July 10, 2013

Why traditional WAN Optimization is not the right solution for Unified Communications

(Sponsor-Contributed Paper)

WAN optimization solutions mitigate the impact of low network bandwidth and high delays on application performance by using data compression, caching and protocol optimization. None of these techniques applies to UC. Voice and video codecs are already "self-optimized" and non-cacheable. Control protocols are already very efficient. Instant messaging and presence consume little bandwidth...

On the other hand, UC requires stable delay, low jitter and guaranteed bandwidth for very changing real time flows. Just have a look to the broad codec zoo in a Microsoft Lync environment:


Another example of non-compressible and dynamic flow is SVC (Scalable Video Coding), an open-standard extension to H.264. SCV allows systems to adapt to network conditions to enhance the resolution, frame rate and quality of video streams. Used by most of today's video conferencing devices like Polycom, SVC technology enables high-quality video collaboration meetings even if network conditions or client capabilities are limited.

Discrete solutions such as WAN optimization controllers (WOC) and application delivery controllers (ADC) are static in a dynamic environment, point-to point in a peer-to-peer situation, highly specialized in a very diverse world: they are not equipped to manage UC traffic.

Self-adapting in a dynamic environment, designed for any-to-any traffic, controlling the entire application portfolio, WAN Governance coupled to Autonomic Networking solutions provide enterprises with a direct connection between application performance and their business requirements. They recognize that a) UC is not one application but a suite of very different applications and b) that UC must peacefully co-exist with all other applications over the WAN. As a result, UC delivers the benefits promised:

  • UC get a perfect quality;
  • The performance of the other business critical applications is protected against resource intensive UC;
  • UC performance SLAs are managed over the network with clear KPIs presented in consolidated and detailed dashboards.



This is a good article and a very informative one. I am interested more on this, I would like to draw comparison that how much bandwidth for voice/video: traditional WAN optimisation tech VS. New UC.

Can you help me?

[edited for clarity]

Thanks for the question. We are working on some additional Q&A.

Hi Manish, I'm not totally sure to get your point, but let me try an answer - I suggest you look at voice and video flows as already hugely compressed (that's the job of the well designed codec, after all). It is why pure, classical WAN Optimization techniques are definitely not efficient on them. On the other hand, as these flows are critical and energetic, they can suffer from others and harm others as well - Hence they must be tamed and properly controlled with specialized mechanisms. Best regards, Thierry.

Search Webtorials

Get E-News and Notices via Email




I accept Webtorials' Terms and Conditions.

Trending Discussions

See more discussions...

Featured Sponsor Microsites



Please note: By downloading this information, you acknowledge that the sponsor(s) of this information may contact you, providing that they give you the option of opting out of further communications from them concerning this information.  Also, by your downloading this information, you agree that the information is for your personal use only and that this information may not be retransmitted to others or reposted on another web site.  Continuing past this point indicates your acceptance of our terms of use as specified at Terms of Use.

Webtorial® is a registered servicemark of Distributed Networking Associates. The Webtorial logo is a servicemark of Distributed Networking Associates. Copyright 1999-2018, Distributed Networking Associates, Inc.