the internet of important things - smart grid: an intelligent test case

12
Analysis & commentary for decision makers in the telecoms industry The Internet of Important Things Smart grid: an intelligent test case H ELIOS A DVISER

Upload: helios

Post on 29-Jan-2015

103 views

Category:

Business


1 download

DESCRIPTION

Helios Adviser white paper Author: Richard Womersley [email protected] _______________________________________________________________________ Follow Helios via Linkedin, www.twitter.com/askhelios and www.facebook.com/askhelios

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

Analys is & commentary for

decis ion makers in the telecoms industry

The Internet of

Important Things

Smart grid: an intelligent test case

HELIO

SADVISER

Page 2: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

About Helios

Helios is an independent consultancy providing business, regulatory and technical

advice to the ICT and transport sectors. The company specialises in the

development, application, exploitation and regulation of terrestrial (fixed and

wireless) and satellite-based communications, surveillance, broadcast and

navigation technologies and also has significant expertise in aviation and associated

markets.

We provide high quality consultancy encompassing everything from concept

development to regulatory impact assessment; from technology roll-out and

commercialisation to business case analysis and investment appraisal.

We support businesses, governments, regulators and other institutions. Our

customers usually work in complex regulatory domains, in safety critical industries

and are supported by advanced technology. Our aim is to improve corporate

performance.

Our success has been recognised through two Queen’s Awards for Enterprise (in 2004

and 2009).

Get in touch…

For further information please contact:

Richard Womersley

Helios

29 Hercules Way

Aerospace Boulevard

AeroPark

Farnborough

Hampshire

GU14 6UU

UK

E [email protected]

T +44 1252 451 651

F +44 1252 451 652

W www.askhelios.com

Page 3: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

“It has long been an axiom of

mine that the little things

are infinitely the most

important.”

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

“[The] next step in [the]

development [of the Internet]

is to progressively evolve

from a network of

interconnected computers to

a network of interconnected

objects, from books to cars,

from electrical appliances to

food, and thus create an

‘Internet of Things’.”

Internet of Things — An

action plan for Europe

Offering a new means of

delivering connectivity for the

smart grid is potentially

lucrative for telecoms service

providers

The ‘Internet of Things’

Introduction

Telecommunications began by enabling people to talk with other people. As

technology has progressed people started to communicate in a variety of

ways using ‘machines’ (computers) as intermediaries. Machines are

effectively communicating with other machines, largely guided by human

operators. It is logical therefore, that machines will begin to communicate

with other machines without human intervention. As smaller and smaller

machines become able to communicate, a new Internet paradigm emerges:

an Internet of machines, sometimes called machine-to-machine

communication but increasingly being called the Internet of Things (IoT).

One of the great questions relating to the IoT is exactly how devices will

connect to each other, given the large number of potential entities on a

network. Wiring things together would be cumbersome and expensive and

therefore the obvious means of achieving connectivity is through the use of

wireless networks. This paper considers the opportunity for cellular

operators to capitalise from the impending growth in the IoT. Arguably, the

IoT starts with the Internet of important Things and first amongst the

important uses of the IoT is likely to be smart meters. Using smart meters

as an example, we consider the size and scale of the opportunity for

cellular operators and how a joint cellular-mesh network approach may

prove to be the ‘dream team’.

Smart grid and the Internet of Things

It is widely recognised1 that the next stage in the evolution of the Internet

is to move from connecting people (using computers) to connecting objects.

This concept of interconnected objects has been termed the ‘Internet of

things’. In reality, however, the IoT is an ‘Internet of Internets’ in which

like objects may form internets (or intranets) of their own, which are then

in turn joined together to form the wider IoT.

Machine-to-machine (M2M) communication, which has typically been

addressed by GSM-based technologies, represents one widely recognised

example of a part of the IoT, but this is just one small part of a much larger

jigsaw. Each of the different elements which will together complete the IoT

jigsaw will have varying sizes and connectivity requirements. One issue yet

to be addressed, however, is whether there is a ‘one size fits all’ solution

to connecting devices together. It seems highly likely that low power, small

size devices, may require different data transmission protocols from larger,

higher power devices. This means that a ‘one size fits all’ approach may

not be efficient.

Some ‘Internets’ are also more easily implemented than others due to size

and power availability: developments in ‘smart grid’ technology which

interconnects utility meters are therefore a logical first step towards the

growth of the IoT, given the availability of local power sources and of space

within meters to accommodate a connecting device. Offering a means of

delivering connectivity for the smart grid, and for future M2M devices

therefore delivers a potentially lucrative business opportunity for

telecommunication service providers.

1

Page 4: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

The size of the opportunity is vast: the European Commission estimates

that there may be around 50 to 70 billion machines across Europe that need

to be connected2. This equates to an estimated 5 billion in the UK alone,

which is more than the current worldwide total number of cellular

subscribers3. This is before many of the new ideas come to fruition, such as

those suggested by thought groups such as the European Commission’s

Future Internet 2020 task force. All these objects will require data

connectivity and it is envisaged that this connectivity will be almost

universally wireless. Further, the capacity required to connect objects

together will be very significantly more than is currently available using

2.5G and 3G technology today.

Given its immediacy, the remainder of this paper uses the concept of smart

meters as a case study to examine the opportunities that may be presented

to cellular operators by the IoT. It is important to remember, however, that

today’s smart grid (the Internet of important Things) is only one part of

tomorrow’s IoT and represents the tip of the iceberg insofar as its likely

eventual development.

UK smart meter plans

There are currently 28.5 million electricity meters in the UK4, together with

a similar number of gas meters, and around 8 million water meters (though

this is expected to expand to 16 million by 20305). Thus there are well over

60 million utility meters in use in the UK today.

The UK government has committed to roll out smart energy metering to all

households by 20206. In parallel, the UK water industry regulator (Ofwat) is

hoping to piggyback on this roll-out to connect water meters too. The plans

for this smart grid require two-way connectivity and thus there will be a

need to provide solutions for these 60 million units over the next 10 years.

In some countries, the use of wired means of connecting smart meters into

the necessary management and monitoring systems using power line

telecommunications (PLT) is being considered, however this has a number

of drawbacks: as well as only being directly applicable for electricity

meters (as they are the only devices immediately connected to the

electricity infrastructure), there

has been strong vitriol in the UK

against PLT devices7. They are

unpopular due to the amount of

radio interference which they

generate. Unpopularity aside,

PLT has not been proven to meet

the reliability or throughput

requirements necessary for a

truly smart grid, therefore the

UK’s smart grid will be largely

wireless. This represents a

significant opportunity for

cellular network providers across

both the UK and Europe to secure additional new revenue streams,

assuming that a suitable business model can be found in which the

connectivity can be delivered profitably.

“[The Internet of Things]

requires truly ubiquitous

wireless capacity that can

handle several magnitudes

more data.”

Future Internet 2020

The UK government has

committed to roll out smart

energy metering to all

households by 2020

Wireless offers advantages

over wired connectivity

2

Page 5: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

Wireless smart metering

offers cellular operators the

chance to capitalise on their

existing network infrastructure

Each meter will generate

<2kByte of traffic per day

As networks are upgraded,

modems will need to be

replaced. This could mean

120m visits by 2020

The Average Revenue Per User

from embedded devices is

likely to be very small

Smart grid using a cellular network

Advantages of a cellular solution

Wireless smart metering offers cellular operators the chance to capitalise

on their existing network infrastructure by offering a connectivity solution

to the 60 million UK utility meters, thereby generating additional revenues.

However, such connections will inevitably deliver low Average Revenue Per

User (ARPU), while consuming network resources such as signalling

congestion and upstream bandwidth.

The straightforward means to access this opportunity is to place a SIM and

associated wireless card (whether 2G, 3G, 4G or beyond) into each meter.

Given the small volume of traffic that each meter is likely to generate

(< 2kByte per day), this would not present a significant growth in network

traffic (assuming that the load is spread throughout the day). Of note, most

pricing plans offered to date are restricted to off-peak meter reads, which

discourages a more interactive smart grid.

Managing this number of subscribers should not present a significant

headache. Not only can modern networks deal with these kinds of numbers

of subscribers, but the fact that the meters are static means that the

frequency of location updates can be reduced (or forced updates only

employed) further reducing the overall load on the network.

Disadvantages of a cellular solution

A large obstacle in a cellular solution arises as technology is upgraded. If

each meter is fitted with a suitable radio modem, as networks are

modernised, these modems would need to be replaced. With 60 million

meters in the UK, even if it is simply a case of replacing each module, this

would represent a significant effort on the part of either the network or the

meter supplier or fitter.

This is a significant challenge: whilst normal cellular users will

automatically migrate to new technologies as their handsets are upgraded,

fixed installations of any kind will require wholesale manual replacement.

The level of work involved would be similar, for each technology upgrade,

as for the initial roll-out of services and whilst a gradual migration from one

technology to another could take place, the need to revisit 60 million sites

still represents a significant undertaking. This is a very real possibility

should GPRS be chosen as the sole smart metering communications

technology in the UK. Even if this is limited to one visit to each of the UK’s

approximately 27 million residences, due to the strong likelihood of GPRS

obsolescence within 7 to 10 years, there may be a second visit prior to the

2020 mandate deadline.

An arguably larger problem is that of coverage: smart metering and smart

grids require ubiquitous coverage. Meters are located indoors and in hard-

to-reach locations. Handsets are mobile, meters and transformers are not.

Another problem posed by a solution of this type is that the necessary

investments may not yield significant financial returns, especially if the

annual line rental charged for each device is small. The ARPU from

3

Page 6: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

embedded devices of this type is likely to be very small. In some instances

it may be so small that the amortised cost of the SIM and wireless card may

take longer to recover than the life of the card itself. A UK government’s

Impact Assessment (Baringa Partners) estimates the yearly GPRS backhaul

cost as £4.83 for one off-peak meter read per day. Evidence exists that

competitive pressures will further drive this price down. And once-a-day,

instead of true on-demand interaction, is an impediment to a truly useful

smart grid.

As mentioned, coverage may be a concern, not least because many meters

will be situated in locations where coverage is difficult to achieve, notably

indoors and in particular in basements. GSM coverage of the UK population

is upwards of 98% and as such most domestic and commercial properties

should be within an area of coverage. However, whether this would be

available indoors, particularly in less dense non-urban areas, is less certain

and it is likely that some additional sites would be needed to make

coverage ‘deeper’. The penetration loss at 900MHz8 for a signal passing

through two walls is around 19dB which is higher than the 10dB building

penetration loss which operators normally plan for when attempting to

deliver indoor coverage. An additional 10% indoor penetration requires 4 to

6dB of additional signal strength, requiring an increase in site density of 3

to 4 times. To deliver an additional 9dB of signal strength may therefore

require up to 10 times the number of cell sites.

The use of femtocells may alleviate some of this problem in the longer

term. However, it is unclear how the problem of lack of coverage would be

dealt with in areas where this technology is not available if a cellular

solution were to be universally adopted, and whether or not a ‘non 100%

compliant’ solution would be politically acceptable, leaving some users

unable to use smart metering.

Wireless mesh networks

Advantages of mesh networks

Mesh networks are communication networks in which each mesh radio (or

node) is capable of connecting to one or more other nodes and of injecting

data into the network, receiving data destined for it, and passing data from

one node to which it is connected to another. In the case of smart

metering, think of each meter as a unique picocell. Mesh networks are also

capable of self-healing: in the event that any node is lost, traffic can

usually be re-routed around it. In essence, wireless mesh networks form a

‘wireless internet’.

ZigBee is an example of an early mesh technology and this and other

meshing technologies using 2.4GHz spectrum have proven adequate for

short range, intra-home applications. However, due to range limitations

using 2.4GHz, mesh networks has proven impractical to deploy at scale due

to coverage issues and infrastructure costs.

Much work has been conducted to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of

wireless mesh networks9 and they are already delivering significant

benefits, in particular in applications such as smart metering. The coverage

Many meters will be situated

in locations where coverage is

difficult to achieve

With mesh networks, each

node connects to many other

nodes, and networks are

capable of self-healing

4

Page 7: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

Much work has been

conducted to assess the

effectiveness and efficiency

of wireless mesh networks

and they are already

delivering significant benefits

There is no need to change

the radio device unless the

requirements of the meters or

the devices themselves change

As networks grow, the number

of nodes connected through

any Access Point can begin to

exceed its capabilities

One solution might be to put

a GPRS or 3G card in every

meter

of a mesh network is determined by the geometry of the nodes themselves

as they are rolled-out. In an application such as metering, nodes will be

situated in domestic and commercial properties and coverage will be

extended as new nodes are

installed. If appropriate radio

frequency and power levels

are used, the short distance

between nodes means that it

becomes relatively

straightforward to provide

connectivity in otherwise

difficult to access locations

such as in basements or deep

inside properties. As the node

density increases, the number of nodes that any particular device will be

able to connect to will increase providing alternative connectivity options

and resilience of coverage in the event of any failures.

One of the advantages of mesh technology over cellular in a smart metering

context is that the mesh radio node can be designed with the exact data

rate needed, and transmitter duty cycle in mind, so that it is optimised for

the throughput of the meter or other device to which it is connected (and

to supporting connected nodes). The knock-on effect of this is that there is

no need to change the radio device unless the requirements of the meters

or other underlying devices themselves change. Should any changes in

metering take place, which would require a change to the meters

themselves, the associated mesh device could be replaced at the same

time. There is thus no need to replace mesh radios unless the underlying

device to which they are connected also changes.

Disadvantages of mesh networks

Unlike mobile networks wherein each user inherently has a way into and

out of the mobile network to connect to third parties, as a stand-alone

network, wireless mesh delivers limited connectivity, only permitting

connection between nodes on the network. To enable ingress and egress

from a mesh network, mesh access points (APs) need to be deployed at

appropriate locations (the equivalent to cellular base stations in a mobile

network). Typically 1000 or more mesh nodes can be served by each AP −

the exact number depending on the density of node installations and radio

range (a function of spectrum and transmit power). These APs, or

gateways, provide points for network management as well as for collecting

and distributing data amongst the nodes.

In theory, APs can be located anywhere amongst the various nodes, and it

helps if the AP can connect with multiple neighbouring nodes. The more

nodes it can connect to, the shorter the path between remote nodes and

the central AP, minimising delay and latency, and providing additional

resilience. If the number of APs is fixed, as networks grow, the number of

nodes connected through any AP can begin to exceed its capabilities such

that additional APs would need to be established. One solution to this might

be to put a GPRS (or 3G) card in every meter. If each meter were fitted

with both a mesh node and a mobile device some meters could act as APs

and in others, the GPRS (or 3G) device need not be activated.

5

Page 8: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

Connecting the APs to the central management function and data back-haul

network can be achieved through a variety of means, and commonly fixed

or wireless broadband or cellular connections are used.

• Fixed broadband connections are limited in that they require the AP to

be situated in a location where there is a telephone line available.

These locations are often not optimum for providing connections to

multiple nodes without additional cabling between the telephone line

and a vantage point providing better coverage from the AP.

• The use of a bespoke wireless network may be suitable where nodes

can be situated in line of sight positions to a central concentrator site,

or in line of sight situations to each other. This restricts flexibility and

though any AP located in a position with a good line of sight is likely to

be able to connect to multiple nodes, it does restrict the choice of

sites.

• A cellular solution is a particularly flexible option to provide the

necessary connectivity for mesh network APs. Not only is coverage

likely to be present in locations which are also good sites for accessing

multiple neighbouring nodes, but the additional flexibility of being able

to move APs easily offers the opportunity to optimise the location of

APs as the mesh network grows. Even with 1000 nodes connected to a

AP, the total volume of data generated (from a smart meter network)

is very much within the capability of even 2.5G cellular networks and

would present a very small load on a 3G or 4G network.

Thus, there are strong synergies between mesh APs and cellular networks.

In many cases, the cell sites themselves would represent ideal locations for

the positioning of the APs, providing an alternative model both for cellular

operators and for mesh operators. Instead of using the cellular radio

interface for the backhaul from the mesh APs, the data could be routed

directly over the UTRAN and either interconnected at the RNC or continue

to the core network to a point of interconnection further towards the edge

of the network. From the point of interconnection, mesh traffic could be

routed to a separate interconnection point and thus the cellular network

would act as a virtual tunnel. The advantage of a connectivity model of this

kind would be to overcome the restrictions on gateway capacity.

There are a range of solutions

for connecting the Access

Points to the central

management function

The cellular network can be

configured to act as a virtual

tunnel for mesh traffic,

overcoming restrictions on

gateway capacity

There are strong synergies

between mesh Access Points

and cellular networks

6

Radio

Network

Controller

(RNC)

Radio

Network

Controller

(RNC)

Node B +

Mesh AP

Node B +

Mesh AP

Node B +

Mesh AP

UMTS Terrestrial Access Network (UTRAN)

to Core Network

to Mesh NetworkRadio

Network

Controller

(RNC)

Radio

Network

Controller

(RNC)

Node B +

Mesh AP

Node B +

Mesh AP

Node B +

Mesh AP

UMTS Terrestrial Access Network (UTRAN)

to Core Network

to Mesh Network

Page 9: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

Operators can remove the risk

of technology upgrade and

enjoy deployment flexibility

by using cellular connections

or sites to activate mesh

network Access Points

Mesh networks adapt with

each new connection

They permit new types of

devices to be connected

The radio connection is only

changed when the device

itself changes

A hybrid cellular-mesh solution

The ideal solution?

There are undoubtedly cost benefits to using a wireless mesh network to

provide the connectivity into and out of buildings given the self-provided

coverage that mesh networks deliver. Further, there are clearly capacity

benefits in optimising the

use of scarce radio

resources for a particular

application by tailoring the

radio technology to the

requirements of the device

to which it is connected.

Smart metering and smart

grids have limited data and

throughput requirements,

often resembling a process

control application; here,

reliability trumps

throughput. Using cellular connections or sites to activate mesh network

APs provides an unsurpassed amount of flexibility in deployment and

importantly removes the risk to operators of technology upgrade.

The combination of mesh and cellular technology provides a ‘dream team’

for smart metering in that it is:

• Scalable: Alone, cellular networks would begin to creak as the number

of IoT devices grew to the kind of levels foreseen by the IoT. Mesh

networks adapt with each new connection, but would require an

increasing number of easily configurable, and well located APs.

Importantly, mesh networks are today being designed to leverage the

vast address space made available using IPv6. The two together allow

for planned and for ad-hoc expansion to the kinds of hundreds of

millions of devices which are likely to emerge.

• Adaptable: Cellular networks are restricted to certain message sizes

which may not suit the variety of different applications that will make

up the IoT, making inefficient use of the valuable network resources.

On the other hand, mesh networks can be specifically combined to deal

with certain traffic types. Combined they offer the ultimate in

adaptability, permitting new types of devices to be connected in the

most effective and efficient manner.

• Able to deal with obsolescence: Replacing the immense number of

wireless devices the IoT may comprise, would be an almost impossible

task. With mesh technology, the radio connection is only changed when

the device itself changes, minimising the effort of replacement and

reducing the carbon footprint caused by equipment scrappage. The

obsolescence cycle for smart meters, for instance, is 15 to 25+ years,

markedly longer than that of mobile technologies.

• Of sufficient coverage: Cellular network coverage, whilst widespread,

is insufficient to ensure the depth of penetration required for IoT

devices. Coupling cellular’s star topology architecture with a meshed,

7

“Telecommunication operators are usually

called for with regards to the long distance part

of the picture … However, the other area where

we think that operators can add value is the

local data collection network … GSM might not

be appropriate in all cases to connect the meter

up to the information system … and also it

might not be economically viable to roll out

based on GPRS. So, we think there is a business

case for advanced radio technologies - mesh

networks.”

Valerie Le Peltier, Director M2M Vertical,

Orange Group10

Page 10: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

peer-to-peer architecture extends coverage without needing to build

additional base stations, offering a cost attractive way ahead.

• Profitable: Putting all IoT devices onto a cellular network clearly

maximises revenue potential, however this revenue comes at a high

cost and thus may be low profit. Working together with mesh

technology to deliver a blended solution may reduce revenue, but at

much reduced risk and cost and thus potentially higher profitability.

Smart metering: how each solution compares

The following table highlights the advantages and disadvantages of the

three potential solutions to cellular operators.

There are clear benefits for cellular operators to work closely with mesh

providers, and close integration of the networks/technology may deliver

the significant additional benefits of securing mesh traffic and thus

revenues to one particular network. Whilst in the first instance, such close

integration of mesh and cellular technologies may seem unnecessary, as the

IoT grows, such a model may be the most effective and perhaps the only

means of ensuring the bandwidth and flexibility necessary for growth.

Beyond smart metering

At a concentration level of 5000:1 as in systems deployed in the Americas

and Australia, meeting the UK’s smart metering requirements would require

12,000 APs to support a mesh network (coincidentally similar to the number

of cell sites currently deployed by each of the UK operators).

For cellular operators, using mesh networks as the ‘last mile’ connection

presents a number of distinct advantages:

• An enormous reduction in the necessary investment in additional

infrastructure to provide coverage

Coupling cellular coverage

with a meshed peer-to-peer

architecture is practical and

cost-effective

8

Network type Pros Cons

Cellular only Large anchor tenant providing guaranteed income.

Control of M2M/IoT connectivity maximising long-

term growth opportunities.

Management of the tens or hundreds of millions of

connections.

Widespread, deep coverage requirement requiring up

to 10 times as many sites.

Potential for expensive replacement programme

when technology upgraded.

Limits in the number of simultaneous connections

may be a problem with millions of devices.

Integrated

cellular and mesh

network

Exceptionally straightforward and flexible roll-out.

Shared network management ensures best tools for

specific connection.

Achieves indoor coverage at low cost.

Additional coverage can be provided quickly and

with minimal investment.

Equipment upgrade only when underlying service

changes.

Optimised for particular device to which it is

connected thus low replacement cycle.

Requires cellular operators to permit access to some

elements of UTRAN to mesh traffic.

Close working relationship with suitable mesh

provider needed.

Ensures revenue from mesh network stays with one

operator.

Mesh using

cellular as back-

haul

Mesh provider would be able to use alternative (non-

cellular) connection means, reducing revenue

potential.

Page 11: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

The challenge for UK and

European cellular operators is

to ensure that the benefits of

a ‘best fit’ approach to

delivering smart metering,

M2M and IoT connectivity are

realised

• Thousands instead of millions of devices to replace in the event of

network technology upgrade

• Thousands of high ARPU connections instead of millions of tiny ARPU

connections

• Simpler subscriber and network management

• Lower risk of network overload due to multiple simultaneous

connections

However, as the IoT develops from smart metering, initially into M2M

connectivity and beyond, the advantages of a joint solution would become

increasingly large.

The challenge for UK and European cellular operators is therefore to ensure

that the benefits of a ‘best fit’ approach to delivering smart metering, M2M

and IoT connectivity are realised.

How Helios can help Helios appreciates the challenges facing both those implementing smart

grid and those whose role is to provide the necessary connectivity. We

understand the business, technical and regulatory environment and are

ideally positioned to support organisations wishing to be some of the first

movers in the race to deliver the benefits of smart grid and of the Internet

of Important Things.

References 1. http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/rfid/documents/commiot2009.pdf

2. http://www.future-internet.eu/news/view/article/future-intenet-2020.html

3. http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/newslog/

ITU+Sees+5+Billion+Mobile+Subscriptions+Globally+In+2010.aspx

4. http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm070518/

text/70518w0013.htm

5. http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/water/industry/walkerreview/documents/

walker-call-for-evidence.pdf

6. http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/consultations/smart_metering/

smart_metering.aspx

7. http://www.rsgb.org/news/pla_dispute_law.php

8. http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/pub/ntia-rpt/94-306/94-306.pdf

9. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/research/technology/research/emer_tech/mesh/

10. http://www.telecomengine.com/newsglobe/article.asp?HH_ID=AR_5940

9

Page 12: The Internet of Important Things - Smart grid: an intelligent test case

The content of this document is intended for general guidance only and, where relevant, represents

our understanding of current status of telecoms industry matters. Action should not be taken without

seeking professional advice. No responsibil ity for loss by any person acting or refraining from action

as a result of the material in this document can be accepted and we cannot assume legal l iabil ity for

any errors or omissions this document may contain.

© Hel ios Technology Ltd - June 2010

Al l rights reserved.

Helios

29 Hercules Way

Aerospace Boulevard | AeroPark

Farnborough | Hampshire | GU14 6UU | UK

T +44 1252 451 651

F +44 1252 451 652

E [email protected]

W www.askhelios.com