Converged Mobile Operator Messaging
7.3.2007
Author
Supervisor
July 24, 2016
Master’s Thesis
Sauli Pahlman
Professor Jorma Virtamo
Agenda
• Background, Motivation and Objectives
• Methodology
• Mobile Messaging Services
• Messaging Convergence
• Architecture for Convergence
• Interconnection and Charging
• Conclusions
July 24, 2016
2
Background and Motivation
• The number of different mobile messaging technologies is relatively large
and causes confusion to large masses of messaging users
• The current instant messaging technologies have been technology driven
– Non-interoperable messaging service communities and market fragmentation
– The users of different messaging communities can not communicate with each
other
– Users have a number of different messaging inboxes, e.g., for mobile e-mail,
mobile IM, SMS, MMS and so on
• Instant messaging between a PC and a mobile telephone is still in an
immature state and a market opportunity can be seen
• The network effect, i.e., Metcalfe’s law states that the value of a
telecommunications service is proportional to the square of the number of
users of the service -> motivation for large communities
– The approximate number of users in GSM community, the largest mobile
telephone community, is 2.1 billion whereas the approximate number of users
in MSN-Yahoo, the largest IM community, is 350 million
Solution: Convergence
July 24, 2016
3
Objectives
• The most feasible technical approaches for a short term converged
messaging solution.
• Finding the optimal solution, from user experience, service availability and
resource consumption points of view, for implementing a messaging service
that integrates the current mobile messaging services (i.e. SMS, MMS, e-mail
and IM) by providing an adequate level of interoperability to hide gaps
between the messaging domains from the customer.
• Finding the optimal solution we utilize the experiences gathered from a
small-scale trial that was carried out during the writing of this thesis.
• We present the big picture of the service that can be provided to the
customers when the objectives described in previous chapter are reached.
• Furthermore we will outline a long term proposal for converged messaging.
• We will also introduce the reader to the difficulties and issues the
convergence causes for inter-operator charging and interconnection.
July 24, 2016
4
Methodology
•
The study is conducted in three parts
1. Literature study
– Messaging services
– Converged Messaging
– Presence Service
2. Presentation of Interoperability Mechanisms
– Interoperability Mechanisms for SMS, MMS, IM and e-mail
– Charging and Interconnection Issues
3. Feasibility evaluation
– Interoperability Mechanisms’ feasibility
– Issues and Improvements
July 24, 2016
5
Mobile Messaging Services 1/3
SMS
• SMSC requests for user
location information
• HLR respond with the GT
received in the latest
Location Update
• SMSC relays the message
to MSC holding the
received GT
• MSC delivers the message
via BSS and notifies the
SMSC about the delivery
July 24, 2016
6
Mobile Messaging Services 2/3
MMS
• MS sends the message data to a preconfigured MMSC
• Based on the domain-part addressing information MMSC relays the
message to destination MMSC
• Destination MMSC notifies the destination MS about the pending
message. MS fetches the message the destination MMSC acknowledges
the delivery
Mobile IM (IMPS)
• Server-based messaging service -> server-to-server interface based on
domain part of addressing (e.g. wv:sauli@soneraimps.fi)
• Offers:
– Presence
– Instant Messaging (one-to-one, groups)
– Shared Content
July 24, 2016
7
Mobile Messaging Services 3/3
(Mobile) E-mail
• A text-based command protocol SMTP is used de-facto for transferring e-mail. SMTP is based on a
client-server model.
– A typical SMTP session is initiated when a client (Mail User Agent, MUA) opens a connection
to a local SMTP server and the server responds with an opening message.
– The IP address or the DNS name of the local server is usually preconfigured in the SMTP
client. Once the server has sent the opening message and the client has received it, the
client normally sends a greeting command to the server, indicating its identity. These initial
commands are followed by the actual e-mail message data.
– When the local SMTP server has received the message, the connection to the SMTP client is
closed.
– Then the local SMTP server starts to transmit the e-mail message towards the SMTP server
of the receiving domain. The receiving SMTP server is identified by the domain part of the
receiver’s e-mail address.
– The local SMTP server looks up this domain name in the DNS to find the mail exchange
servers accepting messages for that domain. The DNS server of the queried domain
responds with a Mail Exchanger (MX) DNS record which lists the mail exchange servers for
that particular domain. The local SMTP server then sends the message to the receiving
SMTP server with a similar procedure as what took place between the SMTP client and the
local SMTP server.
July 24, 2016
8
Messaging Convergence 1/3
• Current Situation in the Mobile Market
– If a user wants to send a simple text message, he chooses to use the
SMS.
– If he needs to send a small image or add multimedia content to textbased messaging, he will probably use MMS. However, before sending
a message using the MMS, the sender needs to know if the receiver has
an MMS-capable terminal and if he has the MMS settings properly
configured
– E-mail is one of the most used services in the Internet and it is also
available in the mobile terminals.
– IM is the most recent Internet messaging service to enter the mobile
domain. It remains to be seen if IM will succeed for its part, but at least
the expectations are high. In Finland four fifths of the people between 15
and 24 years of age and half of people between 25 and 34 years of age
use IM
July 24, 2016
9
Messaging Convergence 2/3
• The Role of Convergence
– As we can see, the current situation on the mobile messaging market is
somewhat diverged. Currently SMS is the most popular mobile messaging
service but there are also many other types of messaging services available.
– Currently the Internet messaging market is dominated by third party Internet
service providers, namely: MSN, Yahoo and Google. Also the telecom industry is
evolving from a technology centric towards a more service driven model. One
sign of such evolution is the effort for the third party Internet service providers to
transform their services to mobile world which is still ruled by traditional telecom
operators’ messaging services.
– As these new IP based technologies are entering the mobile market, it is
essential for the telecom operators to keep the new services under strict control.
Otherwise the role of the mobile network may move towards an efficient transport
medium, i.e. bit-pipe, which means that the mobile network becomes a
commodity and makes the telecom operators’ income diminish.
July 24, 2016
10
Messaging Convergence 3/3
• Converged Operator Messaging
– Upon the successful introduction of Internet IM, the idea of an operator based
Mobile Instant Messaging (MIM) service has raised. Also, it seems reasonable to
integrate more features into existing and often overlapping mobile messaging
services which, potentially creates confusion for the end users.
– We see the MIM combined with a presence service as a new mobile
communication service that has to be executed and discovered in a converged
manner. The result is the first step of Converged Operator Messaging (COM).
– COM is about consolidating all or most of the existing messaging types with new
features from Internet technologies and integrating them with other services such
as presence.
– To achieve maximum connectivity between end users and then enable a
seamless transition from existing messaging services to COM, it has to interwork
with legacy systems (SMS, MMS, e-mail).
– The communication with legacy messaging service must be implemented in such
a way that the regular text messaging user experience for the COM user as well
as for the legacy user does not differ from the normal scenario (i.e. from a COM
user to another COM user and from a legacy user to another legacy user).
– Additionally, the users must be able to access the COM service using a PC.
July 24, 2016
11
Architecture for Convergence
• Definition and Requirements
– The converged IM user must be able to conveniently use the IM client as
his/her only or at least as the primary messaging client, thus all the existing
messaging types must be accessible through it.
– This level of convergence requires a seamless interoperability between IM
and legacy mobile messaging types, i.e., the converged IM user must be
able to send and receive short messages, multimedia messages and emails from their messaging client. This has to be done independent of the
mobile network operator of the legacy users the IM user wishes to
communicate with.
– This means that the interoperability between the MIM and existing services
must be possible without making any large alterations to existing
components of the mobile networks. Also, the interoperability mechanism
must not interfere the existing mobile messaging services.
July 24, 2016
12
Architecture for Convergence, Examples 1/2
• IM->SMS
– Instant message delivery to an
SMS user is managed via the IPbased large accounts interface
(EMI/UCP, SMPP)
• SMS->IM
– Short Message delivery to an IM
user is managed using a
Transfer Point which interrogates
with the SRI queries. Textual
short messages to online IM
users and delivered to the IM
service
July 24, 2016
13
Architecture for Convergence, Examples 2/2
• MMS/E-mail->IM
– When e-mail or MMS users send messages
to the IM user, the domain part of the IM
user’s address is set to the corresponding
DNS name of the IM Server. When
MSISDN addressing is used, the MMSC
rerouting procedure is performed.
• IM->MMS/E-mail
– The IM service will simply act as a MMS or
e-mail UA and deliver messages to local
MMS Relay/Server or e-mail server in the
operator network for further delivery.
Optionally the IM service can be connected
to MMS infrastructure using the MM7
reference point through which the VAS
providers typically connect to MMS. Using
the MM7 forces the IM server to use SOAP
which uses HTTP for communication.
July 24, 2016
14
The Big Picture of Converged Messaging
• We did introduce a number of approaches for the realization of the most
important individual technical building blocks for converged mobile messaging
service covering text and multimedia
• The SMS interoperability, which means seamless migration from the most
popular legacy messaging service, is the most essential building block for the
new COM service to be initially adopted by a large enough number of people
to form a community
• In our IM service we have a seamless interoperability with all the current main
mobile messaging technologies which makes it a truly converged messaging
service with IM as its core. The building blocks make it possible for the IM
user to reach all contacts via the IM service independent of whether he or she
is roaming in some foreign network or in his home network
• The proposed architecture can be technically realized at the moment. No
large steps in the fields of technology or standardization need to be waited for
July 24, 2016
15
Feasibility Analysis
• By comparing the found
approaches* we found the most
feasible building blocks for
short-term messaging
convergence.
• The feasibility analysis was
made from economical and
technical perspectives.
Requirement
Delivery reports
Unaffected special
short messages
Short signaling
path
No modifications
in mobile network
Interoperability
between operators
Transparent to
the legacy users
Feasibility schedule
Common
Short
Codes
Approach
Specific
Global
HLR-flag
Title
Yes
Partial
Partial
Yes
Partial
Partial
Partial
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Partial
No
Yes
Yes
No
Currently
feasible
Yes
Yes
Currently
Currently
not feasible not feasible
* See the examples provided on slides 13 and
14)
July 24, 2016
Transfer
Point
16
Yes
Currently
feasible
Long-term Architecture
• We also scratched the surface of
the long-term architecture by
introducing a scalable converged
all-IP and SIP architecture for
messaging convergence.
• The architecture allows very fast
introduction of new SIP/IP -based
communication services as well
as full convergence.
• The long-term architecture
maintains the advantages we
have gained by implementing the
short-term architecture, i.e., the
revenues from existing services
are continued even after the
introduction of the new
architecture.
July 24, 2016
17
Charging and Interconnection 1/4
• General
– As the COM is an operator-based service, there is always the issue of charging.
– In the case of the COM, the charging is a greater issue than in the legacy
communication services because of the issued caused by messaging convergence and
transparency in legacy-future interoperability.
– The charging should be defined in such a way that reasonable charging is applied in
the user-to-operator interface (UNI) as well as in the operator-to-operator interface
(NNI).
– There are several charging schemes that can be applied in the COM. The charging
may be based on volume, e.g., the amount of data transferred.
– The charging may be based on the number of messages transferred to each recipient.
Also a time based charging can be considered but the concept of the messaging
session and the specification of its duration must be first studied in more depth.
July 24, 2016
18
Charging and Interconnection 2/4
• Network-to-network
– NNI charging is not a mandatory functionality as the end users produce all the value
but in practice the NNI charging is almost always performed.
– Usually there is no consensus among the operators on whether or not the NNI
charging should be performed.
– The issues with unwanted bulk messaging, e.g., spam are supposed to be
extensively avoided by introducing charging also in the NNI.
– In addition to regular one-to-one charging which is typical to legacy services, the COM
should enable a charging scheme for one-to-many messaging too.
– The service must enable an NNI charging which reflects the UNI charging to avoid
unwanted malpractices.
– As an example: we do not want a COM user to be able to produce negative value
to his COM operator by sending messages that cost him far less than they cost
his operator in the form of termination charges.
July 24, 2016
19
Charging and Interconnection 3/4
• User-to-network charging
– As the COM is an operator-based service, there is always the issue of charging.
– The motivation for the charging in the UNI is very different from the NNI charging
scenario which makes it difficult to choose a scheme in which they are in balance
with each other.
– As one-to-many and group messaging is possible using the COM, in the COM
charging it should be possible to differentiate one-to-many and group messages from
plain one-to-one messages.
– This is further emphasized when rich content, e.g., multimedia delivery is used. As
the legacy interoperability in the COM is based on the SMS, the COM charging faces
some problems.
– The NNI termination fees for short messages are relatively high and as the COM is
most probably used as an IM service, which means high number of very short
messages, the UNI charging can not be the same than in the SMS.
July 24, 2016
20
Charging and Interconnection 4/4
• Interconnection
– Earlier we created a limited form of interconnection which is based on the usage of
already interoperable and interconnected legacy services as a bearer
– However, if we want to interconnect on a more sophisticated level than SMS and
MMS, we need to specify additional forms of interconnection mechanisms
– For high level inter-operator interconnection it is likely that at least two different
models will be developed at first.
– Firstly an operator needs to establish interconnection to its most important partners. Those
interconnection agreements may be bilateral in nature.
– However, the former is not a feasible solution if interconnection to a large number of
operators is required. This is because the interconnection requires always testing,
contracts, fault analysis policies, clearing and signaling settlements which are timeconsuming and expensive.
– For global interconnection so called hubbing models should be considered.
– The hubbing models define basically architecture where several mobile network
operators connect to a peering point or a hub. The peering point or hub provides
physical connectivity as well as it is able to handle complex internetwork charging
schemes.
July 24, 2016
21
Conclusions
• Converged operator messaging is needed – now
• From pure technical viewpoints the proposed
architecture and the building blocks for an early form
of fully backwards compatible COM is currently
available and economically feasible
• The long-term architecture needs further
specifications and some dependencies need to be
waited for
• COM charging, especially interconnection charging is
economically and technically a complex task and any
general solution for these were not found
July 24, 2016
22
Further research
• The long-term architecture must be specified further
• Large scope end-user trials are needed
• Secure connections to IMS/mobile core services are
needed – possibly to be implemented through an
IKEv2/IPsec tunnel?
• Charging and interconnection issues are still to be
studied more in depth
July 24, 2016
23
The Nordic and Baltic
telecommunications leader
July 24, 2016