Amazon Tech Support

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Monday, 10 October 2011

WiFi neutrality vs. the OMA

Posted on 06:14 by Unknown
I've written before about the critical importance of "WiFi Neutrality" - the ability for the end-user, device OS or applications to choose which WiFi connection to use, over-riding any operator-defined preferences if such exist.

The critical control point is the "connection manager" on a device - the bit of software that determines which accesses are available, and how/when to connect to them. For WiFi, this is usually done as a core role of the device OS - most people are used to seeing the Windows or Mac choices for WiFi APs, or a similar function on their smartphones. For cellular connections, it doesn't really exist as such on phones (beyond a primitive menu somewhere with auto/manual network-select). But on laptops, there's usually a customised client from the operator that gets auto-loaded when inserting a 3G USB dongle for the first time, or pre-loaded if it's got a built-in module.

I've long predicted that the CM would become a strategic battleground, especially for the WiFi aspects. Much to service providers' continued annoyance, most WiFi isn't a service at all (ie at a hotspot), but is just a wireless connection to a local LAN. The biggest use of WiFi is for connection to a fixed-broadband router or gateway, and then direct to the Internet. Various other LAN use-cases are important as well, notably enterprise network connections, or UPnP links to other devices in a user's home (TV, printer, server etc).

The mobile operator community would dearly love to have greater control and visibility over users' WiFi connections - ideally capturing data connections and putting them through the core network (for billing, charging, policy, QoS reasons etc). "Uncontrolled" (ie user-driven) WiFi connections are often seen as undesirable because they represent a second access path for data on or off the device. This both implicitly reduces the perceived value of the paid cellular/hotspot connections, and also allows easier access to applications that the operator may not want (eg competing VoIP).

The Open Mobile Alliance is currently working on a "solution" for the fact that CM's currently are not standardised. The Open Connection Manager programme and its associated APIs are being worked on by a group of its members (Intel, Orange, Huawei, HP & Deutsche Telekom) with various objectives.

"Up to now, there is no existing standard or de facto standard for Connection Managers.  Operators and OEM/ODM have to develop and use different and dedicated solutions, thus increasing the effort and time to market.

For Mobile Broadband devices, this situation is critical and leading to a strong effort for service providers to develop connection manager applications as there are already several networks to support and any new mobile broadband device such as USB modem requires to redevelop existing connection managers to be implemented and supported by these applications.

For smartphones or tablets, the importance of management of Wi-Fi offloads for example and/or the need to expose information status on the connection to applications is requiring a solution through the connection manager application.

Furthermore, new fast growing businesses such as Connected Devices & M2M are facing the same hurtles and will need as well a solution to reduce the impacts and efforts to deal with the connection management aspects."

Now, for cellular data connections this is fair enough. There is a fair amount of work needed to reinvent the UI for each new device or module, so standardising some aspects certainly makes sense.

For WiFi, however, the situation is much murkier. There are already various efforts such as Hotspot 2.0, I-WLAN and ANDSF which are attempting to "steer" smartphones to use operator-provided WiFi. The dreaded term "seamless offload" still crops up regularly. While I've had some positive recent conversations with operators and vendors - who realise that control over WiFi ultimately should and will continue to reside with the user, I'm not so sure that OMA has got that particular memo.

"The OpenCMAPI enabler SHALL be configured to use the operator defined list of preferred SSID preconfigured in the device and/or the WSID (Wlan Specific Identifier) list in accordance with [3GPP TS 24.234] if present in the SIM/RUIM/NAA on UICC"

"The OpenCMAPI enabler SHALL be able to force the association on a SSID, visible or not" 

"The OpenCMAPI enabler SHALL be able to modify or delete only WiFi profile that are not predefined by the operator"

Now to be fair, it also says this:

"The OpenCMAPI enabler SHALL allow the user or the application using the Open CMAPI to connect to Known network or Unknown network manually"

But it's entirely unclear how that will work if that conflicts with the previous requirement. So for example, could an enterprise user delete the operator's WiFi profile & stop offload, if they decide it is incompatible with their security policy?

The bottom line is that as far as I can see, the OMA Connection Manager API sits very uneasily with the concept of WiFi Neutrality - I really can't see many device vendors (especially Apple) relinquishing control of this pivotal part of the stack. In any case, the Open CM is unlikely to be seen as a useful basis for the expanding number of WiFi-only devices.

If implemented in this WiFi-unfriendly fashion, it is also going to be something that will further dissuade users from buying 3G-embedded laptops (which I've been negative about for years), if the operator also controls the WiFi connectivity settings. You don't let a service provider dictate how you use your USB ports or fixed-ethernet RJ45 socket on your PC, so why on earth would you accept controls on the wireless-ethernet?

I have a simple adage with anything to do with WiFi : If you don't understand fixed ethernet, then you have no business doing anything with the wireless version either. Quod erat demonstrandum....
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • Quick musing on Cloud Computing
    I just heard the phrase "Everything as a Service" during a presentation on Cloud, SaaS and other forms of managed service offering...
  • Apple, embedded SIMs, NFC and mobile payments - some speculation
    I wonder if I've just managed to join up the dots on something rather important: - Recent reports suggest that Apple is intending to use...
  • New Cisco VNI traffic report out
    One of the broadband industry's "bibles" has been published in a 2010 edition . Cisco's "Visual Networking Index...
  • Is the MID a market?
    MIDs (Mobile Internet Devices) are being pushed by some notebook OEMs and silicon suppliers as the next big convergent handheld category. I...
  • "You can't use my eyeballs for free"
    Let's look forward 10 years. We've all got augmented reality browsers on our handsets, or perhaps our 4G-connected sunglasses. They ...
  • Mobile traffic management - the Inter-technology war begins
    I've been following the proliferation of mobile broadband traffic management technologies for some considerable time now, having publish...
  • Pre-MWC notes for analyst relations staff
    OK, it's the time of the year when I get bombarded by emails and phone calls from a million people inviting me to briefings and similar ...
  • Mobile operators' future voice strategies decoded
    Apologies in advance, but this blog post is deliberately a bit of a tease. I'm not going to spell out the answer here, as it's too v...
  • Hosted mobile services in the recession - Caveat Emptor
    I used to work as an equity analyst at an investment bank back in 2000-2001. I remember an unending stream of first generation Application S...
  • Challenges in measuring offload volumes
    I suspect we're going to get bombarded with statistics in the next year, along the lines of "Operator X deployed Vendor Y's off...

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (31)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (6)
    • ►  May (5)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (5)
  • ►  2012 (46)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (4)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (6)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (9)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ▼  2011 (73)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (10)
    • ▼  October (8)
      • Telcos will find that API payments are a two-way s...
      • There needs to be an Alternative Communications Pr...
      • Implementing native RCSe in devices brings operati...
      • Next few months are do-or-die (or die again) for R...
      • Musings on my next personal phone & contract
      • WiFi neutrality vs. the OMA
      • My suspicions on iPhone delays - chipset integrati...
      • 3GPP gets serious about the Future of Voice beyond...
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (5)
    • ►  June (7)
    • ►  May (9)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (7)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ►  2010 (130)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (10)
    • ►  October (10)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (9)
    • ►  July (7)
    • ►  June (19)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (11)
    • ►  March (18)
    • ►  February (7)
    • ►  January (10)
  • ►  2009 (126)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (14)
    • ►  October (9)
    • ►  September (8)
    • ►  August (9)
    • ►  July (10)
    • ►  June (21)
    • ►  May (14)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (11)
    • ►  February (15)
    • ►  January (9)
  • ►  2008 (94)
    • ►  December (24)
    • ►  November (26)
    • ►  October (25)
    • ►  September (19)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile