Subject: [Sip] Chance to defend position that SIP has had poor consumer traction Etc.

From: "Lee Dryburgh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:35:20 +0000

Marketing for the eComm March 2008 conference (see www.eCommMedia.com) is
away to drive ahead with the messages which I give them. One of these
messages is critical towards SIP. Before the marketing material is
finalised, I'd like to first welcome responses. I'd love to copy all the
messages but I may run the risk of getting accused of spamming the list so
below I've just copied the section that relates to SIP:

"Voice Industry Stagnancy
Telcos still see themselves as masters of communications innovation and the
guardians to the creation of new services. Yet 3G, FMC, IPTV, NGN and IMS
services are failing in the market place. At the same time consumer
attention drifts increasingly towards Internet based applications such as
Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, FlickR, SecondLife, World of Warcraft Etc. which
are becoming increasingly voice enabled.

Yet within the Internet realms VoIP is still heralded as the communication
revolution. But VoIP on it's own is nothing more than digital telephony and
it will never be profitable. It has gained little consumer traction and can
be announced as dead-on-arrival. SIP the VoIP signaling protocol even after
a decade of development has had little consumer reach and the entire notion
of a common signaling protocol is now under question. "

Now it would seem stupid to ask people to call their baby ugly. BUT what I
do hope for, is that there is enough people with a balanced view who if they
feel strongly against this position and can provide clear rationale, then I
will have it modified/changed accordingly. Otherwise it will be accepted as
true. Seems fair?

Thanks Lee
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments on the application of sip

---

From: Ari El <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 08:39:46 -0800 (PST)

> will have it modified/changed accordingly. Otherwise it will be accepted

SIP is a protocol, not an application. Protocols don't have any  "consumer
traction". 

Now within the voice industry if you can tell me a single large
wireline/wireless telco that hasn't done some work or planning in replacing
class 4 and later class 5 switching equipment with a SIP/IMS core, you
probably work in another industry. Same core we will use for 4G in wireless. 

>From my experience telco investment cycles  have a 5 to 10 year period. All
major telcos have started working towards the change just 2 or 3 years ago.
It will take 2 or 3 more, at least, before we start. Once we do, it will be
fun. Nobody is planning to deploy voip just because it sounds cool or
because the "industry analysts" recommend it. What's more, in the way most
telcos are planning it, it will go mostly unnoticed by customers. We sell
voice or multimedia communications, not voip.

Facebook might have a lot of consumer traction but it doesn't generate any
net income. And they don't offer you any service you pay for. Telcos can
complement facebook while the hype lasts, yes; many are working on that. BTW
anyone remembers secondlife virtual stores?  

Just my $0.02

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Chance-to-defend-position-that-SIP-has-had-poor-consumer-traction-Etc.-tp14362104p14363324.html
Sent from the IETF - Sip mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

---

From: "Henry Sinnreich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 15:22:38 -0800

Lee,

Sorry, but you have it all wrong and confused as email from others are
also observing. 

The half truths are even more confusing.

This list is not the right place to argue your confusion. 

Henry

________________________________

From: Lee Dryburgh [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 8:35 AM
To: IETF SIP List
Subject: [Sip] Chance to defend position that SIP has had poor
consumertraction Etc.

Marketing for the eComm March 2008 conference (see www.eCommMedia.com)
is away to drive ahead with the messages which I give them. One of these
messages is critical towards SIP. Before the marketing material is
finalised, I'd like to first welcome responses. I'd love to copy all the
messages but I may run the risk of getting accused of spamming the list
so below I've just copied the section that relates to SIP: 

"Voice Industry Stagnancy
Telcos still see themselves as masters of communications innovation and
the guardians to the creation of new services. Yet 3G, FMC, IPTV, NGN
and IMS services are failing in the market place. At the same time
consumer attention drifts increasingly towards Internet based
applications such as Facebook, MySpace, YouTube, FlickR, SecondLife,
World of Warcraft Etc. which are becoming increasingly voice enabled. 

Yet within the Internet realms VoIP is still heralded as the
communication revolution. But VoIP on it's own is nothing more than
digital telephony and it will never be profitable. It has gained little
consumer traction and can be announced as dead-on-arrival. SIP the VoIP
signaling protocol even after a decade of development has had little
consumer reach and the entire notion of a common signaling protocol is
now under question. " 

Now it would seem stupid to ask people to call their baby ugly. BUT what
I do hope for, is that there is enough people with a balanced view who
if they feel strongly against this position and can provide clear
rationale, then I will have it modified/changed accordingly. Otherwise
it will be accepted as true. Seems fair?

Thanks Lee

---

From: "Lee Dryburgh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 00:20:27 +0000

> SIP is a protocol, not an application. Protocols don't have any  "consumer

Ari - firstly thanks for you response.

This is just semantics. Lets rephrase which keeps the line the same - there
has been a lack of consumer traction with applications which use SIP.

> probably work in another industry. Same core we will use for 4G in

I'm aware of the plans and it seems to be getting a bit long in the tooth
now; the last operator I did some consulting work for (Hutchinson 3G)
evaluated packet based video (over the air interface) and decided to go
circuit switched. At a greenfield 3G deployment (Orange) I watched in
amazement that analogue signalling links (V35 based SS7) were put in place!
My impression is that there is a large difference between any action on the
ground and Powerpoint slides.

But really this bypasses more fundamental points. The first question is
whether any investment directly relates to any significant ROI? Customer
behaviour is markedly different to the environment into which SIP was
originally envisaged; is voice not passé now? Voice as a standalone offering
is not going to be profitable long term. The profits are to be chased in the
ways into which voice can be combined into business processes, social
networking Etc. (I really can't go into this here - more combinations are
listed on the eCommMedia.com about page). A dark cloud is appearing over
SIP/IMS in terms of being the technology underpinning such combinations. For
IMS see:

IMS: http://www.ss7.net/ss7-wiki/index.php/Ims-failure

> voice or multimedia communications, not voip.

As said voice is dead as a standalone product long term. It needs to be
looked at as an adjunct to ecommerce, social networking etc. Besides
it is passé,
the kids are instant messaging given the chance. T-Mobile (States) where I
did some work recently told me that if they offer a data plan with no voice,
the teenage market virtually only takes it and runs IM. Talking of which I
don't even see SIMPLE playing in the IM field so late in the day. The kids
are Twittering, Beboing and IMing - voice is rare for them (tweenagers).

The direction of SIP is voice centric. Voice as a discrete service is dead
long term in terms of profit (and high application use).

When you say multimedia communications, operators can not name these. And
there is no way they can compete in this direction with the innovation
ecology of the Internet.

> anyone remembers secondlife virtual stores?

Facebook is still in the stage that Google was in, pre-AdSense and pre-IPO.

Just my $0.02

As indicated before I am not after upsetting folks. I'm interested in a
great conference; my understanding at this point is that telephones and main
stream media are being displaced. If I imagine how long role outs etc. take
and note the changes in consumer behaviour since the advent of broadband and
project forwards, it is hard to see SIP lining up with the market. It
reminds me that in 1999 people started coming to SS7 training classes asking
what is the point in learning SIP as it will replace SS7 within a few years.
Last year I did more SS7 training than any other year and AFAIK SS7 is still
used in 99% of networks. And if you want to do billable VoIP besides voice
being passe long term, then every company I have dealt with uses H.323 quite
simply because it integrates with existing billing systems (those setup for
SS7). Strangely enough there is no money in free/low-cost VoIP and the
appeal of such an offering decreases over time as people wish to drive a
more "fused" application experience.

Regards

Lee

---

From: "Lee Dryburgh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 00:33:07 +0000

Henry to make such affirmative statements is rather lofty of you.

Having worked for most telecom vendors and many operators, in 30 countries,
exclusively in the realms of signalling, it is rather staggering that you
retort "confused" and leave it at that. That signalling work includes first
NGN trials and 3G deployments.

The "others" you refer to is "other" and I've just replied to that.

As said I asked for a balanced view as far as possible and simply hitting
reply, typing "confused"/"half-truth" is far from balanced.

Regards

Lee

On 16/12/2007, Henry Sinnreich <[email-masked]> wrote:
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Lee Dryburgh [mailto:[email-masked]]
> *Sent:* Sunday, December 16, 2007 8:35 AM
> *To:* IETF SIP List
> *Subject:* [Sip] Chance to defend position that SIP has had poor
> consumertraction Etc.
>
>
>
> the guardians to the creation of new services. Yet 3G, FMC, IPTV, NGN and
> IMS services are failing in the market place. At the same time consumer

---

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 19:11:20 -0600

On Dec 16, 2007, at 8:35 AM, Lee Dryburgh wrote:

> Marketing for the eComm March 2008 conference (see  
> www.eCommMedia.com) is away to drive ahead with the messages which  
> I give them. One of these messages is critical towards SIP. Before  
> the marketing material is finalised, I'd like to first welcome  
> responses. I'd love to copy all the messages but I may run the risk  
> of getting accused of spamming the list so below I've just copied  
> the section that relates to SIP:
>

Eek! This is sure to generate a major flamewar!

Please respond directly to Lee, NOT THE LIST! Or, I'll make you guys  
a new list for the flamewar if needed.

--
Dean

---

From: "Lee Dryburgh" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 01:29:32 +0000

Sure that is probably best to avoid list flame wars that could ensure
on this rather large list.

I quickly setup a mailman private mailing list (no public archiving)
for the purposes of continuing the discussion.

Sign up here:
http://ecommmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/sip_discussion_ecommmedia.com

Once signed up, post using:
[email-masked]

Now dropping off this list on this issue.

Thanks

Lee