A few myths about Telco and OTT models
Emmanuel Bertin
1, 2
emmanuel.bertin@orange-
ftgroup.com
Noel Crespi
2
noel.crespi@it-sudparis.eu
Michel L’Hostis
3
michel.lhostis@orange-ftgroup.com
1 - Orange Labs - 42, rue des Coutures 14066 Caen, France
2 - Institut Telecom, Telecom SudParis, CNRS 5157 - 9, rue Charles Fourier 91011 Evry, France
3 - Orange Labs - 2, avenue Pierre Marzin 22307 Lannion, France
Abstract— Over the next few years, we will witness radical
changes in the way users consume communication services. Two
of the most visible trends are the Over-The-Top (OTT) models,
pushed by webcos, i.e. the major companies driving the offering
of web services, and the telco model, favored by
telecommunication network operators. Are they that different?
With an analysis of the differences and the commonalities
between these two models, this paper unveils the reality about
some of the myths surrounding OTT and the telcos’ models.
INTRODUCTION
Telco and OTT models are sometime seen as fundamentally
different actors, whose only common point would be to (quite
accidentally) compete economically, since the latter have
disrupted the market of the former. In this paper, we intend to
debunk a few myths about this competition between telcos and
OTT models, thereby continuing the ICIN tradition [1]. We
define here an OTT provider as a service provider that offers
telecom services, but that neither operates a telecom network
nor leases networking capabilities from a telecom operator,
relying only on the worldwide Internet network. In the rest of
the paper, we will successively review some of the most
common assertions about telcos and OTT providers, and
conclude with some future scenarios.
I. M
YTH #1: THEIR ARCHITECTURES ARE
INTRINSICALLY DIFFERENT
Concerning communication services, OTT and telco
architectures are often considered to be intrinsically different.
Telco communication architectures are usually divided into
three independent layers:
• A network layer, with access and core networks;
• A control layer, with AAA and service triggering, as well
as communications control (the key historical telco
service); and
• An application layer, with service platforms that provide
supplementary value-added services on top of the control
layer, using protocols such as SIP (an ISC interface).
The control layer is here tightly linked to the network
layer. First, the control layer might pilot the network layer. For
instance, in the IMS architecture, the treatment of the media
flows (e.g. QoS) depends on the signaling layer. Second,
information from the network layer might be reused by the
control layer. For instance, the network authentication is
sometimes used by the control layer to personalize services.
When launching the operator web portal, the customer of a
network access offering is thereby directly recognized,
without having to authenticate him/herself (implicit
authentication).
Figure 1: Telcos’ architectural principles
Interestingly OTT models have layers that are quite similar:
• A control layer, with identity management, access control
and API exposure, as well as the key OTT services (e.g.
search for Google, communication control for Skype or
social networking for Facebook);
• An application layer, where third-parties provide value-
added services on top of the control layer, using APIs;
and
• A network layer, similar to that of the telcos.
2011 15th International Conference on Intelligence in Next Generation Networks
978-1-61284-321-6/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE 6