| Updated: Tue, Jun 13, 2006 11:53 am PDT | About | Feedback | Site Map |
|
Welcome, Guest
| Login
| Sign Up
| About Voiponder
Voiponder is a community hub for Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) |
|
NOTICE: Voiponder is currently undergoing upgrade/expansion. Our apologies for the temporary slow activity on the site.
TOPICS
- • Regulation & Policies
- • Business Strategies
- • Technologies
- • Security
- • Legal Issues
- • Exploring Frontlines
MOST ACTIVE
- Jon Arnold
- Susan Crawford
- Irwin Lazar
- Brough Turner
- Alec Saunders
- Martin Geddes
- Geoff Huston
- David Isenberg
- James Enck
- Jack
- Scott Marcus
- Kevin Werbach
- Bob Frankston
- Brad Templeton
- Michael Geist
- Frank Paynter
- Peter Thermos
- James Seng
- Paul Mockapetris
- Aswath Rao
ABOUT VOIPONDER
- » Background
- » Internal Blog
- » Site Map
- » Contact
|
Vonage Canada Challenges Dual-Tiered InternetMar 07, 2006
Is Comcast Impairing Vonage?Mar 06, 2006
Old New Telco ThinkingMar 06, 2006
VoIP Explosion in CABLEFeb 28, 2006 The number of U.S. VoIP users increased by 900,000 to 4.5 million in the last quarter of 2005, according to a new report by Telegeography. The increase represented a jump of 25 percent over the previous quarter, and of 248 percent compared to the same quarter in 2004. Time Warner Cable and Vonage were key drivers of the growth, as they have been in the past. Time Warner added 248,000 subscribers in Q4, an increase of 29 percent over Q3. ›››
VoIP Media Coverage of NoteFeb 24, 2006
Former FCC Chairman Powell Says Net Neutrality 'Doing Great' - Now, Here's the Reality!Feb 23, 2006 Yesterday Networking Pipeline reported that former FCC chairman Michael Powell thinks that Net Neutrality is 'Doing Great'. Of course, this is the same person who was also reported as saying that we have too much choice in the media. Yes, there are people who thought we were all better off when we only had three networks to choose from. Sometimes I think there is a fine line between nostalgia and dementia. ›››
Regulation of VoIP ServicesFeb 22, 2006 Ofcom has published a considerable consultation paper for its "approach to regulating voice telephony services in the light of new technological developments". Below is the introductory excerpt from the document: "...Traditional telephone services have existed for over 100 years. However, changes are underway that could significantly affect the way voice services are provided in the future. In particular, Voice over Internet Protocol ("VoIP") services change the way voice services are delivered..." ›››
PC Magazine on VoIP: Many Paths to FollowFeb 22, 2006
Examining the Reality of ConvergenceFeb 21, 2006
Can Vonage Make a $Billion in Revenue?Feb 20, 2006
VoIP Security FUDFeb 18, 2006
VoIP's Threadbare New ClothesFeb 18, 2006 Om has burnt the midnight oil analyzing Vonage's S-1 filing, coming to the conclusion that, while churn may not be as ugly as people thought, it's still cause for concern, and apparently intensifying. His point at the end about definitions is particularly good, as excluding cancellations in the first 30-days is undoubtedly flattering to the numbers. The net present value of Vonage's lifetime customer revenues is an issue which VoIP-watchers have long speculated about with trepidation -- what if marketing spending, churn, and price competition combined to form a toxic soup which fatally poisoned the economic proposition for access-independent VoIP? ›››
U.S. VoIP and Broadband Policy: Today's Debate is Off the Mark!Feb 17, 2006
Remarkable LeverageFeb 17, 2006
ChangeWave's Residential VoIP Research Usage Update - Part IIFeb 17, 2006
|
|
NEWS BRIEFS |
FEATURED BLOGS |
This morning Vonage Canada filed a request with the CRTC to challenge Shaw Cable's $10 "quality of service enhancement fee" for subscribers wishing to sign up for competing VoIP services over their cable lines. Folks, this is a real-life case showdown about net neutrality, and it's the first direct challenge I've seen. The issue is not as heated here in Canada, but the scenerio is no different. Now, the CRTC is being put on the spot to respond in the absence of any U.S. precedents. The FCC has conducted hearings on this bedrock issue, but decisions have not yet been rendered. 
On the one hand, the big telcos are chanting the mantram, "We shall not block, impair or degrade any content, service or application." On the other hand, they're saying, "There's no problem. We don't need a law until there's a problem." Well, now. Mitch Shapiro over at IP & Democracy, points to Russell Shaw's post that says: "I have been noticing a growing number of posts in which many Vonage users and Vonage Forum Members have been complaining about the quality of Vonage calls over Comcast broadband connections..." 
Ahh, so the telecom incumbents have come up with a "new" idea for the Internet -- 
If there is one word in the telecommunications that has suffered from over-abuse for many years now, it's convergence. The term has been liberally applied to each successive generation of communications technology for their supposed ability to solve a myriad of service delivery problems within a single unifying converged carriage and service delivery solution. Unfortunately, the underlying reality has always been markedly different from these wondrous promises, and we continue to see an industry that deploys a plethora of service delivery platforms and an equally diverse collection of associated switching and service delivery technologies. One can't help but wonder at the collective gullibility of an industry that continues to herald the convergent attributes of each new generation of communications technology, while at the same time being forced to admit that previous convergent promises have never been realized. 
Jon Arnold's been digging through some 
I'm continually amazed by the amount of FUD being spread with regard to VoIP security threats. People...the sky is not falling. VoIP isn't e-mail. It isn't implemented like e-mail, it won't be implemented like e-mail (maybe "it shouldn't be implemented like e-mail" is a more appropriate statement). Following best security practices will ensure at least a level of security equivalent to current TDM systems. Best FUD I've heard this week: VoIP is insecure because you can simply put a bridge on an ethernet line and capture a stream. Hey, has anyone ever heard of alligator clips? 
Despite rather rapid growth in broadband access, the U.S. is falling further and further behind other countries -- we're now ranked #16 in the world. What's slowing the U.S. down? Two threads dominate U.S. broadband policy debate today. The first focuses on traditional telecom regulation -- reciprocal compensation, universal service, e911, and CALEA (wiretap capabilities). The second focuses on "Internet freedoms," i.e., guarantees that your broadband access provider won't block or inhibit specific applications like VoIP. 
One of the big problems with the enormously problematic E911 Order is that it required VoIP providers to hook into the legacy E911 system controlled by the Baby Bells without mandating that the Bells allow the VoIP guys to connect. This was a tailor-made holdup situation for what was already an enormous holdup. (Remember that it took the wireless industry more than ten years to figure out how to work with the legacy E911 world, but the FCC only gave the VoIP companies a few months.) The Bells had full authority to give the appearance of being helpful while slowly dragging their feet and pushing the VoIP providers (their competitors) closer and closer to a deadline that (initially at least) was supposed to trigger mass cut-offs of VoIP customers for whom E911 service wasn't available. |
Copyright © 2006 Iomemo, Inc.
All rights reserved unless where otherwise noted.
Home | News | Backgrounders | Archives | RSS Feeds | Feedback About Voiponder | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Codes of Conduct |
 DNS Powered by UltraDNS |
 Managed Hosting by NetNation |
Local Time: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 05:47 AM PDT - Page Load: 0.3569 Sec.