Business Modeling Options for Distributed Network ...

European Wireless 2016

Business Modeling Options for Distributed Network Functions Virtualization: Operator perspective Julius Francis Gomes, Petri Ahokangas and Sara Moqaddamerad Martti Ahtisaari Institute, Oulu Business School University of Oulu Oulu, Finland. integrated networks with real time control. However, to make the implementation of 5G networks economically feasible, it is necessary to create robust and consistent data traffic. One way of doing that can be virtualizing different network functions.

Abstract— Mobile network operators (MNO) are continuously looking for opportunities to reduce capital expenditure and operational expenditure in order to attain organizational economic objectives. Technology concepts like software defined networking (SDN) and network functions virtualization (NFV) have thus surfaced to reduce proprietary hardware based networking and to provide agility. This paper deals with the distributed NFV concept and further deepens with one use case, virtualization of customer premises equipment (vCPE) functions. We apply business model as a basis of analyzing the study context. This paper presents three different business modeling options for the vCPE concept, a conceptual outline of integrated value package and further opens up scalability and feasibility factors for such business models.

The European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) proposed nine different use cases of NFV including virtualization of access networks, virtualization of mobile core network, virtualization of mobile base station, virtualization of home environment, etc.. Virtual Network Function as a Service (VNFaaS) is another from that list of use cases which presents the contemporary concept of virtualizing Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) functionalities [2]. This use case goes beyond consumer level users to enterprise level customers defining the CPEs. Companies like Telefonica in the global telecommunications industry have already started piloting NFV through vCPEs. This paper serves as a guide to understanding different ways of virtualizing CPEs as VNFaaS using the business model as a basis for analysis.

Keywords— Network functions virtualization (NFV), Distributed NFV (D-NFV), Software-defined networking (SDN), Virtual customer premises equipment (vCPE), Business model options, 5G.

I.

Based on a basic NFV architecture and existing business models for cloud computing, Mijumbi et al. [3] presented a stakeholder analysis comprising five different type of players that can take part in the NFV paradigm. The list includes Infrastructure provider, Telecommunications service provider, VNF providers & Server providers, Brokers and End users. Business model as a business research theme addresses elements like value creation, value capturing, key activities, sales and marketing strategies, basis of pricing, revenue stream, cost structure and different stakeholders as well [4][5][6]. Thus, it is vital to pull business model theories to transcribe existing knowledge on technical issues, like NFV and vCPE, into implementable strategies. Since the research on NFV and vCPE are both in infancy from a business point of view, it is important that these problems are dealt with diversified lenses for market trialing.

INTRODUCTION

Mobile network operators around the globe currently operate networks that are built using a vast and increasing amount of proprietary hardware. To add a new network service, these operators are often required to invest more in additional hardware. Hardware oriented networks not only pose financial hurdles, but as well hurdles such as facility scarcity, energy consumption and need for more skilled human resources [1]. Moreover, hardware appliance lifetime is limited and they need to be changed or upgraded in most cases too. Indeed, hardware lifecycle has shortened in the recent decades due to increasing speed of innovation in the technology arena. Increasing demand for cloud-based services over the last few years is becoming evident across industries throughout the globe. In the telecommunications industry, since the dusk of the last decade technologies such as Software Defined Networking (SDN) and Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) have attracted significant attention due to respectable reasons. In addition, these concepts are highly complementary but not dependent on each another [1]. NFV can be brought into action without having SDN in play. Without SDN being present, NFV functionalities can be performed by using virtualization techniques used currently.

This paper combines different virtualization models for CPEs from existing literature and extending the stakeholder analysis from Mijumbi et al. [3] by focusing on analyzing feasibility, value creation and value capture logic of different virtualization models. This paper responds to the two fold explorative research question:

From a technology innovation point of view, the telecommunications industry is striving to standardize the fifth generation (5G) of mobile networks. 5G promises ease-of-use by bringing technologies that are more intelligent and

ISBN 978-3-8007-4221-9

37



What kind of business modelling options vCPE offers for operators?



How to justify feasibility and scalability of these business models?

© VDE VERLAG GMBH, Berlin, Offenbach, Germany

European Wireless 2016

The rest of the paper is as follows. Section II presents an introductory note on the context of the study, VNF-Distributed VNF and vCPE. Section III discusses a business model framework for analyzing the research context. The business modeling options and scaling factors for different virtualization model of CPE are derived and evaluated in Section IV. And, section V concludes the paper with discussion and conclusions. II.

In November 2012, seven leading operators selected the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) as the home of Industry Specification Group for NFV. Since then ETSI has grown by attracting more than 240 TSPs globally and released series of publications in this ground. According to ETSI, the NFV architecture is designed of three components, these include the NFV Infrastructure (NFVI), the virtualized network functions (VNF) and the NFV Management and Orchestration (NFV MANO). The NFVI combines both software and hardware resources that creates the environment in which virtualized functions are implemented. A VNF is the implementation of traditional network function which is employed using virtual machines instead of traditional hardware appliances. And finally, the NFV MANO framework provides the functionality required to deploy the NFV.

CONTEXT

This section opens up introductory notes on the context of the study; NFV and vCPE. In presenting NFV, a brief history of the concept is presented. Additionally, this section also discusses distributed NFV approach as an extension of the NFV concept. Detailed description on the concept of NFV can be found in the [1][2].

The ETSI-proposed NFV reference architecture only specifies initial functional requirements and outlines the required interfaces from a technical perspective. However, In the ETSI GS NFV 0001 V1.1.1 [2] a detailed description of nine use cases are presented. These use cases include: 1) NFV Infrastructure as a Service, 2) VNF as a Service, 3) VN Platform as a Service, 4) VNF Forwarding graphs, 5) Virtualization of Mobile Core Network and IMS, 6) Virtualization of Mobile base station, 7) Virtualization of the Home Environment, 8) Virtualization of CDNs, and 9) Fixed Access Network Functions Virtualization.

A. Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) & Distributed NFV The concept of Network Functions Virtualization (NFV) was first presented by 13 global leading Telecommunications service providers (TSP) in a white paper that introduced the concept, and discussed its benefits, enablers and challenges. NFV claims to address different network related issues by utilizing standard IT virtualization technologies and combine multiple network equipment types; which can be high volume servers, switches and storage, network nodes and etc.. Mijumbi et al. [3] argues that NFV can significantly help reduce operating expenses (OPEX) and capital expenses (CAPEX) in facilitating the deployment of newer network services or replacing existing functions. NFV aims to change the way TSPs design and architect networks in current market by reducing hardware installations and include standard IT virtualization procedures to consolidate many network systems in a more financially efficient, operationally effective, easily modifiable, and longer lasting manner.

Fig. 2. Implementation of vCPE (Adapted from Telefonica)

The most popular approach to NFV implementation focuses on all virtualizable functionalities are centrally relocated in Data Centers [7]. Additionally, the head of strategic developments and innovation of RAD Data Communications referred to the earliest ETSI definition from white paper 1.0, where it is clearly stated that virtualized functions could be located in Data centers, Network nodes and in the end user premises as well based on the Network Point of Presence (NPoP). The D-NFV approach lays a foundation to conceptualize different vCPE models. B. Virtualization of CPE functionalities (vCPE) Currently, the typical implementation of CPE is made up of different proprietary hardware oriented equipment and

Fig. 1. Implementation of traditional CPE

ISBN 978-3-8007-4221-9

38

© VDE VERLAG GMBH, Berlin, Offenbach, Germany

European Wireless 2016

business model elements to choose from can be considered as business modeling options for modulation.

functions. The list can include but not exhaustive to; Network Address Translation (NAT), routing, Universal Plug and Play (UPnP), Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DCHP), Firewall, Model, radio, switching, and etc. The concept of vCPE professes virtualizing the functions of these customer premises equipment through standard IT virtualization functions. Figure 1 shows an example of current CPE approach and Figure 2 shows an example of vCPE approach.

We consider that value creation and capture to be one of the core essence of business modelling given that the entity is exploiting lucrative business opportunities. Value creation is concerned with value created for users, on the other hand value capture is concerned with the total value which is being created for the operating business entity. In a sense, this perspective not only bothers initial value proposition of the firm, but as well tests financial feasibility of a given activity. The value creation for customers for a modern business entity can be analyzed using the 4C Typology of Internet Business Models proposed by Wirtz, Schilke & Ullrich [16]. Similarly, the value capture logic for businesses can be analyzed using the source openness/closeness model proposed by Casadesus-Masanel & Llanes [17]. Though these models help analyzing the value creation or value capture logic of a firm as being standalone, we argue that if they can be combined it will result with an array of available business model options for organizations who are trying to modify their business model. We consider the new conceptual model to explain value source openness at one pole and value integratedness on the other.

Building on the D-NFV approach, it can be argued that in case of vCPE, virtualization activities can take place in different locations in the network chain separately or at same time. Also, vE-CPE location examples stated in the ETSI GS NFV 001 V1.1.1 [2] supports this argument. The following part of the paper will build on this conceptualization of different virtualization location based models to identify business modelling options. III.

BUSINESS MODEL CONVERGENCE FRAMEWORK

In the business model literature, the business model is often referred to as a description [8][9], an architecture [10][11], a representation [6][12], a model or conceptual tool [4][13] to proliferate business activities to a targeted objective. Existing literature also offers different perspectives of what should be at the center of business modeling for individual business entities. Osterwalder & Pigneur [14] argues for value proposition, whereas Ahokangas, Juntunen & Myllykoski [15] considers business opportunities to be the heart of the art. However, both these perspectives appreciate the core importance of value creation and value capture.

We simplify the concept of business model by generalizing its different elements under broader titles and integrate them to the bigger picture. In doing so, we perceive the business model to be a modular convergence model towards value creation and capture. The two perspectives that we pull together in building the convergence model is borrowed from [16] and [17]. Wirtz, Schilke & Ullrich [16] discusses the 4C typology of Internet Business Models; the 4Cs are: content, commerce, context and connection. And, Casadesus-Masanell & Llanes [17] discuss the resource openness-closeness mix of software companies in harvesting market value. They present a two-axis matrix based on the openness/closeness of core software/applications and extension software/applications.

Source Openness Open source, open core, open extension, proprietary

A. Source Openness Reflecting on Casdesus-Masanell & Llanes’s [17] different software business models we develop the source openness side of the convergence model. [17] discusses the openness and closeness of base software and extension software in offering four alternatives; they are: open source (open base-open extension), open core (open base- closed extension), open extensions (closed base- open extension) and proprietary (closed base- closed extension). Though this model was offered specifically suiting the software industry, we argue that similar style can be used to broaden and scale up value offering by adjusting cooperation and industrial partnering model.

Value creation and capture

Commerce, context, content, connectivity Value Integratedness

Fig. 3. Business Model convergence framework

We analyze the problem of the study with a value creation and value capturing convergence framework. This framework discusses a concept of looking at the business model phenomenon by pulling together two distinct perspectives which should help practitioners innovating individual business models by analyzing multiple available options. Business models can be perceived as a tool to implement organizational strategy, often is the case that organizational strategy requires either radical or incremental shift of focus. In such cases, organizations are likely to decide for some business model elements over others as preferable. This set of available

Fig. 4. Source openness/ closeness (adapted form [17])

ISBN 978-3-8007-4221-9

39

© VDE VERLAG GMBH, Berlin, Offenbach, Germany

European Wireless 2016

NFV whitepaper 1.0 [1] about possibilities of virtualization in different locations of the network chain, we summarize these probable virtualization locations in Figure 5.

Operator Network

Depending on the openness/closeness options which any individual organization choose to take should eventually translate the value capture logic of the firm. CasadesusMasanell & Llanes comments that purely proprietary models often results in higher captured value for organizations but lessens the scope of value creation for users. Similarly, purely open source models can deliver the maximum value to customers but reduce captured value. The key for organizations is to locate the best mix of openness-closeness for an optimum level of value capture and creation. From the business model elements collection, the source openness side can explain key partners, key activities, key resources and technologies used. From a strategic perspective, this side of the model helps an organization to find a way to scale up or down its business activities to attain specific business objectives. Additionally, since the openness-closeness discussion concerns how to offer value to end users, it also help define the strategic scope of the organization as well to some extent.

Fig. 5. Different locations of functionality virtualization for CPEs.

B. Value Integratedness The other side of the convergence model is built on Wirtz, Schilke & Ullrich’s [16] 4C typology of Internet Business Models explaining content oriented, commerce oriented, context oriented and connection oriented. We argue this line of sight at business models not only applies on Internet Business Models rather also can be used in assessing many more business models, we call it the value integratedness.

Figure 5 presents four scenarios of virtualization of network functions for CPEs. These are: 1) Virtualization in operator network, 2) Virtualization in Customer Premises, 3) Virtualization in Operator Network and Customer Premises, and 4) No virtualization. Similar notions were presented in the SDN & OpenFlow World Congress 2014 by RAD data communications. Since this paper discusses distributed NFV business modeling options, thus no further detail will be presented on the “no virtualization” case. This paper does not investigate the technical aspect of vCPE and NFV. However, these architectural alternatives themselves provide solid grounding for different business models.

The 4C perspective to business models offers four industry horizons from where value can be created for end users. We argue value creation can be harvested by integrating these different models as well. The overall integratedness of how value is being created depends on how companies are going to combine contents, contexts, commerce and connectivity. Additionally, since this school of perception considers business activities emphasis in creating value, we can consider it to reflect organizational focus. Thus, this side of the convergence model can help entrepreneurs better focus on which arena will the venture create value for customers. Companies can fix its strategic focus by selecting will they offer value through contents or by creating contexts or by offering connectivity or by creating commercial platforms or even by combining two or more of these mentioned styles. IV.

The most prevalent approach for network virtualization concept has been virtualizing in operator network. From business modeling point of view, this approach reduces capital expenses on CPEs to extensive level. Also, operators can reuse existing resource for different customers as an overlapping manner within the network. In the existing literature, virtualization in the Network is usually generalized which might reduce understanding the advantages clearly. Virtualized functions can be deployed through cloud technologies, datacenters, provider edge and even a network node accumulating number of closely situated base stations. Thus, depending on the operator network where virtualized functions will be deployed, business modeling options could be further broken down. Because operators are continuously looking for ways to reduce CAPEX and OPEX, perhaps this is the most promising approach for long term. However, deployment of this approach will require radical shift from existing CPE implementation.

BUSINESS MODELING OPTIONS FOR VCPE

Building on the business model convergence framework, this chapter presents three architecture based business modeling options. Going forward, we discuss value creation and capturing source options and value integratedness for business models built around vCPEs. Finally, we sum up with a discussion on how scalability and feasibility of these business models can be analyzed.

The next approach for virtualizing CPE functions can be located within customer premises. In this case, most of the equipment at customer premises will be replaced with virtual functions. However, all of these virtual functions will be then relocated in the remaining equipment at customer site or network. These remaining CPEs could include equipment like mobile phone or TV set top box or some other general usage

A. Source openness based business modeling options Casadesus-Masanell & Llanes’s [17] source openness model provides a foundation for looking at different industrial problems with a similar approach. Referring to the statement in

ISBN 978-3-8007-4221-9

40

© VDE VERLAG GMBH, Berlin, Offenbach, Germany

European Wireless 2016

equipment. Economically, this approach does not require the operator to invest additional sum on cloud and physical network.

customer segment can be both in consumer level and also enterprise level. Also, using vCPEs MNOs can offer secured end to end connectivity. For these service offerings, subscription fee can be an ideal way of charging customers.

The third approach discusses virtualizing CPE functions in both operator network and customer premises. This approach of CPE functions virtualization can harness the capacity of existing CPEs and also reuse cloud/DC utilities that an operator already possess. From BM perspective this approach can be effective in case the operator prefer incremental change rather than radical change in the system. Additionally, for operators interested in NFV, this approach could be the initial phase of virtualizing activities needing less financial commitment and mostly building on existing resources.

For the consumer market, some of the MNOs are already selling TV connectivity. We perceive that such functionalities can also be offloaded through virtualization. Besides TV connectivity, MNOs might as well identify newer types of content that can be delivered using CPE interface. One example can be online rental of visual or audio content. Online advertisement, subscription fee and pay-per-view are prospective revenue model for this case. Once MNOs create a wholesome CPE that offers different services using one or minimal number of equipment, it is necessary that structured navigation context is created for better user experience. Using online advertisements on this context layer can be useful to generate revenue.

B. Value Integratedness for Operators Value created for end users through CPEs can be multifold. Currently for different value, operators are providing separate customer premises equipment. As an example, an operator who sells broadband connection and also entertainment package (TV and games) provides additional CPEs for each additional service functionality. When and if one of the service needs upgradation, operator needs to replace the existing equipment, which results as an operator cost that can be avoided. Table 1 shows a set of integrated value which operator can deliver to their customers using virtualization of CPE functions harnessing the benefits of distributed NFV. TABLE I.

Finally, for commerce layer, a well-integrated CPE solution will open up possibility to fit in other third party applications and services. In this way, other service providers can as well provide their solution using the MNO vCPE framework. In this case, revenue model can be billing for the third party application through the MNO core network billing system. In doing so, MNOs can charge a slice from the third party application vendor. C. Feasibility and scalability factors Previous subchapters presented three different business modeling alternatives based on function virtualization location and how overall value can be integrated from MNO perspective using vCPE architecture. In the convergence logic, practitioners need to assess how value creation through integratedness part best suits different value source options.

VALUE INTEGRATEDNESS OF VCPE D-NFV BUSINESS MODELS

Role

Revenue Model

Connectivity

Network connectivity, secured connectivity

Subscription fee

Content

Entertainment, other value added content

Online advertisements, subscription fee, payper-use

Context

Structured navigation for different sort of services

Online advertisements

Commerce

3rd party application & services

Revenue slice from 3rd party

MNOs need to assess their resource competence and capacity in order to choose which style to choose for. Additionally, the feasibility of choosing one model over the other depends on various scalability factors and business model elements feasibility. Accepting Stampfl et. al’s [18] scalability antecedent factors for early business model conceptualization phase, we stress on analyzing each of these case by case. To check the feasibility and scalability of a business model, MNOs need to assess technology scalability. In the case of vCPE through distributed NFV, how much function virtualization is possible from a technological perspective at a certain point is to be answered. This will also initially answer the choice of function virtualization location for the MNO. Additionally, it is likely that there are some CPE functionalities which cannot be relocated from customer site, e.g., end-to-end security, WAN optimization, etc.. Furthermore, some functions might perform better if they are virtualized in customer premises or left in the physical equipment rather than virtualizing in the network. There can also be functions which may degrade because of network constraints if virtualized.

Using the 4C value integratedness logic we project probable value package a vCPE solution can provide to end users. Table 1 depicts a list of value that mobile network operators can bring to their end users using vCPE. This list can serve as a discussion opener to look for further value integration. From the 4C perspective, mobile network operators are currently offering value to users in multiple layers. Since all these services are using separate CPEs, the vCPE concept significantly impact economic objectives by virtualizing and combining multiple CPE service functionalities in less number of equipment.

Organizations need to analyze both cost structure and revenue stream in analyzing economic feasibility. Whichever architecture an MNO chooses, it should provide an optimum

In the connectivity layer, mobile network operators can sell internet connectivity to end users as a service. In this case,

ISBN 978-3-8007-4221-9

41

© VDE VERLAG GMBH, Berlin, Offenbach, Germany

European Wireless 2016

One of the limitation of this study is the lack of grounded business oriented research on NFV and vCPE. However, in turn that can be also be perceived as a novelty of the work.

revenue stream and at the same time new cost generation should be kept minimal. MNOs also need to analyze the Network externalities, which refers to the impact of the business model on the overall network as a whole and the ecosystem around it. Impacts can go beyond one specific MNO’s own network. To avoid unnecessary hassles post-implementation of a business model, MNOs can benefit analyzing different network externalities with importance prior to implementation. Finally, MNOs need to asses User Orientation for the new service. If an MNO is choosing incremental change to the system, users will act in a certain way. On the other hand, if radical changes are brought to the system then end users are likely to accept them in different ways. V.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT This study has been supported by the DIGILE Cyber Trust – Digital cyber security program. REFERENCES [1] NFV White Paper, (2012), Network Functions Virtualisation–Introductory White Paper., SDN and OpenFlow World Congress. October 22–24, 2012, Darmstadt, Germany. [2] NFV, G. (2013). 001: Network Functions Virtualisation (NFV); Use Cases, V 1.1. 1. ETSI, December. [3] Mijumbi, R., Serrat, J., Gorricho, J. L., Bouten, N., De Turck, F., & Boutaba, R. (2015). Network function virtualization: State-of-the-art and research challenges. [in press] [4] Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., & Tucci, C. L. (2005). Clarifying business models: Origins, present, and future of the concept. Communications of the association for Information Systems, 16(1), 1. [5] Onetti, A., Zucchella, A., Jones, M. V., & McDougall-Covin, P. P. (2012). Internationalization, innovation and entrepreneurship: business models for new technology-based firms. Journal of Management & Governance, 16(3), 337-368. [6] Shafer, S. M., Smith, H. J., & Linder, J. C. (2005). The power of business models. Business horizons, 48(3), 199-207. [7] Gittik, Y. (2014). Virtualization at the Customer Edge: D-NFV, vCPE and More. SDN and OpenFlow World Congress 2014. [Online]. http://www.rad.com/12/dnfv-vcpe/33842/ [8] Applegate, L. M. (2001). E-business Models: Making sense of the Internet business landscape. Information technology and the future enterprise: New models for managers, 49-94. [9] Weill, P., & Vitale, M. (2002). What IT infrastructure capabilities are needed to implement e-business models. MIS quarterly Executive, 1(1), 1734. [10] Dubosson‐Torbay, M., Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2002). E‐business model design, classification, and measurements. Thunderbird International Business Review, 44(1), 5-23. [11] Timmers, P. (1998). Business models for electronic markets. Electronic markets, 8(2), 3-8. [12] Morris, M., Schindehutte, M., & Allen, J. (2005). The entrepreneur's business model: toward a unified perspective. Journal of business research, 58(6), 726-735. [13] Osterwalder, A. (2004). The business model ontology: A proposition in a design science approach, Universite de Lausanne, Lusanne. [14] Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation: A Handbook For Visionaries, Game Changers, And Challengers, Yves. (p. 288). Wiley. [15] Ahokangas, P., Juntunen, M., & Myllykoski, J. (2014). Cloud computing and transformation of international e-business models. A Focused Issue on Building New Competences in Dynamic Environments (Research in Competence-Based Management, Volume 7) Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 7, 3-28. [16] Wirtz, B. W., Schilke, O., & Ullrich, S. (2010). Strategic development of business models: implications of the Web 2.0 for creating value on the internet. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 272-290. [17] Casadesus-Masanell, R., & Llanes, G. (2011). Mixed source. Management Science, 57(7), 1212-1230. [18] Stampfl, G., Prügl, R., & Osterloh, V. (2013). An explorative model of business model scalability. International Journal of Product Development, 18(3-4), 226-248.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Business modeling has been an important part in the ICT industry since early 2000s. However, in the recent years practical use of business models have broadened globally. This paper presents an exploratory discussion on a contemporary technical issue using the business model concept for analysis. We present three business modeling options for vCPE functions using D-NFV architecture for MNOs building on the value source openness logic. Additionally, this paper presents a concept of delivering integrated value package to end users using virtualized CPE functions which can replace existing physical CPE commitments. vCPE business models can be designed having function virtualization either in the network or in the customer site alone. Additionally, function virtualization can be done in both locations in a distributed manner. Depending on organizational commitment, MNOs can choose incremental change or radical change. Traditional CPE implementation architecture involves high proprietary hardware involvement. Thus, moving to a model where all CPE functions are virtualized in the operator network will be radical. Such radical change in the network architecture will incur high initial cost. On the other hand, if MNOs choose to move incrementally towards core virtualization, the other models will serve as a good foundation. Currently one customer site might consist numbers of CPEs. In a case where the number of physical CPEs are high, virtualization at customer site model or a distributed model might be more feasible. Alternatively, if the customer base is robust compared to the number of all the CPEs in the network, MNOs can consider putting virtualized functions closer to the core network. This also provides a progress path, as virtualizing in customer site will reduce the overall number of CPE at initial stage and later allow the MNOs to virtualize in the network. This paper provides a ground to see the NFV phenomenon from economic perspective. Also, the use of business model as a basis for analysis opens up avenue for further research in this arena. This has been an initial step to understand the NFV concept using business model. Deeper analysis could be carried as an extension where industry participation will enhance results. Findings of this study suggest that business model can be applied to similar concepts for analysis, such as SDN.

ISBN 978-3-8007-4221-9

42

© VDE VERLAG GMBH, Berlin, Offenbach, Germany