** THE WAVE REPORT ON DIGITAL MEDIA **

WAVE Report announces new photographic conference coverage. The launch of this reporting is on the CEATEC Japan 2001. This is a unique event, for most WAVE Report readers, in that it showcases Japanese electronics technology not widely reported on. Check this out:

http://www.wave-report.com/photopages/ceatec_2001/intro.htm

We look forward to your comments. Please send them to

photos@wave-report.com

***The Essential Web Services Summit: What IS a Web Service Anyway?

By James Sneeringer

An industry buzzword, and an integral part of Microsoft’s .NET initiative, is the concept of Web services. The important questions are: what is a Web service, what is required to develop one, and why would a business employ one? In the afternoon session of the Microsoft/Intel Essential Web Services Summit (see WAVE0146 for introductory article) DevelopMentor Instructor Ted Pattison provided some answers from the Microsoft point of view.

As Microsoft defines it, a Web service is a distributed application that operates across the Internet. Most applications are made up of a number of individual program and data files, which are called as needed. A Web service operates the same way, but the files exist on separate machines on the Internet. Web services operate behind the scenes, from program to program, but users experience the application as though it resides entirely on their machine. Pattison contrasted this definition with that of Web applications, which users access directly through a browser.

Web services are one way for applications to communicate with each other. The primary advantage over other methods is that, at least in theory, Web services are platform-agnostic. The key is using established standards such XML and HTTP, rather than proprietary networking protocols. In addition to communication advantages such as the ability to work through firewalls and across different platforms, using established standards may also save development dollars. HTTP can balance loads across the network, for example, and security can be handled either by a standard such as SSL, or a third-party service. Microsoft’s Passport service was highlighted at this conference, but in fact, the provision of this type of user authentication service will be one of the major battles of the Web services market - between Microsoft and AOL/Time Warner.

What You Need to Know

Pattison spelled out the four technologies that go into the development of a Web service:

XML

XML is short for Extensible Markup Language. It is a very flexible way to represent data, developed from the HTML system of tags. XML data is self-descriptive: a single XML file contains both a set of data, as well as information called meta data about what types of data are present, and how they interrelate. Applications reading such a file not only receive the data, but also the ground rules for how that data can be manipulated. XML places no limitations on how meta data can be defined.

XSD

XSD is a standardized schema for XML. It sets forth a limited set of data types that can be defined in XML, and specific rules under which users can define new types. By limiting the meta data in XML, XSD improves compatibility with standards such as Java, or Microsoft’s CLR (see last WAVE). XSD aims to ensure that an XML file can be mapped to these other standards.

SOAP

SOAP is the Simple Object Action Protocol. It is a standard for messaging — the process of two machines communicating before and after file transfers. SOAP defines how XML can be used by one machine to request a file, or acknowledge a file receipt.

WSDL

WSDL, the Web Services Description Language, defines the way Web service interfaces are described from one machine to another. It is a standard by which one machine can let another know what Web services are available, and how they are configured.

Because the concepts are abstract, an example might be helpful. Imagine a local Windows computer initiating a Web service across the Internet with a distant Java machine. It communicates with the distant machine by sending and receiving SOAP messages. WSDL defines the Web services available on the distant machine. XSD allows the original Windows file being sent to be mapped into XML, and remapped to Java at the distant machine. HTTP handles the file en route, and security is handled by SSL.

Microsoft ASP.NET

Pattison also spent over an hour discussing the intricacies of Microsoft’s new tool to develop Web services, ASP.NET, which replaces Active Server Pages (ASP). The tool is designed to allow programmers to develop both Web applications and Web services. Two major changes to the ASP environment: a scripting language is no longer required, and state management works across Web farms, rather than being tied to a single machine as before. State management is the process of tracking each user’s state (i.e. logged-in or logged-out for, example).

Like the rest of .NET, ASP.NET is based on the Common Language Runtime (CLR), a virtual execution engine. ASP.NET is still, however, tied to Microsoft’s Internet Information Server (IIS), which has been the focus of numerous security exploits, and a great deal of criticism. Microsoft has defined several new extensions to denote Web services and applications from traditional ASP pages. When IIS detects one of these extensions, the request is passed through IIS into the ASP.NET runtime, where it is run by the CLR, rather than within IIS. Because the CLR compiles just in time, and manages the code it runs strictly, Microsoft predicts Web applications and services will be much more secure than previous Microsoft Web server tools. Several developers at the conference we spoke with, however, had the opinion that as long as IIS was involved at all, security could be too-easily defeated. Pattison hinted strongly that future versions of Microsoft Web server software would not include IIS, or that it would be optional.

http://www.microsoft.com/usa/partner/isv.asp

***EMC Cellular Subscription and Handset Forecasts

(October 30)

From a worldwide subscription base of 728m at the end of 2000, EMC predicts a 35% in-year growth to 988m cellular subscriptions at end December 2001. While cellular subscriptions are still predicted to grow to reach 1bn in 2002 and 2bn in 2005, the rate of growth has slowed down from the 52% year-on-year growth witnessed in 2000. Even then, the 2000 growth figure was already declining from the peak rate of 55% of 1999.

World Cellular Subscriber Forecasts (Millions of Subscribers)

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Africa 16.6 29.1 48.7 68.1 84.7 100.2

Americas 63.6 92.7 132.5 170.6 202.2 226.4

Asia Pacific 232.1 330.6 442.1 558.8 666.6 761.4

Eastern Europe 29.5 45.7 61.8 77.0 90.4 101.9

Western Europe260.2 336.4 423.3 488.8 532.5 561.1

Middle East 10.4 15.1 20.1 26.3 33.2 40.3

USA/Canada 116.5 139.1 164.5 190.7 215.6 238.2

World 728.8 988.7 1,293.0 1,580.2 1,825.3 2,029.5

Source: EMC World Cellular Database, October 2001 based on actual figures to end June 2001.

http://www.emc-database.com

0147.2 Story of the Issue

***The Broadband Economy

By Amanda Rogos

The debates on telecommunication regulation or deregulation have been fierce both before and since the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The evolution of circuit to packet switched data, merging data and voice services and cable television with Internet services in addition to the mergers between companies in all the aforementioned markets have only further complicated this situation. Columbia Business School’s Institute for Tele-Information (CITI) was the latest forum for discussion on these topics and the WAVE Report was present for the day of debate.

Unfortunately, there was not much debate. The view, most often heard (at least in our offices) of the CLEC (Competitive local exchange carrier) demise being a direct result of ILEC (Incumbent local exchange carrier) discrimination, was strangely absent. There was evidence of a similar argument in several papers on the CITI Web site (written by James Glassman and William Lehr) but neither individual was present at the conference.

The day was one-sided - focusing on the view that there has not been enough deregulation. Yet, the arguments presented were intriguing and by the end of the day, we were wondering what was wrong with deregulating some of the ILEC market? Why shouldn’t incumbents be allowed to invest in their infrastructure without sharing it? And why was asymmetrical regulation (regulating DSL but not cable broadband) deemed a fair play by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission)? After a weekend of further study, the arguments towards decreasing the ILECs regulatory burden seemed weaker than when advocated at the conference. However, we found that the conference presented an interesting view of the telecommunications world and therefore more than merit this article.

The theme of the conference was the condemnation of asymmetrical regulation (and subsequently the FCC). The Telecommunications Act of 1996 identified the Bell companies as monopolies and therefore regulated them such that they must follow basic rules forcing them to unbundle certain elements of their network to competitors, setting the wholesale rates they can charge, restricting their services between LATA (local access and transport area) and restricting entry into long distance. Cable on the other hand, has been put under less restriction (until the recent open cable push) and is therefore, according to the participants, allowed to have free reign in the market. The theory is that this environment has lead to a 70% market share for cable in the broadband market, compared to DSL’s 30%.

The root cause of this distortion can be related to investment in infrastructure and facilities. The Bell network was faced with a situation in which their large investments in fiber, broadband routers and switching fabric, would benefit their competitors as well. Because broadband was a risk and not a guaranteed success, the Bells were reluctant to accept all the risk and then share their profits with companies that had not made the same type of investments, but shared in theirs. Essentially, as Economist Alfred Kahn put it, the regulations basically mandate that, “If you [Bells] are successful, you have to share. If you aren’t you eat your investment.”

John Thorne, Senior VP and Deputy General Counsel at Verizon, compared the DSL market with wireless as an example of its potential for unregulated growth. Initially, the use of wireless technology was regulated by the FCC. When the FCC granted regulatory parity to all carries and removed interLATA restrictions on Bell companies, wireless services began to have explosive growth with SMR (Nextel) becoming the first successful application. Thorne believes that given the chance to invest without regulation, DSL would have similar growth and success - benefiting the Bells, but also consumers as well.

Jerry Hausman, from MIT’s Department of Economics took a slightly different tack, although still blaming the FCC, and said that the Commission was guilty for not only their asymmetrical regulation but for their implementation of those policies. According to Hausman, facilities-based competition is the only real competition. Therefore, when the FCC set pricing for UNEs (Unbundled network elements) and encouraged network sharing, it was not competition - it was sharing. Instead, when the FCC set these rates, using a system called TELRIC, they should have been set higher (higher than retail pricing as opposed to under) as an incentive for CLECs to build out their own infrastructure. Hausman believes that because the CLECs depended entirely on the ILECs for their livelihood, there was no future in their business - and that was their downfall.

For example, in Korea, where broadband deployment is completely unregulated the connections per 100 inhabitants are four times as high as the US, with 4.32 million broadband connections (9.2 per 100 inhabitants - November 2000). Canada falls into second place with a 4.5% penetration. The US has a 2.2% penetration per 100 inhabitants. As another example, Korea has three ADSL providers Korea Telecom (the incumbent) and Hanaro Telecom (the startup competitor) are the two largest with 46.8% and 24.8% of the market respectively. There are no unbundling, pricing or network sharing regulations in Korea and Hanaro uses its own fiber network. Hausman compared these figures with the US broadband market in which ILECs (DSL) have 24.6% of the broadband connections and CLECs (DSL) have only 4.5% (cable modems have 70%).

When some brave soul in the audience suggested that without CLECs competition would cease to exist in the DSL market, the panel voiced their opinion that there is no need for competition within DSL. Instead the entire broadband market should be considered, i.e. competition between cable, DSL, wireless and satellite should be sufficient to satisfy competition standards. The FCC, which received varying amounts of negative attention within each panel, due to their competitive posture vis-à-vis its regulation, instead merely counts players, not actual competition, as if to say, "See, competition is alive, we have 9 players in the DSL market."

The talk turned briefly to cable, which although not regulated per se, has not been completely untouched by these policies either. Operators currently offer only a small channel for broadband and use most of their bandwidth for television - even to the extent that they are showing small channels like the 2nd golf channel and 4th football channel. This, according to participants, was due to the fear, that if a large broadband investment was made, they too, could be party to the same type of unbundling and regulatory structure. This may be happening with the push for Open Cable and most operators, excluding AT&T, are not happy with the entrance of this debate. Satellite may be in for some regulation as well - especially due to the pending acquisition of DirecTV by EchoStar, which was recently announced.

Now, there are certainly counterpoints to all the aforementioned debates, most of which we have covered in previous WAVE Issues. For instance, one could argue that if the Bells would agree to separate their retail and wholesale operations, they would have a lot more freedom to invest as they chose. In essence, regulation has attempted to help them unburden themselves from the risk of which they complain. Plus, if this is a competitive market, and the incumbents have a monopoly position, don’t they have the upper hand? Why have they fought the DCLECs so hard, instead of using their business as an added revenue stream?

On the CLEC side, perhaps it is true that they had an incentive (initially) to co-locate instead of build their own facilities. But when the ILECs began to stall the co-location efforts, wouldn’t that be incentive enough for the CLECs to construct their own networks? Actually, build-outs were started by Covad, Level3 and IXC but instead of instant facilities success, they have been rewarded by falling investment from funding partners, ILEC anticompetitive price decreases and in the end, bankruptcy. Certainly not the result that was hypothesized above.

Were CLECs to become truly facilities based and compete with the ILECs they would have had to implement a much smaller footprint - that is, smaller geographic coverage. They would have no option but to carefully pick the areas where broadband would have had a very high attach rate in order to have a chance of paying back the investment. In fact, one company had this strategy in the cable side, (RCN) and they are having problems like all the others. So in our minds, the CLECs were really in a no-win situation.

The telecommunications market and its regulatory structure are indeed a difficult tangle of issues. CITI’s conference was an excellent forum for a discussion that was unusual in its bias. It presented a very different picture than is usually seen in Washington, where competitors and consumer advocates have been committed to fight the ILECs and any effort to deregulate them, almost to the death. This dichotomy of conclusions, which does not often surface in Washington or in the Trade Press made for an interesting set of debates. Bravo Columbia!

The next WAVE Issue will present another viewpoint, this one from Ken Zita of Network Dynamics Associates, asserting that the broadband revolution is already upon us, with business-based broadband. Zita believes that too much emphasis has been put on consumer broadband, an interesting theory indeed.

http://www.citi.columbia.edu/

0147.3 3D

***Pixologic Releases TextureMaster Zscript For ZBrush

(October 24)

Pixologic has announced the release of the TextureMaster ZScript for ZBrush. TextureMaster is available at the ZBrush Web site and is a free download to current ZBrush users.

ZBrush is an application offering a dynamic and integrated digital imagery workflow solution that incorporates ZScript technology to offer 2D and 3D within one real-time environment, maximizing an artist's productivity and creativity. The TextureMaster ZScript simplifies the texturing process and allows the user to gain the benefit of the 3DCopy feature.

ZBrush employs smart pixels, called Pixols, to retain color, material, depth and orientation information within an image. Pixols handle the unintuitive and time-consuming calculations that would normally be done manually. With Pixols, an artist maintains total control over the amount of depth added or subtracted and can utilize differences in depth for image control and editing. Using a mouse or stylus pen an artist can create 3D primitive and freeform shapes that react to any combination of a Pixol's surface attributes. Furthermore, ZBrush is host to a set of real-time 3D sculpting, painting, texturing and deformation tools - seamlessly integrated in one intuitive environment. With instant feedback encompassing a synthesis of 2D and 3D capabilities in a single stand-alone tool, ZBrush offers flexibility and appeals to a wide audience

ZBrush version 1.23b is available online at an introductory price of U.S. $292.50. Version 1.23 is a free upgrade to current registered users. ZBrush is not available in stores and can be purchased and downloaded online (ESD format) or at selected resellers. A free downloadable Demo version (Mac & PC) is available at Pixologic's site.

http://www.zbrush.com

***bioVirtual Announces Availability of 3DMeNow 1.5 and XPlayer

(October 31)

bioVirtual has announced 3DMeNow1.5 and Xplayer, two releases which add features such as real-time animation authoring and web output to the creation and deployment of photorealistic human models. Building on version 1, 3DMeNow1.5 retains all the features of the original - but now includes functions including:

Integrated animation control via WYSIWYG drag and drop timeline editor and with user-definable automatic animation for lipsynching and idling expressions. Choose from a range of actions including emotions, facial expressions, head and eye rotations and then animate them with audio files.

Integrated audio recording to create automatic lipsynching and accurate animation.

Integrated hair and spectacles model wizard. Apply one of over 60 different hairstyles and ponytails. With the spectacle wizard you can choose the Frame style and color, Lens Color/ Transparency and fine-tune the position, size and orientation.

3DMeNow1.5 saves whole project files as *.now files, and also saves optimized *.bio files for on or offline viewing using the XPlayer. This allows the use of models in WebPages, and applications such as Director and PowerPoint. Also full printer support and the ability to save 3D snapshots in JPG, .BMP or .PSD.

Perimeter modeling. More control over points to increase realism and accuracy.

Selectable backgrounds using both colors and images.

Load images directly from scanners and/or digital cameras via TWAIN support.

XPlayer is a scriptable ActiveX control - essentially a mini 3D game engine - which can be used to display and control any bioVirtual *.bio file content. XPlayer is a low-bandwidth 3D browser and adds web support by adding features such as real-time animation playback and streaming audio support so users can create and send messages via email, add the ability to welcome visitors to their web sites or add life to PowerPoint and Director applications.

http://www.biovirtual.com/3DMeNow/downloads/3dmenow1_5_111.exe

***Toon Boom Releases Improved LightTable Module

(October 31)

Toon Boom Technologies has announced the release of the LightTable module upgrade, which is compatible with USAnimation V5 and runs on Windows 2000. The LightTable module introduces the concept of the virtual animation studio, allowing animators to work remotely and send their drawings electronically to their partner studio anywhere in the world.

With the LightTable module, animators can hand-draw animation with a pressure-sensitive pen and graphic tablet based on the classical light table approach and use these vector drawings with all of the other USAnimation modules.

This release includes improved vector drawing and repainting tools, the ability to build and export USAnimation Paint files, the possibility to display bitmap images and live-action sequences for rotoscoping, support for the import of audio files and multiple sounds at playback, and the ability to lip sync sound files to help in the creation of your drawings.

Users can also import USAnimation drawings so that they can be repainted or retouched, or simply for reference artwork, when creating effects like shadows, highlights and tones.

Toon Boom Technologies is a supplier of 2D animation software for businesses and individuals. The company offers a 100% vector-based, resolution independent and multi-layer software system with multi-format output to HDTV, Film, DVD, Imax and Macromedia Flash. The improved LightTable module will start being shipped on November 9, 2001.

http://www.toonboom.com

***ParallelGraphics Launches Latest Version of Internet Model Optimizer, v.1.5

(November 1)

ParallelGraphics, a developer of Web and wireless 3D technologies, has released Internet Model Optimizer (IMO) V1.5, a tool that provides a way to optimize complex 3D models created with CAD/CAM/CAE and other design systems for use on the Internet. The challenge of compressing large 3D CAD models into files small enough to be delivered efficiently across networks has been constrained by today's bandwidth limitations. IMO addresses this problem by providing efficient Web delivery of 3D content.

Using proprietary algorithms, IMO optimizes 3D models by removing the polygons that contribute least to the total visual impression of the models, while allowing for a balance between rendering speed and visual quality.

IMO version 1.5 has a range of improved features. These include:

- Support for the transformation hierarchy of a model's parts which allows for animations to be created more intuitively and efficiently.

- Support for inlining which allows access to models whose parts are located in separate files.

- Increased support for the editing and previewing of materials.

IMO is part of the complete enterprise solution from ParallelGraphics which includes server based algorithms for accessing and optimizing existing CAD databases; and authoring software for creating and distributing interactive real-time 3D simulations over the Internet for online training and assembly guides.

http://www.parallelgraphics.com

***Ascension and Sony Complete Real-Time, 5-Performer Motion Capture Production

(November 1)

Sony Computer Entertainment Europe’s Team Soho and Ascension Technology have announced a motion capture production for the forthcoming Playstation 2 game The Getaway which uses five motion capture performers in real time. To animate the game’s characters, each performer wore an Ascension Technology MotionStar Wireless tracker and a pair of 5DT data gloves. This allowed the game to have increased interaction among the characters while streamlining the overall production pipeline.

Team Soho was able to map motion capture data from all five performers — plus the ten 14-sensor gloves — directly onto the character models, which were created in Alias/Wavefront Maya. Dave Bawell of Phantom 3D (Hollywood, CA) helped install the MotionStar Wireless system outside London where a large wooden mocap stage was built to accommodate the performers. The project required the simultaneous tracking of five performers, incorporating over 50 specially built wood props such as cars, trucks and weapons.

Each motion capture performer wore an Ascension CyberSuit outfitted with 11 sensors. Each performer had a separate backpack and receiving base station. Ascension also supplied the 5DT Inc. 14-sensor data gloves to capture the performers’ hand movements. The gloves connected directly into each performer’s backpack, with the glove data “piggybacked” on the body motion data through the MotionStar Wireless RF link at 2.4 GHz. Real actors were used for the production because Team Soho wanted to capture their speech along with their movements.

The Getaway, Sony Computer Entertainment Europe’s flagship title, positions the player as Mark Hammond, a retired bank robber who is forced back into the world he left to save his son from an evil mobster. A series of frantic car chases ensue, hurtling the player through a recreation of 70 square kilometers of actual London street scenes.

In development for three years, The Getaway is expected to be released early next year.

http://www.ascension-tech.com

0147.4 Semiconductor

***RF Engines Launches a Way to Improve Next Generation of Spectrum Analyzers

(October 30)

RF Engines Limited, a British technology company based on the Isle of Wight, has created a way of simultaneously processing digital signals across a spectrum in real time. This is ideal for creating the next generation of spectrum analyzers, offering improved performance and lower costs as less silicon is required. Often this can be just a single chip solution whose lower costs, small size and power consumption opens up possibilities for handheld designs such as Bluetooth scanners. RF Engines is making this architecture, Pipelined Frequency Transform, available as licensable Intellectual Property (IP) in the form of IP cores that can be included in programmable logic devices or System On Chip (SOC) designs.

Spectrum analyzers currently either use an analog filter to sweep across the frequency band of interest or use a digital technique of a flash A/D converter followed by a micro-processor-based DSP executing an FFT to split the band into a number of frequency bins and the signal power in each bin is then calculated and displayed.

The analog filter method is slow, taking several seconds to sweep across the frequency band of interest with the result that transient signals are often missed altogether. The FFT method is faster but can still miss fast transient signals and suffers from relatively poor dynamic range and selectivity. The use of windowing improves dynamic range but the frequency response of each individual bin is not flat, so the power measured will vary according to the RF position of the signal within a bin. Alternative digital methods using banks of FIR or IIR filters are possible but tend to be expensive to implement since a separate filter would be needed for each frequency bin.

PFT enables a stack of Digital Frequency Converters or a massively parallel processed pipeline FFT to be replaced with a single chip, thereby reducing overall system cost and power consumption by up to 50%, while improving performance. The areas for its use are in broad bandwidth applications of up to 100MHz, such as the next generation of mobile phone base stations, spectrum analyzers, radar and electronic surveillance equipment, that require conversion and filtering of channels in real time with all channel signals being available for onward processing.

The Pipelined Frequency Transform architecture is optimized for the real time signal analysis of ultra wideband signals and transforms the signals from the time domain to the frequency domain as an FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) does. However, unlike an FFT, the PFT also provides performance filtering across hundreds of channels. This could not be done in real time on a general purpose DSP running FFT routines. For example, a demonstration implementation of PFT on four FPGAs can handle in excess of 100MHz bandwidth signal at 8-bit resolution and extract 1,024 channels with sharp channel filter characteristics of, typically, a filter stop-band rejection of better than 75dB (with 8 bit A/D data input). Moreover, it can do a 1024-point transform up to 20 times faster than an FFT implemented on a DSP.

The basic PFT architecture uses a series of frequency splitting stages to sub-divide the original signal band. The first stage splits the band in half; the second splits the two bands into four, and so on until the required number of bins is achieved. Decimation at each stage ensures a constant data rate through the pipeline, and hence a continuous data throughput with no loss of data. Gain across each bin is flat (typically less than +/- 0.2 dB) and bin-to-bin isolation can be tailored using filters within each stage to meet the dynamic range requirements of the system.

An N-point PFT is functionally equivalent to a parallel bank of N individual complex down-converters; i.e. all frequency channels are available all of the time. For large values of N, the PFT solution requires less silicon than the equivalent bank of down-converters. Thus, for example, a 16K point transform needs only 14 PFT stages as compared to 16384 Digital Frequency Converter modules.

The architecture is scaleable with intermediate stage outputs simultaneously available if required. It is configurable so that trade-offs between dynamic range, selectivity, throughput rate and silicon gate requirements can be done under the designer’s control to provide the optimal solution for each application.

Being pipelined means that there are no time gaps and therefore no missed data, which is crucial for very fast or fleeting signals. In addition, it is cascadable by adding additional PFT stages to provide higher resolution by increasing the number of points or, conversely, finer resolutions can be achieved if a smaller input bandwidth is used.

Furthermore, the PFT can also be tuned to allow flexible dynamic channelisation of broadband spectrum without affecting static channels during the reconfiguration process.

http://www.rfel.com

0147.5 Deals

***Gatespace and Jungo Team Up to Provide an Open Services Residential Gateway

(October 24)

Gatespace, a software developer of open standards based distributed service platforms and Jungo Software Technologies, a provider of residential gateway software and technologies, jointly announced their strategic technology alliance. Using Jungo's OpenRG software platform for residential gateways, the companies will jointly provide an integrated solution for next generation value added services to the home, and SOHO / ROBO (Small Office/Home Office and Remote Office/Branch Office).

Gatespace, which was launched as a result of a 3-year joint research project between Ericsson and the consulting firm CR&T, is one of the pioneers in the market for distributed service platforms based on OSGi (Open Services Gateway Initiative) standards. Gatespace's Distributed Service Platform (GDSP) enables development, delivery and management of network-based services, providing intelligent and seamless connectivity and interoperability between content/application service providers, network operators, and service gateway and device manufacturers.

Jungo's OpenRG packs in residential gateway elements, including device drivers, a small-footprint embedded-Linux based operating system, networking and management software, and a set of integrated applications and services required for the home, including voice and security software. Jungo's OpenRG also provides a development environment and open APIs, so that other value added services may be developed and customized to the needs of each target market. OpenRG's extendable platform enables the integration of third party applications, for a more customized and application-rich residential gateway solution. OpenRG is upgradeable via the Internet through remote management and includes diagnostics capabilities.

Gatespace's product complements Jungo's OpenRG solution by adding an OSGi framework along with value added components for secure communication, remote management, and enterprise integration and supports a variety of device protocols such as UPnP. This service delivery platform works with OpenRG's platform, which includes Firewall, VPN, Gaming and Streaming support, advanced network services "Plug and Play" home networking, and more. By porting Gatespace's software to the Jungo platform, the combined solution enables Original Equipment Manufacturers and Service Providers to bring new products and services to market cost effectively.

Some of the next generation value added services that will be delivered to the home via the residential gateway include:

-- Information / Entertainment

-- Communication

-- Network security / VPN

-- Energy Management and Metering Appliance

-- Diagnostics and Servicing

-- Safety and Security Monitoring

-- Telemedicine and Healthcare Monitoring

http://www.gatespace.com

http://www.jungo.com/openrg

http://www.osgi.org

--------------------------------------

To subscribe to WAVE go to

http://www.wave-report.com

And Click on the Subscribe Button

To unsubscribe also use the Wave Report Home page or send a message with UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the text to

arogos@wave-report.com

Previous issues of WAVE, as well as other info can be found at

http://www.wave-report.com

http://www.3dlinks.com/

Comments on or questions about WAVE may be sent to:

wave@fourthwave.com

or any of the individuals below:

John N. Latta:-------jnl@wave-report.com

Amanda Rogos:---------arogos@wave-report.com

James Sneeringer:-jsneeringer@wave-report.com

The WAVE Report may be redistributed in full for individual readership and posted to newsgroups, Web, and FTP sites. This publication may not be reprinted or redistributed for profit. Short quotes are permitted but must be attributed to the WAVE Report. 4th Wave retains the copyright to the WAVE Report.