application? It is generally agreed that mobile providers will not build 3G networks just to turn themselves into mobile ISPs. One way or another, they want to make money from the value-added services 3G technologies enable. They will also want to manage the quality of the services delivered, track user activity for customer profiling, and be able to bill multiple parties for complex sessions with multiple billing parameters. In addition, if the mobile environment is IP-based, mobile providers will have to introduce many new network management provisioning, and policy management applications into their OSS platforms. In many cases, such applications simply do not exist because no one really knows what their requirements will be. Mobile operators hope for flexible billing and provisioning applications that adjust to any new technology or service that pops up. They are likely to be dependent on equipment vendors' proprietary OSSs and other technology-specific components until the OSS vendor market can catch up. The need for flexibility and the likelihood that mobile providers will increase the number of diverse systems they must maintain places a greater premium on integration strategies and technologies in mobile environments - an area in which they have not excelled traditionally. A related problem mobile IICs will face that affects OSS are a lack of common models and definitions. Because the network technologies and OSS to support them are (or will be) new, there has not been any work done to come up with common definitions or data models for doing things like defining services, as there has in other OSS areas. If every mobile IIC does its own thing, those looking to unbundle mobile services will again face regional variations in their eBusiness processes. Models certainly exist for the mobile industry to follow, but there is no widespread agreement yet that settles this issue. A serious issue that could affect OSS is the increased infrastructure costs associated with 3G networks. This cost is attached not only 