ISDN to IP Videoconferencing

Migration
A paper investigating the motivation for migration and the potential issues
inherent in both technologies.
 Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction................................................................................................................... 3
2.0 Disadvantages of ISDN Based Videoconferencing ...................................................... 4
Multiple Networks to Manage .................................................................................... 4
Need Local Management ............................................................................................ 4
3.0 Forces Influence IP Based Video Services & Infrastructure Migration ....................... 5
Better Economy of Converged Network......................................................................... 5
Cost Advantages ............................................................................................................. 5
Operation Benefits of Centralized Management............................................................. 5
Enable Low-cost Desk Top Video Capability ................................................................ 6
Flexible Ways to Communicate...................................................................................... 6
Greater Needs For Collaboration .................................................................................... 6
User Satisfaction Advantages –Quality & Convenience........................................................ 6
4.0 Concerns/Barriers About Transitioning to IP Communications................................... 6
Quality Of Service (QoS) ................................................................................................... 7
Reliability ......................................................................................................................... 7
Migration Operation/Investment Protection/Costs ..................................................... 7
Security Issues of IP Video......................................................................................... 8
5.0 Conclusions................................................................................................................... 9
 1.0 Introduction
Videoconferencing has been lingering on the fridges of general acceptance for decades,
and yet its traffic volume is till dwarfed by voice and data applications. The circuit-
switched PSTN world has often been held liable for the less than stellar growth of video
services due to high CPE costs, availability of ISDN services, and lack of remote
management capability. However, the relatively recent move by many videoconferencing
users to convert their existing ISDN infrastructure to an IP-based infrastructure is
expected to generate renewed interest in videoconferencing and spark revenue for IP
based services soon, according to a new report from InStat/MDR1. Revenue is expected
to grow at a compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 43.5 percent from
videoconferencing services provided by IP infrastructure. On the other hand, revenue
generated in the ISDN camp is only expected to grow at 6 percent CAGR.

The migration to an IP based network allows for the development and integration of
applications that promise greater cost efficiencies and flexibility. A recent study shows
the current base of IP videoconferencing providers offer savings of up to 50 percent over
ISDN prices. In hopes of achieving lower network costs, greater flexibility, and better
performance, customers increasingly show a keen interest in evaluating IP-based video
conferencing services. For example, California State University Video Over IP (CalVIP)
Consortium recently issued an RFP on migrating its ISDN video service to IP based
services and stated that “H.323 has become the dominant standard for videoconferencing
room equipment and individual units are significantly less expensive than the older H.320
equipment. Contractor support for H.320 is dwindling and getting increasing expensive.
In addition, ongoing operating expenses are also increasing.”

This is not to say that an IP based solution offers videoconferencing nirvana. While IP
does overcome several inefficiencies of the ISDN world, it is plagued by concerns
regarding quality of service (QoS), reliability, security, investment protection and a
general hesitation to adopt a new technology. Recently at the Next Generation Networks
conference, AT&T CTO Hossein Eslambolchi said: “AT&T to continue investing in IP
networking to the point where all of the carrier’s real-time voice traffic will run over IP
by 2010. Still, the biggest challenges in making that expectation come to fruition is the
network management complexity the migration requires, and the lack of sufficient
automated management tools to address that complexity” Eslambolchi acknowledges that
IP is far from perfect, but that its cost efficiencies are undeniable, which is why AT&T
and other carriers need to migrate.

In this paper, we started with a list of known disadvantages of ISDN video followed by
introducing the forces influencing the IP video migration. Then we discuss concerns and
barriers about transition to IP communications.

1
InStat/MDR and CED Broadband Direct are both subsidiaries of Reed Business Information.
 2.0 Disadvantages of ISDN Based Videoconferencing
In order to be a useful business tool, videoconferencing must operate in real-time. Any
lag in voice and video signals would render the technology virtually useless and such
problems with early applications may, in part, be to blame for videoconferencing’s
relatively stagnant growth. The technology was originally designed to be transported on
circuit-switched networks. In recent years, most videoconferencing deployments use the
Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) a public circuit-switched network. Due to
its global availability, ISDN service has been responsible for the diverse and globally
widespread adoption of group videoconferencing systems. However, ISDN does have
some disadvantages, including the following:

Multiple Networks to Manage

Most enterprise networks are not ISDN based. Therefore, in order to use ISDN based
videoconferencing, organizations have to deploy and manage a separate ISDN network
designed to support this specific application. This translates to a total of three networks
within an average organization; packet-switched data network, circuit switched telephone
network, and ISDN videoconferencing network. In addition to having three physically
diverse networks, the unique demands of each also require three different sets of
technical capabilities and therefore often different staff.

Need Local Management

Legacy videoconferencing systems were not designed to support remote management.
Instead, in order to manage such a system, support staff had to be present in the same
room as the installed system. Although this does not necessarily cause significant
problems for organizations with limited system deployments, it does make the
management of a large number of video systems expensive, if not cost-prohibitive.

Availability of ISDN Services

The deployment of ISDN service is not ubiquitous. Many telephone service providers do
not deploy ISDN services in every service nodes, thereby prohibiting the deployment of
applications dependent on such a connection. In addition, when available, installations of
ISDN are time-consuming.

ISDN Is An Usage-Based Service

Just like a typical phone call, a videoconferencing call placed over ISDN lines will accrue
charges on a per minute basis. Now, consider that a typical videoconference usually
involves multiple ISDN connections. In fact, the average call placed at 384 kbps requires
the use of six 64-Kbps digital channels simultaneously for each end-point. Loosely
translated one 60-minute call between two separate offices within the same company will
result in a charge to the company for 60-minutes of usage over twelve ISDN lines.
Obviously, this has the potential of making ISDN videoconferencing relatively
expensive.
 3.0 Forces Influence IP Based Video Services & Infrastructure
Migration
Recognizing the growing interest in IP based videoconferencing and the need to work
with legacy ISDN networks, the majority of videoconferencing systems available today
support features of both ISDN and IP based networks. Organizations investing in
videoconferencing for the first time to those looking to upgrade equipment but not
network are investing in these hybrid systems as a means to smooth the way for future
migration to IP. On the other side of the coin, organizations across the board are making
that move today. The forces of IP-based video migration include:

Better Economy of Converged Network

One of the primary advantages of deploying IP based videoconferencing is the ability to
use the organization’s existing data network as the transport mechanism. This results in
both cost savings and efficiency enhancements. Furthermore, the packet-switched nature
of IP networks allows data, voice and video traffic to share a pool of dynamically
allocated bandwidth, furtherer improving the transport economy.

Cost Advantages
IP-only videoconferencing systems are typically less expensive than ISDN based systems
due in large part because they do not require ISDN software. In some cases, users may
even elect to use their PCs as the basic processing engine for IP conferencing as opposed
to a separate codec. In this situation, the incremental cost is typically only that of a
camera.

Videoconferencing calls placed over an IP networks do not typically incur per-minute

usage fees. In fact, if a company’s existing corporate IP data network has the adequate
bandwidth and quality of service necessary to support video traffic, video calls
originating and terminating on that network will be nearly free.

In addition, many IP network providers (ISPs) offer flat rate plans for network services.
With these plans, the network usage is often viewed as a fixed cost, which allows either a
certain number of usage hours or, in some cases, an unlimited amount of network usage.

With talk of cross-network calls, it is important to note that the addition of a gateway to
the network, calls on an IP-based network can still be placed and received to/from an
ISDN based network. In basic English this means that you can take advantage of the
benefits migration offers even if those you converse with aren’t.

Operation Benefits of Centralized Management

Unlike its ISDN-based cousin, an IP-based video system is always connected to the
packet-switched network, thereby allowing these systems to be remotely managed. In
addition, video system vendors have recently released management tools that allow a
relatively small number of support staff to effectively manage a large number of locally
and remotely deployed video systems. This allows an organization to invest in a large-
scale deployment without the matching large-scale staff. A much smaller, centralized
group can provide the same level of support that individual on-site technicians supply for
ISDN-based installations.

Enable Low-cost Desk Top Video Capability

For many years, the high cost of purchasing and installing ISDN based video systems
limited deployments to large conference rooms. This means that users had to compete
with the rest of the user community for access to these facilities. As such,
videoconferencing was often viewed as something for “special” meetings and not as a
day-to-day business tool along the lines of the fax or email.

On the other hand, both IP based systems and the IP network are less expensive to
purchase and deploy. Again, if using the same IP network currently in place,
videoconferencing is now available wherever there is a LAN connection. Since these
spaces are not typically shared with others, users now have virtually unlimited access to
these video systems, thereby paving the way to everyday usage of the technology. This
capability also paves the way for video system installations in small offices and homes.

Flexible Ways to Communicate

An IP-based network enhances business communications by providing a flexible
foundation upon which all types of new applications and services can be deployed
quickly. These applications maximize productivity and improve communications by
facilitating increased mobility, delivering advanced functionality, and streamlining
administrative tasks. As a result, employees are able to communicate more effectively,
with co-workers and customers, and can focus their efforts on activities that create new
revenue streams or generate cost savings.

Greater Needs For Collaboration

As more and more organizations compete globally and rely on suppliers from throughout
the world, the business need for enhanced communications capabilities continue to
increase. A driving force for the movement to interactive IP video communications is the
need for more frequent collaboration. Many organizations are finding that collaborating
using interactive video along with document sharing streamlines their business activities
and increasing productivity.

User Satisfaction Advantages –Quality & Convenience

The quality of a videoconference meeting depends heavily on the bandwidth of the
connection. As described previously, ISDN based video calls typically utilize 384-kbps
bandwidth. On the other hand, IP networks users can usually access 10/100 Mbps
bandwidth. Therefore, a standard IP video call might be placed at higher speeds than
384Kbps, resulting in an enhanced level of audio and video quality.

4.0 Concerns/Barriers About Transitioning to IP Communications

As with anything, regardless of the upside, there are concerns with IP-based
communications. These tend to focus on Quality of Service, reliability, cost and
migration. It is important, however, to note that a well designed network and the proper
investment can help eliminate or at least minimize the impact these issues may have.
Quality Of Service (QoS)
Latency, jitter, and echo plagued IP telephony industry in its infancy. These were largely
caused by a lack of QoS in the network. Justified or not, the experiences of this early
entrée, continue to cause concern today.

A converged network must be able to separate each traffic type and handle it according to
its unique requirements. For example, data traffic is not time-sensitive; it travels in bursts
and requires accurate delivery. Conversely, voice and video traffic is very time-sensitive.
Adding voice and real-time video packets to a bursty IP environment requires QoS in
LAN and WAN. An organization needs to understand how important QoS can be to
ensure proper network performance for voice, data and video. Traffic classification and
marking, queuing, and data packet fragmentation and interleaving techniques are
available now to guarantee voice and video quality.

Planning a QoS strategy before deployment saves time and money, and perhaps more
importantly eliminates user frustration. Most IP service vendors can now deliver toll-
quality voice. However, to ensure high end-to-end quality multimedia communication in
a converged network, QoS policy management is needed in all routers and switches.
Even if an organization is not fully committed to a convergence strategy now, it makes
sense that all of its new data equipment be equipped to handle voice and video to ensure
eventual smooth migration.

Reliability
Reliability is also a critical concern for companies that are contemplating converging
their networks. It is often assumed that when merging voice onto a data network, it will
become unreliable. Many IP service providers have built reliable components into their
systems via call processing server clusters, redundant routers and switches, and UPS
systems. With the correct design considerations and best practices, converged networks
can achieve a comparable level of reliability to that of a traditional voice network.

A recent survey by Phillips InfoTech asked enterprises that have already deployed IP
Communications to assess their level of satisfaction with their deployment:

• 85 percent stated that real-time voice quality met or exceeded their expectations
• 80 percent noted that they were satisfied with system reliability and scalability

Migration Operation/Investment Protection/Costs

There are several common concerns related to this issue. Among them:
• Should the enterprise run voice, video, and data on the same network? If not,
should a separate IP network be installed specifically for video communications?
• Is the current IP network suitable for IP-based videoconferencing, or must it be
upgraded? If upgrades are necessary, how significant are the associated costs?
Will additional routers/switches or equipment upgrades be required?
• Will all of the systems be connected to the internal IP network? If not, how
many ISDN gateways will be required in which locations? In addition, should
these gateways be managed by internal staff or outsourced?
 • Are the existing network maintenance and support resources both willing and able
to support a converged network carrying data, video, and voice traffic? If not,
how many additional resources and what additional training will be required?

Most organizations have made significant investments in their existing ISDN video
service networks. It is understood that the need exists to protect these investments while
migrating to an IP based video network. Therefore, a low-risk migration path is required
from ISDN to IP. Most video equipment vendors have created products to ease this
transition and ensure that new equipment can integrate with the existing infrastructure.

Eventually a converged network will most likely make additional technology purchases
more interoperable because it will be based on open standards. For organizations opening
new offices and have already planned to make significant investments in data networking
equipment, the insertion point for this new technology is clear. For smaller deployments,
a flash-cut is the typical strategy for transitioning to IP communications. For larger
enterprise deployments, there are many viable migration plans – and while they are
unique to the company deploying them, they offer realistic examples of how similar
organizations may plan to migrate from ISDN to IP networks. Over time they will build
out IP and slowly reduce their dependency on ISDN technologies. In the longer term, the
overall cost benefits of equipment, operations, and carrier services should be reduced.

Security Issues of IP Video

Using an IP infrastructure for voice, video, and collaborative data communications
promises compelling advantages for enterprises. Unfortunately, security concerns are
often raised because nearly all corporate networks have firewall and network address
translation devices (NATs) that effectively block IP voice and video calls. Firewalls do
this by placing a barrier to any unsolicited, incoming communications. NATs block IP
communications traffic because the IP voice and video devices behind the NAT have
private IP addresses that are not routable on the public Internet. Some organizations can
avoid firewall and NAT traversal temporarily by using a gateway to PSTN.

Several solutions exist for overcoming the NAT and firewall problem for IP
communications including bypassing the firewall and NAT, upgrading the network
infrastructure devices using an application level gateway (ALG), and navigating across
the firewall and NAT using a semi-tunneling traversal method.

Bypassing the firewall and NAT is clearly not an option for most organizations.
Removing firewall protection or employing a device such as a proxy or MCU at strategic
locations in the network to bridge around the firewall/NAT may compromise network
security. These solutions may also be costly, and they require political and intellectual
access to the network firewalls and NATs. In addition, a bypass devices will be required
at every location along the communications path where a firewall or NAT presently
exists.

Upgrading the firewall/NAT with an ALG is another possibility, although intrusive and
potentially expensive. ALGs are essentially vendor specific software upgrades to the
firewall devices that examine each data packet attempting to cross the firewall to see if it
is of a known protocol type, such as H.323 or SIP. If packets contain the known protocol
type, the firewall allows the packets to pass. However, like the proxy or MCU bypass
solutions, ALGs require political and intellectual access to the firewall, and every
firewall/NAT in the call path must be upgraded with the ALG software. Furthermore, as
new protocols are developed, a new vendor specific firewall ALG software upgrade will
be required.

Another solution of traversal is to use Ridgeway Systems’ IP Freedom™ transparent

traversal method for enabling IP voice and video communications that neither bypasses
the firewall and NAT nor requires firewall/NAT software upgrades. This is accomplished
using Ridgeway’s client software on the inside of the firewall that establishes outbound
communication connections through the firewall with a Ridgeway server on the outside
of the firewall. All IP voice and video connections pass through the server, making it
possible to traverse any number of firewalls and NATs in the actual call path. Inbound
calls are received through the same client software and are routed to the appropriate IP
voice or video device for which the call was intended. The whole process is transparent to
the IP voice or video device. One shortcoming of the Traversal method is that minor call
latency is added since all connections pass through the secure communications server.
Each firewall and NAT traversal scheme has its own pros and cons; organizations needs
to evaluate various approaches and select one to fits its organization.

5.0 Conclusions
Today’s economic climate has made it more crucial for decision makers to consider
return on investments (ROI) for their organizations telecom services. Enterprises that are
investing in IP Communications usually have several objectives in mind: reducing capital
expenditure, reducing operational costs and improving their organization’s
communications capabilities. The move to IP networking certainly promises the ability
to run video service with a richer feature set as well as reducing the total costs of
ownership for users. Despite the increased attention in IP-based video conferencing, we
expect to see coexistence of both ISDN and IP video equipment and network services
over the next several years. Service providers will face challenges of seamlessly
integrating and managing the heterogeneous videoconferencing endpoint equipment,
networking equipment, and combinations of IP and ISDN carrier services. Our recent
survey of enterprise decision makers shows that the decision to deploy IP-based
infrastructure and solutions is no longer a question of “if” but of “when.” The IP based
video represents a natural move for the industry, vendors and service providers.
Enterprises, service providers, and equipment vendors all need to plan for survival and
success in an environment with mixed network options.