What Should Enterprises Be Focusing on When Thinking About eSIM, SGP.32, and Cellular Connectivity Partners

By Phil Sealy | 4Q 2024 | IN-7637

Registered users can unlock up to five pieces of premium content each month.

Log in or register to unlock this Insight.

Internet of Things (IoT) cellular connectivity can mean different things to different enterprises, which can translate into different connectivity priorities and strategies. The new SGP.32 specification is designed with this in mind, considering device longevity, data consumption levels, device location/mobility, level of security, latency requirements, device real estate, and power consumption-all areas that can differ depending on the IoT application in question.

As the SGP.32 specification nears full ratification and launch, what will SGP.32 mean for enterprises, what should they be focused on, and how should enterprises be reshaping their connectivity strategies?

There are a host of new benefits that SGP.32 will enable. SGP.32 has been built to address the complexities encountered with SGP.02, purpose-built to address specific pain points that the IoT market faces as it relates to the Embedded Subscriber Identity Module (eSIM). Although near impossible to mention all the benefits, the bullet points below present some of the most prominent advantages:

• SGP.32 will help reduce complex and time-consuming integration processes to onboard multiple operators, via profile downloads remotely accessed from existing Subscription Manager Data Preparation Plus (SM-DP+) infrastructure.
• Reduce the barriers related to integration between Subscription Manager Secure Routing (SMSR) and Subscription Manager Data Preparation (SMDP) by enabling communication between any IoT/Machine-to-Machine (M2M) device and an SM-DP+, meaning no pre-integration is required.
• Reduce the need to activate large fleets of devices manually, which can also be fragmented in terms of location through automation processes, thanks to bulk Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) management.
• Remove the need to physically replace SIMs upon operator switch and provide a more competitive environment, not constrained by additional costs associated with physical SIM change.
• The current SGP.02 specification requires and defines profile downloads via either Short Message Service (SMS) or Hypertext Transfer Protocol Secure (HTTPS) connections. Currently, User Interface (UI) and network-constrained devices cannot support non-SMS approaches, which make up a large proportion of the current and future IoT market. SGP.32 will address this issue.
• The specification has been designed with Low-Power Wide Area Networks (LPWANs) in mind, unlocking the broader cellular IoT market.
• SGP.32 will allow enterprises to realize global expansion ambitions, through out-of-the-box connectivity and use of Remote SIM Provisioning (RSP) to ensure compliance with regional connectivity regulations.

IoT connectivity can mean different things to different enterprises, translating into different connectivity priorities and strategies.

SGP.32 is the common denominator as it relates to IoT eSIM enablement. Regardless of connectivity priorities and requirements, it is this specification that will become the foundation from which IoT cellular connectivity is realized. Although it is clear that the cellular IoT market will adopt eSIM and SGP.32 at scale, there are other key considerations that enterprises need be thinking about when looking to select a cellular connectivity partner:

• Enterprises must identify what their specific IoT digitization requirements and priorities are, and then map these to their connectivity partners' solutions.
• Connectivity platforms are much more than a cellular enablement tool; therefore, it will no longer be a case of connect and forget. They are designed with customization in mind with the potential for intelligence to be applied at the back end to help further optimize and automate processes.
• IoT devices can be out in the field for decades. Enterprises need to ensure that they are partnering with a trusted and reliable connectivity partner that has demonstrated itself as a longstanding, reliable source for cellular service delivery, while also proving that it is aligned with the latest standardization developments to ensure a level of future-proofing.
• Alongside partnering with a trusted and proven connectivity partner, enterprises should also take a close look at other capabilities, particularly their ability to support eSIM at the point of device assembly, manufacture, or distribution via a zero-touch approach further supported by orchestration capabilities.
• Security should be at the forefront of all eSIM deployment strategies. Security and eSIM are intertwined and the use of a physical tamper-resistant piece of hardware and/or containerized solutions within a processor (Integrated SIM (iUICC)) means that security can be integrated and implemented at the device design phase.
• eSIM connectivity platforms are agnostic and not tied to the form factor used within devices. Regardless of which form factor is used in a device (Embedded Universal Integrated Circuit Card (eUICC), iUICC, etc.), partners should be able to support all form factors to allow a level of choice flexibility and enable the use of a form factor that is most convenient for the IoT device in question.
• SGP.32 should form part of any new tender process and if deploying before the release of SGP.32, then a pathway/timeline toward the new specification should be clearly outlined.
• eSIM should not be viewed as a product but should be seen as a service offering. At the heart of RSP and lifecycle management capabilities are software platforms that allow the remote management of fleets of IoT devices. When weighing options, it is important to consider the functionality, ease of use, and UI of eSIM connectivity platforms.
• Roaming is becoming increasingly difficult, complex, and costly to enable. Regional regulatory requirements are further compounding the situation, but SGP.32 can break down those barriers, enabling compliance with local regulation, and reducing risk and implementation complexities.