[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: VOIP Peering Questions
At 08:37 PM 6/1/2004, Dan Wing wrote:
> Like Duh :-) If the call is IP end to end why would there be a
> per minute billing model?
I know you intended that as a rhetorical question, but the reason
is scaracity. If there is a scarce resource:
Wing-San !!! so to answer your proper question what is the scarce
resource.. obviously PSTN termination is a scarce resource however
artificially defined that is by regulation.
* ports on a PSTN switch
granted
* water, gasoline, natural gas
well humm .. you are arguing the usage based model here which for SMPT and
HTTP and FTP applications on IP has been proven not to
work. Transit-Peering is more cost efficient then reciprocal comp any day
of the week.
* IP bandwidth
* IP bandwidth of quality sufficient for realtime voice or
video communications
bandwidth for VOIP is IMHO trival ..bandwidth for Video is not ergo buy
more bandwidth. If we could only get Golbal IP Sound CODEC adopted more
globally .. Its the default in SKYPE .
* ports on a DSLAM
dropping on a cost basis by the hour if my Chinese friends are accurate.
then it's legitimate to bill (or tax) for that resource *in some manner*.
PSTN resources yes... as I have pointed out to you several times the
margins on DMS 500 or 5ESS are at least equal to Cisco 12000.. as
unbelievable at that may be and due to the hollywood accounting so
prelevent in the telecom industry. Its amazing how many times those assets
can be depreciated.
The difficulty is in identifying what resources are, in fact, scarce and
will remain so, and building a business around it. Everything points to IP
bandwidth being a non-scarce resource, but we aren't _quite_ to having
everything point to quality IP bandwidth being a non-scare resource.
Humm .. there we may differ ..what is "quality IP bandwidth" what you
might say is best efforts..I could certainly argue that bandwidth expansion
is easy so the argument you make is moot The Japanese YahooBB in particular
have proven that as well as FREE.FR ..the opposite view is that carriers
want to artificially restrict bandwidth or muck with the packets in order
to charge a price differential for QoS I dont think that is going to fly
too far tthough that is a view popular in Cable circles.
But who knows ..
> If the call must terminate on the PSTN then
> yes there is a legitimate reason for a "billling event"
...
-d
--
To unsubscribe send a message to voip-peering-request@psg.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
An archive is at <http://psg.com/lists/voip-peering/>.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives
NeuStar Inc.
46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166
sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org sip:57141@fwd.pulver.com
ENUM +87810-13313-31331
PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683, Fax: +1 815.333.1237
<mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz>
<http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
--
To unsubscribe send a message to voip-peering-request@psg.com with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
An archive is at <http://psg.com/lists/voip-peering/>.