By Yi Liang

The next-generation network is a high speed packet or cell based network which can provide multiple services such as voice, data, video and multimedia. It has a high bandwidth multi-service core and intelligent edge. It provides quick service delivery and provisioning. Next-generation networks are based on internet technologies including Internet Protocol (IP), Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS), and Session Initiation Protocol (SIP).

Network convergence is one of the key subjects in the next-generation network. The goal is to bring together voice, data and video at the network level, at the system level, at the application level, and at the device level. Convergence in transport means all traffic sharing a common packet-based network which is usually IP based. At the system level, the softswitch will replace the traditional circuit switch. It enables voice communication over the IP backbone. IP PBX and multi-service devices enable the enterprise to access the network easily and reduce cost. More and more applications will be developed to use the new infrastructure. These new applications integrate voice, data and video at the desktop as well as in the server. Examples of this include multimedia conferencing, multimedia messaging etc.

The IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) is a standardized NGN architecture originally developed by the 3G Partnership Project (3GPP). It defines a generic architecture that offers VoIP and other multimedia services within wireless and wireline infrastructures. The IMS architecture is divided into three layers: service (application), control and transport (access). Following diagram is a simplified view of the layered architecture of IMS. Major vendors like Ericsson, Lucent, Nortel and Siemens have made substantial investment in IMS software. There are a lot of challenges and also a lot of opportunities in this technology evolution process.

By Paul Gasparro

The economic downturn in the U.S. has hit every industry including high tech. Sun Microsystems (18% of workforce), Teradyne (5% of workforce), National Semiconductor (330 people), and Applied Materials (1,800 people). The list goes on in the telecom ecosystem that MapleWorks is part of. Gigacom identified dramatic cuts at Nokia (600), Motorola (3,000), and Nortel (10% of its work force).

In spite of the layoffs, tech companies are under pressure to get products to market with reduced staffs. How does the CEO address this issue? The answer is not to nibble at the problem, but to take drastic actions. The aggressive action will create an environment of rethinking the going forward model. So instead of cutting 10% or even 20%, set a plan to cut by 30% or 40%.

With this plan in place, the next move is to take advantage of Canada's excellent telecom R&D skills and cost advantages. Working with MapleWorks gives you access to the best development resources available in the world (see Larry Dignan's report on Gartner findings) at a cost reduction of up to 40% from the US resources, and on the same continent.

An experienced engineer in the US will cost a company about $200K (salary, benefits, overhead) annually. This means that a staff of 20 represents a $4M fixed expense. The company could reduce the staff by 75%, and add 15 people in Canada at a cost of about $90K per person annually. The new expense rate will be $2.4M, or about 40% less. The quality and efficiency of the staff will not suffer. Future staff additions can be made at MapleWorks without losing a beat from the development perspective, and without investing in the capital associated with typical US hiring.

(Paul Gasparro is Co-founder and Vice President of Business Development for MapleWorks – the smart choice for on-shore software development.)

Private companies are also feeling the hatchet. The October 21, 2008 edition of VentureWire Alert identified a whole batch of layoffs. Online video company Heavy Inc.cut 14% of its staff, online wiki provider Wikia Inc. has laid off about than 10% of its staff in a "restructuring," and other companies to announce layoffs in recent days include Hi5 Networks Inc., Pandora Media Inc., SearchMe Inc., Zillow.com, Zivity Inc., AdBrite Inc., Jive Software Inc., Redfin Corp., and Seesmic Inc. These companies are under pressure to reduce burn rates and preserve cash. The prospects of getting more are poor.

The pressure is being applied as Venture Capitalists are being pressured by their limited partners to conserve cash. These limited partners are in many cases forced to rethink their high risk investment strategy as their portfolios dwindle with the sinking of the stock markets. Hence they are hedging on their commitments to fund the VC's, or in some extreme cases trying to recover previously committed funds. VCs have adopted a combat field position. Save the bleeding companies with a reasonable chance of survival, let the dying companies die, and let the walking wounded stay in pain. This philosophy was best articulated at a Sequoia Capital at a now well-documented meeting with all its portfolio companies on Oct. 7 to warn them that the "good times" were over.

By David Zinman

To expedite development and quality assurance cycles, many software projects incorporate automated testing. Automation of testing can greatly reduce phase times and reduce costs for the any outsourced or internal project. By analyzing the way test automation is done, Mapleworks has developed a solution called Mapleworks Automated Testing System or MATS.

What is required from a test automation system?

1. The ability to run different types of tests:
   • Unit testing
   • Full system testing
   • Integration testing
   • Regression testing
   • Performance testing
2. Consistency and reliability
3. Observable detailed results with comparison ability
4. Flexibility – test and test suites

At Mapleworks we’ve found some practical problems with test automation. Take the case of a long and involved test script. These types of scripts can be recorded by a test platform or created manually with a sustained effort. If an essential piece of functionality has to be modified, then the script must be re-recorded or re-factored in some way. And say this modification is applicable to several different places in the delivery, the cost rises exponentially to the quality assurance cycles.

At Mapleworks, we have designed a novel approach to solving this problem. Using the TestComplete platform, we have added an abstraction layer that takes an arbitrary label and points it to each testable object. This de-couples the test script and testing engine from the tested program.

What we can now do is record an intricate test procedure, convert it to a MATS (Mapleworks Automation Test System) script and create the mapping file for the testable components.

An added benefit from this architecture is that the QA team can write tests before the project is completed. All that is required to run testing suites is the mapping file to be filled in with the actual component internal name which can be obtained using the TestComplete ‘map object from screen’ tool.

The mapping syntax is straightforward: an arbitrary descriptive name, its object type (button, list, etc), and its component internal name which is implementation specific.

Sample Component Definition File:

Template Editor|Catalogs, Tab,.WinFormsObject('WindowDockingArea', '', 3).Pane.Panes.item[1]

Template Editor|Catalogs|=Catalogs|,Copy,WinFormsObject('TemplateEditorFramework'). WinFormsObject('splitContainer1').WinFormsObject('SplitterPanel', '', 1).WinFormsObject('Navigation'). WinFormsObject('CatalogTab').WinFormsObject('CatalogFramework').WinFormsObject('tableLayoutPanel11')=WinFormsObject('FormFramework').WinFormsObject('mainContent').WinFormsObject('caiTableLayoutPanel1').WinFOrmsObject('panel').WinFormsObject('CatalogFramework').WinFormsObject('tableLayoutPanel11')

Template Editor|Firewall and QoS|Port Triggering|Table|Service,Table, WinFormsObject('TemplateEditorFramework').WinFormsObject('splitContainer1').WinFormsObject('SplitterPanel', '', 2). WinFormsObject('ContentPanel').WinFormsObject('PortTriggering').WinFormsObject('panel1').WinFormsObject('ports').WinFormsObject('Port', '', %row%+3)

The test script has a similar syntax: the arbitrary descriptive name, an action, and any optional parameters.

Sample Test:

Test=Set Service in Port Trigger to ‘aci’ using drag and drop

Template Editor|Catalogs,Click Template Editor|Catalogs|Services|Tree|TCP,Click

Template Editor|Catalogs|Services|Tree|TCP|,Find,aci

Template Editor|Catalogs|Services|Tree|TCP|%currentEntry%,Click

Template Editor|Catalogs|Services|Tree|TCP|%currentEntry%,Drag, Template Editor|Firewall and QoS|Port Triggering|Table|0|Service

Mats simplifies testing since creating tests does not require programming just simple scripting, the tests are flexible to most application changes, and developers only need modify the script to update, create, and run tests that support changed functionality/implementation.

What can be tested?

• Files
• dBs (via ADO)
• Native Windows applications
• Web applications
• Visual properties of controls (fonts, colors etc.)
• Input/output text (variable text such as user names and fixed text such as prompts for multi-lingual applications)

 Here is what the architecture looks like:

Notice that TestComplete is not required to run the tests, the much cheaper TestExecute is all that is needed. At least one instance of TestComplete is required however to record any scripts.

Benefits

There are several advantages that MATS gives to the testing procedure. The use of arbitrary component names permit implementation to be changed without changing tests. Tests are easier to create since they can be written by testers in simple script before the application is available. Testing can easily be performed by developers before committing changes. This assures addition problems are not introduced.

What started as a convenient and cost effective way for an us to offer a value added service has become a product in its own right. We have found customers who are interested in adding this novel approach to automated testing to their QA procedures as a way to cut costs, and expedite testing cycles.

On-shore Versus Offshore Outsourcing – Canada’s on the Ball with Top Rating – Better than India

 By Paul Gasparro

 ZDNet’s Larry Digman covered a report on October 16th rating countries around the globe for off-shore outsourcing. The rating was based on a series of 10 metrics ranging from Language skills and Labor Pool, to Cultural Compatibility and IP Security. Canada was overall far and above any other location, including India. The only two areas that Canada did not rate Very Good or Excellent was Government Support and Cost.

 In the case of Government Support, I do not believe that Gartner understands the depth and breadth of Canada’s Scientific Research and Experimental Development (SR&ED) program. This program provides cash and tax incentives for the development of intellectual property (IP) in Canada.

 I believe, particularly with the improvements in size of the grants, and administration of the claims, that the SR&ED program is very good. Certainly it could be improved, but it does serve to encourage the development of IP, and hence serves to provide an incentive for companies like MapleWorks to do outsourcing development work in Canada.

 As far as cost, you get what you pay for. Doing nearshore outsourcing development in Canada means doing it once, not two or three times. Even if the cost of labor is higher (yet significantly lower than the U.S.), the efficiency and effectiveness of the development team means net cost is lower. In addition to improved development efficiency, the labor pool is very experienced and does not require extensive management by the home team. So overhead is reduced.

 It is worth looking at the Gartner charts and drawing your own conclusions. I believe you will reach the same one that I share. Canada trumps all for your next outsourcing project, and MapleWorks trumps all in North America as the choice for your next outsourced network communications project. Contact us and let’s discuss your plans.

 (Paul Gasparro is Co-founder and Vice President of Business Development for MapleWorks – the smart choice for on-shore software development.) 

By David Zinman

Software programming can be a solitary or collaborative effort. Similarly, so is creating music. The idea for both can be a singular endeavor, but it most often takes a combined effort to reach the finish. This similarity is described in the book by Andrew Johnston and Chris S. Johnson "Extreme Programming: A More Musical Approach to Software Development?" where they hypothesize on the resemblance between musical and software development environments:

The characterization of software development as a craft rather than an engineering discipline has been proposed recently and it is felt that by considering the similarities and differences between the working and learning environments of musicians and developers that some further weight can be given to calls for a more collaborative approach to software development.

The debate that writing software code is an art has been around almost since coders have existed. I would not go so far as to say anything I have coded is "artistic" but some of the novel ideas that come from very focused coding fit with the idea of creating a piece of music.

Music is the organization of sounds with some degree of rhythm, melody, and harmony. I would argue that harmony should not be included in this definition since even a single voice is considered music where no harmony is present. 

But the important idea in this definition is organization: it is the idea of organization and patterns that is common to both music and software. Design patterns are now an integral part of software development. A design pattern is a general reusable solution to a commonly occurring problem in software design. The most famous pattern in music is probably the opening sequence of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony (G G G E-flat). Beethoven repeats this pattern several times in the movement in several variations. Once we understand the pattern of a particular piece, be it coded or musical, we are well on our way to a solution.

Jonathon Kohl explains the tension/resolution that makes up music is applicable in software testing. I would go further and say that it also applies to software coding. There is the intangible feeling of tension when an algorithm is in development, and the feeling of relief upon its successful resolution. For a great example of tension/resolution in music listen to Lenny Kravitz' Mr. Cabdriver. 

I would like to think that we should not be so pragmatic as to look at software development as being"solving a problem in order to start creating." 

It doesn't really matter though because when I am done I put on the headphones and crank some Zeppelin. Anybody want to jam?