzed different in-home networking technologies than can be used for IPTV supporting and content sharing into the house. In spite of each technology has their own advantages and disadvantages, we have found out some risks than can be taken into consideration at the choice time. Some of this tricks can be on hand immediately and other ones could be revealed in a later moment: they will be called current and future risks.

CURRENT RISKS

• Short term most important problem is scalability. In each of the analyzed technologies, this could be solved:

1. WiFi - 802.11n
2. PLC (UPA) – Automatic management of transmitted power

Each of these technological evolutions will offer less interference by improving physical layer sharing.

• There is no technology mature enough, thus, it is necessary to use different technologies. This will result on the need to perform an on site test to determine if the user is suitable for a specific technology.

FUTURE RISKS

• Using 802.11n wifi pre-standard nowadays could be very risky if the final standard requires any hardware or software change in current wifi 802.11n devices.
• The existence of two PLC standards (UPA and HomePlug) may foresee that market chooses the option fitting the best, eliminating the other one. It is very likely that one of the technologies will disappear or its use will be much reduced.

Recommendations for IPTV Operators

Using an end-to-end video transport network. The operator approach will include three independent subnetworks: video, data and management.

Until a completely mature technology is available, it is highly recommendable to use different inhome technologies which offer the required alternatives for homes where problems are observed.

Using a management platform based in TR-069 will allow managing any inhome networking device, regardless of the technology used.

Usage of PLC technology, regardless of the chosen standard, will allow choosing among different equipment providers including the chosen chipset. This will ease negotiation, obtaining better prices due to simultaneous contacts with different vendors. For analyzed WiFi technology, Ruckus is the only manufacturer, which reduces negotiation options.

How to select the best solution for customers

Improving technologies of wireless networks, increases in hard disk-drive sizes and the increasing number of flat-screen TVs in households, makes the home network inevitable in the near future. Unfortunately the home network still remains more of promise than reality for high quality broadcast TV transmission, mainly because the standards and interoperability are some way behind.

The number of home networking options continues to grow with solutions offered using technologies such as GigE, Wifi IEEE 802.1n, PLC, HomePNA 3.0, and MoCA, IPTV end users can create high speed multimedia home networks that are able to carry various types of services at home.

As consumer demand for distributing, sharing, and engaging with digital content grows, so too does the need for a home networking middleware platform that provides these features.

Unfortunately for operators there is not a “one-size-fits-all” solution. No two households are the same, including the placement and number of outlets, or the type of medium that is connected to them. Additionally, the applications, services and traffic patterns will vary substantially from household to household. To compound matters, there are multiple home-networking standards (many proprietary) available, even over the same medium, that makes it difficult to determine the best solution.

Each technology has some type of trade off – whether it is cost to implement, interference issues, or coexistence issues. Therefore, operators must consider a number of factors when selecting a home networking solution. These include the types of services and number of devices to support, reach and available throughput, as well as ease of use and installation. As such, many operators are choosing to evaluate and trial multiple home-networking options.

Service providers must be concern about technology that could adapt their requirements and all stage marketing opportunities, from near-term services to long-term personalized services to the customer.

Also, device management is a key factor that needs to be biddable in order to offer different support levels to the customer. Indeed, Service Providers would be in advantage if they had some important design, monitoring and troubleshooting tools at any moment.

In the end, many operators might just find that the upfront expense of installing “clean cabling” may be the ultimate solution to meeting their requirements related to reach, rate, QoS and most importantly, Quality of Experience (QoE) for the end user.

So, the user-perceived experience of what is being presented by a communication service or application user interface defined by QoE, must be assured. This is highly subjective and takes into accounts many different factors beyond the quality of the service, such as service pricing, viewing environment, stress level and so on. In an IP network, given the diversity and multiplicity of the network, this is more difficult and therefore more critical to success than in other transports.