t improved productivity, from both user operations and the ICT staff. Another bene- fit is easier administration of the network. Again, you have a single network infra- structure and a single system that needs to be administered versus a number of separate platforms and networks consolidating the network management systems. However, the real value in and the real argument for convergence lies in the applications. There are many synergies between converged transport, IP telephony, and converged applications. As functions such as instant messaging, presence, video communications, and streaming media merge with IP telephony, it becomes something greater than a cheaper voice solution: It becomes an integrated applica- tion. When you have an application that integrates voice, data, video, and stream- ing media, you most certainly require converged transport. Regulatory Effects on Convergence While we can achieve advances in technology very rapidly, what tends to delay their deployment is both a human factor and a political factor: We have to resolve the regulatory issues that surround the argument for convergence. The integration of all communication modes under the control of IP has a powerful impact on regulatory models. Regulation has historically been quite dif- ferent for various parts of the industry (e.g., voice versus broadcast versus cable). The way our regulatory system and regulations have been structured and still cur- Next-Generation Networks and Convergence rently operate is that they are largely based on a service definition. If you offer tele- phone service, telephone regulations apply. Cable TV regulations apply if you offer cable TV service. But IP and converged networks part with the vertical model tradi- tionally used in regulation. How do we regulate within a converged network? One idea considers a horizontal model, whereby regulations would be applied to the layers of activity versus the service definition. However, this is an area very much under hot debate, and ideas vary around the world. The 