Verizon and AT&T announce VoLTE interoperability

[EvanA]

http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/verizon-att-launch-volte-volte-calling-interoperability-2015/2014-11-03

 

Hopefully Sprint is going to try and launch VoLTE with interoperability with the big 2 and T-Mobile since they are taking longer to implement it.

 

 

[EvanA]

Kinda hard to do that when Sprint's network (NV) is still not 100% complete and LTE is still in the workings.... I hope Sprint does in the future too though, give Sprint time....

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-368-sprint-is-proceeding-with-a-volte-network-that-focuses-on-interoperability-with-domestic-and-international-volte-carriers

[danlodish345]

http://s4gru.com/index.php?/blog/1/entry-368-sprint-is-proceeding-with-a-volte-network-that-focuses-on-interoperability-with-domestic-and-international-volte-carriers

i hope sprint can ink a deal with them. but also do you think sprint can expand its own foot print outside of its native cverage ?

[centermedic]

This is a strategic move by Verizon and AT&T. I would be VERY surprised if either on of them inked a VOLTE deal with Sprint or T-Mo in the future.

[EvanA]

i hope sprint can ink a deal with them. but also do you think sprint can expand its own foot print outside of its native cverage ?

RRPP coverage will be treated as native. As for Sprint building more coverage, it's certainly possible but we'll have to wait to know for sure.

This is a strategic move by Verizon and AT&T. I would be VERY surprised if either on of them inked a VOLTE deal with Sprint or T-Mo in the future.

I disagree. Every carrier is going to be IP connected for VoLTE eventually. That's the way the industry is moving.

[danlodish345]

RRPP coverage will be treated as native. As for Sprint building more coverage, it's certainly possible but we'll have to wait to know for sure.

I disagree. Every carrier is going to be IP connected for VoLTE eventually. That's the way the industry is moving.

what about for sprints prepaid customers? Will they be left out ?

[EvanA]

what about for sprints prepaid customers? Will they be left out ?

They're likely to benefit from RRPP since it's not typical roaming.

[centermedic]

RRPP coverage will be treated as native. As for Sprint building more coverage, it's certainly possible but we'll have to wait to know for sure.

I disagree. Every carrier is going to be IP connected for VoLTE eventually. That's the way the industry is moving.

The tech has never been the issue. The carriers willingness to ink roaming deals has. The big two have historically been hostile when it comes to roaming deals with T-Mobile and Sprint. Sprint roams with Verizon mostly through the old Alltel deal and AT&T did not renew their roaming deal with T-Mobile. I don't see those attitudes changing.

[EvanA]

The tech has never been the issue. The carriers willingness to ink roaming deals has. The big two have historically been hostile when it comes to roaming deals with T-Mobile and Sprint. Sprint roams with Verizon mostly through the old Alltel deal and AT&T did not renew their roaming deal with T-Mobile. I don't see those attitudes changing.

Roaming is a little different than VoLTE interoperability.

[danlodish345]

They're likely to benefit from RRPP since it's not typical roaming.

wouldn't they have to issue the new devices with the updated radio bands and software?

[EvanA]

wouldn't they have to issue the new devices with the updated radio bands and software?

Of course. You'll need a capable device regardless of if you're a Sprint postpaid or prepaid customer.

[danlodish345]

Of course. You'll need a capable device regardless of if you're a Sprint postpaid or prepaid customer.

you will have to forgive my ignorance i am a bit of a newbie

[centermedic]

Roaming is a little different than VoLTE interoperability.

Not questioning the tech. I am questioning the will.

[lordsutch]

I think the FCC will eventually require all carriers that are VOIP capable to interconnect VOIP (including VoLTE) calls directly over IP rather than bridging to and from circuit-switched technology. In the interim it's surely worthwhile for all of the "big boys" to interconnect over IP so they can move away from legacy equipment; there's no real competitive advantage for (say) AT&T to do VOIP interconnection with Verizon but refuse to do it with Sprint (the voice quality improvements from better codecs are secondary to the advantages of everything being run on a flat, all-IP network architecture).

 

As stated above, roaming is a completely separate issue... although, again, I seriously doubt the FCC will allow anyone with a LTE network to set commercially unreasonable rates for, or absolutely reject, LTE roaming agreements after CDMA or GSM or WCDMA is shut down by that carrier.

[milan03]

As stated above, roaming is a completely separate issue... although, again, I seriously doubt the FCC will allow anyone with a LTE network to set commercially unreasonable rates for, or absolutely reject, LTE roaming agreements after CDMA or GSM or WCDMA is shut down by that carrier.

First, I think all operators have to agree to which LTE roaming solution they're going to use. It's still a tossup between LBO Routing and IMS Home Routing roaming architectures.

 

I have this strange feeling the duopoly will go the the "other" way, as soon as Sprint/T-Mobile and everyone else embraces the standard...

[gnoj]

First, I think all operators have to agree to which LTE roaming solution they're going to use. It's still a tossup between LBO Routing and IMS Home Routing roaming architectures.

What are the pros and cons of each of those routing methods?

[milan03]

What are the pros and cons of each of those routing methods?

There isn't yet an universal agreement between the leading LTE operators, GSMA and 3GPP.

At the moment it looks like GSMA is pushing for Local Breakout Routing, while Korean operators that actually have VoLTE roaming commercially deployed are siding with 3GPP's IMS Home Routing. By looking at Verizon/AT&T presser, it sure looks like they're aligning with GSMA and the LBO approach.

 

LBO "Local Breakout" sends the signaling info back to home network, but the data session remains on the visited network.

- It all has to be perfectly correlated, there are lots of moving parts, and it can easily get messy.

- Benefit of LBO is lower cost due to less traffic for the roamers, lower latency.

- Down side is administrative and billing coordination.

 

Home Routing has both the signaling and data/media transported from visited network to home network.

- This obviously introduces much more traffic between two networks, and increases the cost.

- Since all traffic gets routed back to home network, the latency increases, and becomes hard for eSRVCC to achieve acceptable inter-continental performance.

- And lastly, almost impossible emergency call and location due to everything being routed back to home network.

[gnoj]

There isn't yet an universal agreement between the leading LTE operators, GSMA and 3GPP...

Thanks! Between those two, I'd probably go with LBO for the lower latency and smoother eSRVCC performance. Practically speaking, Sprint may not have much choice anyway if the duopoly have already chosen that method.

[Turas]

I would think Sprint is already headed down one specific path or the other as they are coordinating roaming among their RRP(I think that what they call the group) partners.  I don't think it will matter what the Duo think at that point.

 

Are you able to roam with some partners one way and others another way or is that too much to setup?