Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
As IEEE 802.11 matures and other wireless access technologies are introduced (such as IEEE 802.16e), the emergence of Internet Protocol as a de facto standard for transport allows users to have increasing choice about their mobile access. This effect will not only increase competition amongst cellular network providers it will also increase competition with other stakeholders and operators in the mobile services value chain. Where conflicts of interest arise, or interactions that are not adequately supported by the business model there can be a 'tussle' between the parties. The concept of tussle, as described by Clark et al, is a symptom of inflexibility within the network and is a friction caused when stakeholders vie against each other to pursue their objectives. In this paper we argue that the opening of wireless access service provision must be managed effectively to channel the effects of tussle. We propose that an approach based on an open market can effectively provide telecommunications services to the benefit of incumbent operators and new market entrants. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2009 | 10.1109/VETECF.2009.5378961 | Vehicular Technology Conference Fall |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
IP networks,cellular radio,radio access networks,wireless LAN,IEEE 802.11,IEEE 802.16,Internet Protocol,WiMax,cellular network providers,digital marketplace,mobile access,mobile services,next generation wireless networks,telecommunications services,tussle concept,wireless access service provision,wireless access technology,wireless local area network | Internet Protocol,De facto standard,Wireless network,Wireless,Telecommunications,Open market operation,Computer security,Computer science,Computer network,Business model,Cellular network,Telecommunications service | Conference |
ISSN | ISBN | Citations |
1090-3038 E-ISBN : 978-1-4244-2515-0 | 978-1-4244-2515-0 | 1 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.38 | 5 | 3 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| John Bush | 1 | 1 | 0.38 |
| James Irvine | 2 | 69 | 12.32 |
| John Dunlop | 3 | 1 | 0.72 |