China has 38.6M 3G users vs India’s very slow 3G start and 2G Auction scandal

China – the world’s largest mobile market – had 38.64 million 3G users by the end of October 2010, a threefold increase year-on-year, according to figures from the country’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) cited in a Xinhua report. Approximately 25.38 million users were new subscribers in the past year.

The number of 3G users of each of China’s top three operators – China Mobile, China Unicom and China Telecom – exceeded 10 million by the end of October. China Mobile had 16.98 million 3G connections as of 31 October, while China Unicom had 11.66 million. China Telecom, the country’s third-largest operator, doesn’t disclose its 3G user numbers every month but earlier said it had 9.15 million 3G users at the end of September. Interestingly, China Mobile’s 3G lead doesn’t reflect its dominance in the market overall; it has only around 5 million more 3G connections than number-two player China Unicom, but controls a huge 70 percent market share of China’s total mobile sector, according to Wireless Intelligence. However, China Mobile’s 3G rollout uses homegrown technology TD-SCDMA, compared to its rivals’ use of the global, more popular technologies W-CDMA and CDMA EV-DO. China’s 3G base now equates to around 5 percent of its total mobile market, meaning the three operators have a long road ahead of them in converting their customers to the faster mobile broadband technology. Xinhua notes that earlier this month the ministry said that China aimed to have 150 million 3G mobile users by 2011.

Business revenue of mobile telecommunications made up 69.84 percent of the total, while fixed-line revenues accounted for 30.16 percent, dropping 3.2 percentage points year on year, the MIIT said


Meanwhile, a recent study has concluded that 3G adoption in India will be slow. This goes contrary to the high awareness campaigns currently being doled out by service providers for their 3G offerings, and the technology’s famed capabilities to deliver broadband content.

Only one in five urban mobile subscribers would opt for 3G services in the short term, a new study by the Nielsen Company has found. It further noted that it may take as long as 8-10 years before a majority of mobile users move onto a 3G plan. The study was released by the Nielsen Company in New Delhi on Wednesday at the `Consumer 360′ conference.

However, “The response from consumers has been encouraging, though it is too early to comment on the numbers since we have launched early November,” Deepak Gulati, executive president, mobility of Tata Teleservices Ltd (TTSL) said. Tata DoCoMo, the GSM service arm of TTSL, provides 3G services in nine of out of 22 telecom circles. On early adopters of 3G, he said, “Obviously the high end customers go for it initially.”

The study found that nearly 70 per cent of urban mobile subscribers are aware of 3G services and 63 per cent were familiar with it as a concept. “While service providers have succeeded in popularising the concept and articulating its promises, consumers seem tentative about their disposition to embrace the technology” said Arjun Urs, director – Client Solutions India of Nielsen.

The study also found that the most eager group ready to adopt 3G was “Power users largely made up of working professionals and internet-savvy youth. They told Nielsen they were eager to embrace higher speeds to access the internet and download large attachments,” Urs added.

The survey noted that 36 per cent of those polled indicated a strong disposition towards 3G adoption. Not surprisingly, less tech reliant groups, showed little enthusiasm about the next wave of mobile services.

While government-owned Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd and Mahanagar Nigam Ltd have already launched their 3G services, the response to it has been rather poor, stated market observers. TTSL was the first private telecom provider to launch 3G services.

Market leader Bharti Airtel is expected to launch its 3G services in December, and Vodafone Essar is gearing up to launch its offering in January 2011, to be followed by the Aditya Birla Group-owned Idea Cellular Ltd.


The slow start expected for 3G in India comes on the heels of the much delayed 3G spectrum auctions and that country’s 2G auction scandal.  The November 24 2010 Financial Times reports that:

Mobile carriers in India have come under scrutiny this week, after a report by the national auditor concluded that the country’s telecoms ministry had sold off its 2G spectrum at a “throwaway price”, on a “first come, first serve basis”.     The report by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India estimated that undervaluations of licences allocated to domestic and foreign telecoms groups in 2008 might have cost the government a total of about $39bn in lost revenues. The report said about $8bn was lost from the excess allocation of spectrum licenses to existing wireless telecom operators.  A further $31bn was lost due to the undervalued sale of spectrum to new entrants into the market. Analysts think this is likely to have a harmful impact on one of the country’s most successful industries.

Bharti Airtel, India’s biggest telecoms group by sales, and Vodafone of the UK risk becoming the first leading companies to be targeted by the government for having been awarded more spectrum than the auditors claim they should have, without paying any upfront charges.

There has been a huge public outcry over the cheap license given to new telecom firms in 2008 in a scam which cost the government `1.76 lakh crore. The Comptroller and Auditor General’s (CAG) in a report has castigated the former telecom minister, Mr A. Raja, for allocating 2G licenses to new players in a process which “ lacked transparency and appeared to have been done with the objective of favouring a few firms”.

After getting cheap licenses, these firms sold stake to foreign firms at huge valuation. This despite the fact that these new firms had no infrastructure on the ground. The government is facing heat from the opposition parties over the scam. They are demanding an investigation by the joint parliamentary committee (JPC) on the issue.


On November 14th, 2010, Mr. A Raja resigned as India’s Telecom Minister due to this 2G Scandal.  It was reported that the ruling Congress party leadership had advised Raja to step down so that parliament could function peacefully.  The opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) said Raja should be prosecuted under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and a first information report should be registered against him.  Mr. Raja is accused of causing a loss of Rs1.76tn ($40bn) to the exchequer by allocating 2G spectrum at 2001 rates. 

Opinion:   This author heard Mr Raja speak two years ago at the India Community Center (ICC) in Milpitas, CA.  His presentation was not at all impressive (most of it was in Tamil) and we tend to side with the BJP party regarding prosecution for his role in this fiasco.  Corruption is rampant in India and those that benefit from it must be shown that they won’t be able to get away scott free.  Economic growth will suffer if corruption by government officials is not punished.

Infonetics Research: Carrier VoIP and IMS equipment revenue dips, but demand is up, especially in China

Executive Summary

In two new reports: “Service Provider VoIP Equipment and Subscribers-third quarter (3Q10),” and “IMS Equipment and Subscribers market share and forecast,”  Infonetics Research finds that although prices have dropped, worldwide demand has risen for VoIP infrastructure hardware.  Apparently, large network transformations are driving the need for more IP-enabling products and services, including Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem (IMS).

While VoIP equipment shipments were up in the 3rd Q 2010, overall market revenue is decreasing despite growing demand for IP-enabling services,  Infonetics Research predicts growth for VoIP equipment, especially with products that help in the migration to all-IP systems and those focused on improving mobile services.  A key missing piece is mobile VoIP, which hasn’t happened yet despite numerous predictions from many market research firms.

According to the Infonetics’ report: “Service Provider VoIP Equipment and Subscribers,” the total service provider VoIP equipment market – including trunk media gateways, SBCs(Smart Business Communications Systems?), media servers, softswitches and voice application servers – decreased 9 percent from the second quarter to $511 million. But while revenue is down for the quarter, shipments for almost all segments in the market are up sequentially.  Worldwide, Asia Pacific is the only region expected to post year-over-year revenue growth for service provider VoIP equipment in 2010, the report noted.

The IP multimedia subsystem space, is experiencing an increase in revenue as a result of the demand for VoIP equipment, according to Infonetics’ third-quarter “IMS Equipment and Subscribers” report. The worldwide IMS equipment market, including IMS core equipment and application servers, grew 4 percent in the third quarter, on the heels of a 34 percent jump in the previous quarter.  Longer-term, the IMS market will get a boost from the push for enhanced mobile services, according to this report.


“The number-one story that will come out of 2010 for the IMS and carrier VoIP equipment markets is China, where conditions are driving volumes up and pushing prices down. There are large network transformation projects underway in China, so demand for equipment is very strong, but at the same time, vendors are willing to push the pricing limits to get into strategic accounts. In the third quarter of 2010, every product category except media servers was impacted by pricing pressures, so while shipments were up for most segments, total worldwide revenue took a hit. Looking at the long-term prospects, the network elements that are best poised for solid growth are those that facilitate the migration to all-IP networks, such as session border controllers (SBCs),” notes Diane Myers, directing analyst for VoIP and IMS at Infonetics Research.

Diane Myers,  Directing Analyst, VoIP & IMS Infonetics Research  (408) 583-3391   [email protected]


  • The total service provider VoIP equipment market, including trunk media gateways, SBCs, media servers, softswitches, and voice application servers, decreased 9% from 2Q10 to 3Q10, to $511 million
  • While revenue is down for the quarter, shipments for almost all segments in the market are up sequentially
  • Asia Pacific is the only region expected to post year-over-year revenue growth in 2010 for service provider VoIP equipment
  • In 3Q10, GENBAND leads the combined carrier VoIP and IMS equipment market for worldwide revenue



  • The worldwide IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) equipment market, including IMS core equipment and application servers, grew 4% in 3Q10, on the heels of a 34% jump in the previous quarter
  • In 3Q10, the 4 top vendors, Alcatel Lucent, Ericsson, Huawei, and Nokia Siemens Networks, continue to fight it out for new deals and replacement RFPs
    • Ericsson and Nokia Siemens saw revenue growth with CSCF in a relatively flat quarter
  • Overall, the IMS equipment market is experiencing strong and healthy growth, driven in the near-term by the continued adoption of VoIP services and service provider migration of VoIP services to IMS networks
  • Longer-term, the IMS market will get a boost from the push for enhanced mobile services, with LTE being the most significant driver


    Top 5 VoIP and IMS Vendors by 3Q2010 Revenue are: GENBAND, Huawei, Alcatel-Lucent, Acme Packet, Metaswitch. 

    This includes: combined sales of worldwide trunk media gateway, softswitch, media server, VAS (value added service) and CSCF  server market share. (CSCF=Call Session Control Function is a central component to signaling and control within the IP Multimedia Subsystem- IMS).  Interestingly, these five companies only comprise approximately 60% of sales.  The “Other” category of miscellaneous vendors accounts for about 40% of combined revenues.

    About  Infonetics’ quarterly reports:

     1. Service Provider VoIP Equipment and Subscribers report provides worldwide and regional market share, market size, forecasts, and analysis for VoIP subscribers and media processing and call control carrier VoIP equipment, including high-, mid-, and low-density trunk media gateways, line access media gateways, SBCs, media servers, Class 4 and Class 5 softswitches, and voice application servers (IP Centrex/hosted IP PBX, IP trunking, and residential). Vendors tracked include Acme Packet, Alcatel-Lucent, AudioCodes, BroadSoft, Cisco, Dialogic, Ericsson, GENBAND, Huawei, Iperia, Italtel, MetaSwitch, Movius, Nokia Siemens, RadiSys Convedia, Sonus, Technicolor (Thomson), Tekelec, Xener, ZTE, and others.

    2. IMS report provides worldwide and regional market size, market share, forecasts, and analysis of mobile and fixed-line IMS subscribers and equipment. Equipment tracked includes IMS voice and IM/presence application servers and IMS core equipment, including home subscriber servers (HSS), call session control function (CSCF) servers, media resource function (MRF), and breakout gateway control function (BGCF). The report includes an IMS deployment tracker by region, country, carrier, and vendor. Vendors tracked include Alcatel-Lucent, Broadsoft, Ericsson, Huawei, Mavenir, Nokia Siemens, ZTE and others.

    Contact Info

    If you are interested in buying an Infonetics report or discussing a consulting project? Please contact:

    Larry Howard, Vice President
    [email protected] +1 408.583.3335

    Scott Coyne, Senior Account Director Eastern North America, Europe, Middle East
    [email protected] +1 408.583.3395

    Note:  This author has no business relationship with Infonetics Research and never has.  We are pleased to inform you that Infonetics co-founder Michael Howard is an IEEE member and has spoken at our June 24 ComSocSCV-TiE workshop on Mobile Apps and Infrastructure (his topic was mobile backhaul)

    IEEE 802.16 WG Meeting Report + NIST Guidelines for Securing WiMAX networks against threats

    1.  Excerpts of IEEE 802.16 WG Session 70 meeting report 

    Task Group m (TGm): Advanced Air Interface
    Task Group m (TGm) met and completed resolution of comments in Sponsor Ballot of draft P802.16m/D9. P802.16m/D10 will be prepared for recirculation prior to Session #71 in January. The existing IEEE 802.16m Work Plan from 18 March remains accurate. The IEEE 802 Executive Committee granted conditional approval to forward P802.16m to RevCom. The Working Group anticipates that the conditions will be met in early 2011. The TG issued a closing report, with minutes to follow.

    Maintenance Task Group
    The Maintenance Task Group addressed change requests and updated its database. It also drafted a response to a liaison statement from the WiMAX Forum. The TG issued a closing report and minutes.

    GRIDMAN Task Group
    The Working Group’s GRIDMAN Task Group met to discuss activity under the P802.16n project. The project is amending IEEE Std 802.16 to provide for “Higher Reliability Networks.” The WG agreed to adopt the TG’s 802.16n System Requirements Document IEEE 802.16gman-10/0038r4 as a baseline. The TG issued a closing report, with minutes to follow.

    Machine-to-Machine Task Group
    The WG initiated activity under the P802.16p project, which was authorized by the IEEE-SA Standards board of 30 September. The project is amending IEEE Std 802.16 to provide “Enhancements to Support Machine-to-Machine Applications.” The WG agreed to adopt the 802.16p System Requirements Document IEEE 802.16p-10/0004r1 as a baseline. A closing report and minutes were issued. The P802.16p PAR was assigned to a new Machine-to-Machine (M2M) Task Group, chaired by Ron Murias.

    WG Project Planning Committee
    The WG Project Planning Committee met, reviewed contributions, and prepared a report.

    Comment: We wonder if IEEE 802.16m- the ITU-R approved 4G technology AKA WiMAX 2.0- will ever be deployed. One reason for skepticism is mobile operators endorsement of TDD-LTE. Terry Norman of Analysys Mason expresses his opinion at:

    2.  NIST Special Report 800-127, Guide to Securing WiMAX Wireless Communications

    NIST says, WiMAX technology continues to adapt to market demands and provide enhanced user mobility. SP 800-127 discusses WiMAX wireless communication topologies, components, certifications, security features and related security concerns.

    This report.recommends that organizations that have adopted WiMAX:

    • Develop a robust wireless metropolitan area network security policy and enforce it;
    • Assess WiMAX technical countermeasures before implementing a vendor’s WiMAX technology;
    • Require mutual authentication for WiMAX devices; and
    • Implement FIPS-validated encryption algorithms employing FIPS-validated cryptographic modules to protect data communications.


    More at:

    The NIST document covers the security of the WiMAX air interface and user subscriber devices, including security services for device and user authentication; data confidentiality; data integrity; and replay protection. It does not address WiMAX network system specifications, which covers core network infrastructure and are primarily employed by commercial network operators.

    “Like other networking technologies, all WiMAX systems must address threats arising from denial-of-service attacks, eavesdropping, man-in-the-middle attacks, message modification and resource misappropriation,” the guidelines say.

    The publication explains the basics of WiMAX, detailing the security differences among the major versions of the IEEE 802.16 standard, along with information on the security capabilities and recommendations on securing WiMax technologies.

    WiMax threats consist primarily of compromises to the radio links between WiMAX nodes. These radio links can be both line-of-sight and non-line-of-sight. Line-of-sight links generally are harder to attack than non-line-of-sight links because an adversary would have to physically locate equipment between the nodes to compromise the link.

    Non-line-of-sight systems provide coverage over large geographic regions, which expands the potential staging areas both for clients and adversaries.

    More at:

    Third meeting of the ITU-T FG-Cloud Computing: Lannion, France, 30 November – 3 December 2010


    ITU-T Focus Group on Cloud Computing (FG Cloud) was established further to ITU-T TSAG agreement at its meeting in Geneva, 8-11 February 2010 followed by ITU-T study groups and membership consultation.

    The Focus Group will, from the standardization view points and within the competences of ITU-T, contribute with the telecommunication aspects, i.e., the transport via telecommunications networks, security aspects of telecommunications, service requirements, etc., in order to support services/applications of “cloud computing” making use of telecommunication networks; specifically:

    • identify potential impacts on standards development and priorities for standards needed to promote and facilitate telecommunication/ICT support for cloud computing
    • investigate the need for future study items for fixed and mobile networks in the scope of ITU-T
    • analyze which components would benefit most from interoperability and standardization
    • familiarize ITU-T and standardization communities with emerging attributes and challenges of telecommunication/ICT support for cloud computing
    • analyze the rate of change for cloud computing attributes, functions and features for the purpose of assessing the appropriate timing of standardization of telecommunication/ICT in support of cloud computing

    The Focus Group will collaborate with worldwide cloud computing communities (e.g., research institutes, forums, academia) including other SDOs and consortia.

    ITU-T TSAG is the parent group of this Focus Group.

    Next Meeting: The third meeting of the FG Cloud is scheduled to take place at the France Telecom Orange premises in Lannion, France, from 30 November to 3 December 2010 inclusive, at the kind invitation of France Telecom Orange, France.

    The items for discussion at the meeting will be made available on the Focus Group web page: Additional information related to the meeting as well as the contributions received will also be made available on the Focus Group web page.

    The official meeting announcement, information and on line registration may be accessed from:

    Output documents from previous meeting:

    Introduction to the cloud ecosystem: definitions, taxonomies, use cases, high level requirements and capabilities.

    The scope of this deliverable is to provide an introduction to the Cloud ecosystems, focusing on integration and support of Cloud Computing model and technologies in telecommunication ecosystems. The major changes of this version include the addition of the value proposition and requirements and capabilities clauses according to the agreements reached in FG Cloud#2 meeting.

    Functional requirements and reference architecture

    The scope of this deliverable is to define the functional requirement and reference architecture of cloud computing, which includes the functional architecture, functional entities and reference points.

    Overview of SDOs involved in cloud computing

    The scope of this document is to provide an overview of SDOs; to map the FG cloud working group and output documents to these SDOs; and to be as a base to produce a gap analysis that will result in a unique areas that can be under the ITU-T purview, specifically from telecom perspective.

    Cloud security, threat & requirements

    Discussion of “Security Cloud” has started to review activities of other SDOs (CSA, DMTF, CloudAudit, NIST, GICTF, etc) which are related Cloud Security. After the reviews of the existing activities, the FG Cloud tentatively identified security threats from the standpoints of Cloud user and Cloud service provider. Considering the identified security threats, the FG Cloud also discussed security requirements to be considered for Cloud Computing Technology. The current security threats and requirements are not exhausted enough and further studies for threats and requirements are required based on the output (cloud-o-0013) from this meeting.

    Infrastructure and network enabled cloud

    Position existing network infrastructure capability is a unique opportunity for service providers to provide bundled offers combining Network and IT resources. In addition, service providers can leverage their network asset to address network availability and performance for secure end to end cloud services. Another opportunity for service providers is to evolve network resource allocation and control to more dynamic in order to meet the needs to provision on-demand cloud services. Major progress: A skeleton document is created per the scope, and some of the contributions are consolidated into the document.

    FG Cloud work plan:














    Eco-system: taxonomy, definition, use case, general requirement

    Marco Carugi /

    Jamil Chawki /

    Kangchan Lee

    Initial draft

    Draft for review

    Final review

    before TSAG


    Reference architecture

    Jie Hu /

    Peter Tomsu

    Initial draft

    Draft for review

    Final review

    before TSAG


    Infrastructure & Network enabled cloud

    Mingdong Li /

    Jamil Chawki

    Initial draft

    Draft for review

    Final review

    before TSAG




    Koji Nakao


    Initial draft

    Draft for review

    Final review before TSAG


    Overview of SDO:

    Gap analysis

    Jamil Chawki /

    Monique Morrow

    Initial draft


    (Final review)









    Benefits from Telecommunication perspectives

    Jamil Chawki & Management Team


    Initial draft

    Final review before TSAG





    Initial draft

    Final review before TSAG


    Report to TSAG (Feb 2011)



    Initial draft


    Final Report



    ITU Cloud Computing Focus group and IEEE Cloud Computing Standards Study Group- will they fill the standards void?

    Cloud Computing: Impact on IT Architecture, Data Centers and the Network: July 14th IEEE ComSocSCV meeting (scroll down to July 14 meeting for the pdfs from MSFT, Ericsson, VMWare and Juniper Networks)

    Cloud Leadership Forum: IT Executives Share Experiences and Articulate What’s Needed for Cloud Computing Success

    The need for a Unified Set of Cloud Computing Standards within IEEE

    Top Coverage Highlights from Cloud Connect Conference (my article listed 3rd)

    New ITU-T Focus Group May Set Framework for Cloud Computing
    ACLU Northern CA: Cloud Computing- Storm Warning for Privacy

    ITU-T SG13 Focus Group on Future Networks (FG-FN) concludes 7th meeting in Busan, Korea

    The final report of the FG-FN 7th meeting in Busan, Korea is now available to ITU-T member companies.   The 8th meeting in Ljubljana, Slovenia is from 29 November to December 3rd and includes a mini-workshop (see comments below).  Here is some background info on this FG-FN:
    The Focus Group on Future Networks (FN), by collaborating with worldwide communities (e.g., research institutes, forums, academia and etc), aims to:
    • collect and identify visions of future networks, based on new technologies,
    • assess the interactions between future networks and new services,
    • familiarize ITU-T and standardization communities with emerging attributes of future networks, and
    • encourage collaboration between ITU-T and FN communities.
    The objective of the Focus Group is to document results that would be helpful for developing Recommendations for future networks.

    To achieve this objective the Focus Group will

    • gather new ideas relevant to Future Networks and identify potential study areas on Future Networks,
    • describe visions of the Future Networks,
    • identify a timeframe of Future Networks,
    • identify potential impacts on standards development, and
    • suggest future ITU-T study items and related actions.
    More Detail on Objectives
    New network requirements are emerging thanks to the new social environment, new application areas, etc. Considering these backgrounds, we selected the following four objectives as the ones that are not considered or not satisfactory satisfied in current networks. These objectives can be the candidate characteristics that clearly differentiate FNs and motivate the development and investigation for FNs.
    Environment awareness
    Future Networks should be environment friendly. The architecture design, the resulting implementation and operation of Future Networks should minimize its environmental impact, e.g., to minimize the usage of materials, energy consumption and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions. Future Networks should be designed and implemented so that it can easily be used to reduce other sector’s environmental impact, e.g., by making it machine-to-machine ready.
    (Comment: ‘environmental footprint’ is a wrong phrase. ‘Ecological footprint’ or ‘environmental impact’ are correct wording.
    Service awareness
    Future Networks should provide services that are customized for users with the appropriate functionalities to meet the needs of applications under consideration. Service explosion, i.e., creation and distribution of enormous amount and wide range of services, will occur, and Future Networks should accommodate these services by enabling creation of multiple networks that has optimal or customized functions to realize these services efficiently.
    Comment: network virtualization should be an example because there are other methods, e.g., in-service management to solve this complicated situation.
    creation and distribution: only these two?
    Future Networks should provide services that are customized for users with appropriate functionalities to meet the needs of applications. This leads to service explosion, i.e., the number and the range of services will explode. Future Networks should provide means to accommodate these services without drastic increase of OPEX, e.g., by enabling creation of multiple networks that has optimal or customized functions to realize these services in efficient manner.
    Data awareness
    Future Networks should have architecture that is optimized to handling enormous amount of data. Main objective of the current networks are to establish connection between terminals, and so the architectures were designed as location base network. The essential demand of the users of the network, however, is to retrieve desired information or data from the network. Therefore, Future Networks should be designed so that the user can easily retrieve data regardless of its location.
    Comments: the text in section 8.4 seems more generic and better.
    Comments: is location-free essential? Or an example method that makes data-access easier?
    Comments: the text does not flow. For example, the 1st sentence do not link with the rest.
    FNs should enable users to access desired data easily, quickly, and accurately considering the fact that contemporary and future networks are used mainly to access specific data or contents, not specific node or location. Since the amount of data or contents FNs need to maintain and to reach is becoming enormous, FNs should provide efficient and safe means to handle them.
    Social-economic awareness
    Future Networks should have social-economic incentives to reduce barriers to entry for the various participants of telecommunication sector. Also, each participant should be able to receive proper return according to their contribution.
    Comments: I have no idea what to do, but the text here is still vague… and should we say something on other issues, e.g., network neutrality, ossification of technology because of the lack of economic incentives?
    FN architecture and its technology should be designed and selected to make them deployable and sustainable in social and economic sense, e.g., easiness of cost and maintenance for service universalization, barrier reduction for the entry of various participants into telecommunication sector, proper interface or reference point design for sustainable competition.
    # reference point? Demarcation point?
    Economic Incentives
    FN should provide mechanisms to exchange incentives between various participants, e.g., users, telecommunication providers, governments, IPR holders.
    Explanation: Participants of FN could be grouped in terms of industrial fields and/or nations. Firstly, in terms of industrial fields, participants could include users, commercial ISPs, private sectors network providers, governments, intellectual property rights holders, and providers of content and/or higher level services.[1] Secondly, in terms of nations, participants could include the telecommunications sector in not only developed but also developing countries so that operation, provisioning and management capabilities of FN would be simple enough to be supported by all participants. This also means that FN should be deployable as well as operable even in a less economic attractive area. Barriers to entry for participants would be almost nonexistent in FN.
    FN should be designed to provide sustainable competition environment to vaious participants in ecosystem of telecommunication, e.g., users, various providers, governments, IPR holders by providing e.g, proper economic incentives or freedom of selection.
    Explanation: Many technologies have failed to be deployed, to flourish, or to be sustainable because of their insufficient or inappropriate decision on economic or social aspects of them. Lack of QoS mechanisms had blocked streaming services such as IPTV on TCP/IP networks. One reason for this failure comes from the simple interface between IP and TCP. IPv4 did not provide appropriate QoS abstraction model of lower layer, e.g., it did not provide a method for TCP to know if QoS was guaranteed from end-to-end. It erased the possibility for providers to compete with sophisticated QoS mechanisms on this TCP/IP layer interface, and destroyed the freedom of QoS mechanism selection for customers. The other reason had been lack of proper economic incentives. Various QoS mechanisms e.g., intserv, diffserv or RSVP had been developed and standardized but had failed to be deployed because they had not been accompanied with proper economic incentives for network providers to implement them. Together with various other reasons, these had blocked the introduction of QoS guarantee mechanisms and streaming services in TCP/IP network even when a participant in telecommunication ecosystem tried to customize networks, or ask others to provide customized networks to start a new service and to share its benefit with others. It is therefore important to pay enough attention to economic and social aspects such as economic incentives in designing and implementing the requirements, architecture and protocol of FNs.

    What role if any should IEEE ComSoc play in studying Future Networks?  Should we leverage of this ITU-T FG-FN or start our own project?  Please respond by commenting in the box below.