dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
1168
share rss forum feed

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..

1 recommendation

(Ooma) Voice Communications Exchange (VCXC)

I don't see an Ooma option anymore, guess there aren't enough posts about it to merit the space.

Today I was reading news stories, and this crossed my path - »www.ucstrategies.com/unified-com···era.aspx

It indicates AT&T plans to exit traditional copper and go all VOIP in the next few years (a 14 billion dollar investment).

In the article it indicates AT&T, Ooma and other VOIP providers are members of the Voice Communication Exchange Committee (VCXC) - »vcxc.org/ which seems to be setting rules and possibly rates for VOIP interconnect without PSTN.

One aspect of the organization, aside from transitioning from PSTN to VOIP interconnect, is establishment of a universal VOIP HD standard. A document describing some of this work is here - »vcxc.org/documents/HDICRev2.3.pdf

I was surprised to see the member company list, as it seems Ooma would be a bit smallish to be a member. Members as of June 15th this year were - 3 UK, 8X8, Alcatel-Lucent, ,AT&T, AudioCodes, Avaya, Broadcom, Broadsoft, CableLabs, Cablevision, Cisco, Cox Communications, DECT Forum, Deutsche Telekom, Dialogic, Dolby Labs, Ericsson, Gigaset USA, Global IP Solutions, Google, Huawei, Time Warner, Neutral Tandem, NTT, Ooma, Orange, Polycom, PGI, Qualcomm, RADVISION, Samsung, Skype, Snom, Telstra, Uniden, Unisys, Verizon, Verizon Business, Vivox, VoiceAge, WydeVoice, Xconnect, and ZipDX
--
"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand." - Milton Friedman"


josephf

join:2009-04-26
Reviews:
·VoicePulse

said by pandora:

It indicates AT&T plans to exit traditional copper and go all VOIP in the next few years (a 14 billion dollar investment).

It is highly unlikely AT&T will ever completely exit traditional copper (which, by the way, dates back to Alexander Grahm Bell, in the 1800's, when the Bell System was first created) unless they go all wireless. The "last mile" of customer wiring for almost all AT&T wirelines are with copper and AT&T has no plans to change that. (Verizon is actually ahead of AT&T, as its FIOS customers have no copper. But even AT&T's U-verse uses copper for the last mile.)


mgraves1
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Houston, TX
reply to pandora

Yes, there was a related function last week in the DC area. It was called the Voice Innovation Summit.

»www.ustelecom.org/events-educati···mit-2012

Daniel Berninger, founder, VCXC was the chair. Ooma did not appear to be presenting.

Much of the talk of the death of the PSTN is really about TDM networks, regulatory regimes and business models.
--
Michael Graves
Houston TX
»www.mgraves.org



Trev
IP Telephony Addict
Premium
join:2009-06-29
Victoria, BC
kudos:6
reply to pandora

What are the costs and main criteria for VCX membership?
VCX membership costs $10,000 USD per month independent of company revenue. The VCXC actively seeks members representing all areas of the world as well as all service provider categories without regard to the traditional definitions of telephone companies. VCXC serves companies offering a range of end user communication services in either a retail or wholesale capacity.

Well they sure won't get "all service provider categories" at that cost.
--
Wondering what I do? Find out at »www.digitalcon.ca
Get your Obihai ATA in Canada.

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..
reply to mgraves1

said by mgraves1:

Much of the talk of the death of the PSTN is really about TDM networks, regulatory regimes and business models.

Maybe, I see mention at AT&T of Project Velocity IP (VIP). Which seems to be a plan to migrate at least 75% of wired customers to VOIP in the next few years, the rest are to be moved to LTE.

You can read about it here - »www.att.com/Common/about_us/file···on_c.pdf in the above on page 14 -

Extend 4G LTE build to 300M POPs by end of 2014
High speed IP broadband to 75% of wireline customer locations
Proactively light up fiber to an additional 1Mbusiness locations
Transition to wired + wireless IP

The above is AT&T's stated goal on their website as of November 7, 2012.
--
"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand." - Milton Friedman"

PX Eliezer7
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms

1 edit
reply to Trev

said by Trev:

What are the costs and main criteria for VCX membership?
VCX membership costs $10,000 USD per month independent of company revenue. The VCXC actively seeks members representing all areas of the world as well as all service provider categories without regard to the traditional definitions of telephone companies. VCXC serves companies offering a range of end user communication services in either a retail or wholesale capacity.

Well they sure won't get "all service provider categories" at that cost.

What on earth do you get for $ 10,000 a month?

Because 10,000 a month times 12 months times about 45 members is over 5 million dollars.

Typical corporate waste.

So they rent an office, make a fancy website, hire some pretty secretaries....

Five million dollars!

Ah, well, I see that Daniel Berninger is involved.

The collaboration FWIW could have been done for free using software from OpenOffice and a web service like Dropbox....

Having the same price for tiny companies, medium companies, and huge companies, is also poor policy. As was said, it will keep out two types of companies: those that are smaller but still potentially important, and those that spend their money prudently.

I see that companies like Comcast, Neustar, and CenturyLink were smart enough to avoid this boondoggle. [CenturyLink is the 3rd largest POTS company in the US].

TelCordia was apparently smart also, although now they'll come in as part of their new owners Ericsson.

EDIT: As noted below by Nitzan: Vonage, MagicJack/VocalTec, Bandwidth.com, and Level-3 also are smart enough to save their money.

--------------------------------

Following the Manhattan storm disaster, Verizon has decided to massively start replacing copper wire with fiber.

And they didn't need this 5 million dollar a year committee to decide that for them.

nitzan
Premium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:8

1 recommendation

reply to pandora

As everything else, this is all about critical mass - if enough carriers adopt these standards to make most calls go through it, it has a chance of succeeding. It's interesting to see CLECs like Level 3 and Bandwidth.com absent from the list, as well as some of the largest "small" providers like Vonage and MagicJack. $10k is a steep price and at least so far I don't think you actually get anything from it other than being part of the discussion. Also interesting that it's set as a "non-profit organization" yet the price tag is so high - I guess it's not making a profit after you pay Daniel Berninger, lol...


nonymous
Premium
join:2003-09-08
Glendale, AZ
reply to pandora

Verizon and ATT would probably buy into any group if it was cheap enough just on the outside chance it would matter in the future. Cost of buying the standards for themselves. Centurylink is a mismash of companies yet happy where they are at. Do enough small and large business to be happy and will follow most standards and leaders happilyhappily. They will figure out a way to profit.
Level3 and Bandwidth well not necessarily leaders but not a true follower. If it turns out to matter will make themselves known later. Just not self important enough to buy into any committee just because. Plus as long as they can go to a major manufacturer and buy equipment made to the new standard who cares.

Now why doesn't my small VOIP provider buy into this Ooma did. I see this as a failure on Future9 VOIP.ms Callcentric and all others who do not immediately buy into this and come up with a standard. Really time to move to Ooma even though missed out on the totally free deal.


gweidenh

join:2002-05-18
Houston, TX
kudos:3
reply to nitzan

Bandwidth.com and Verizon are actually leading this effort. We talked about this a year ago...

»gigaom.com/2011/01/18/bandwidth-···ainable/


nitzan
Premium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:8

I could be mistaken, but it seems like the Verizon-Bandwidth.com deal was over PSTN calls.



jimk
Premium
join:2006-04-15
Raleigh, NC
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·voip.ms
reply to josephf

said by josephf:

said by pandora:

It indicates AT&T plans to exit traditional copper and go all VOIP in the next few years (a 14 billion dollar investment).

It is highly unlikely AT&T will ever completely exit traditional copper (which, by the way, dates back to Alexander Grahm Bell, in the 1800's, when the Bell System was first created) unless they go all wireless. The "last mile" of customer wiring for almost all AT&T wirelines are with copper and AT&T has no plans to change that. (Verizon is actually ahead of AT&T, as its FIOS customers have no copper. But even AT&T's U-verse uses copper for the last mile.)

You might still have traditional copper phone wiring coming to your home or business, but that doesn't mean it will be POTS. Their future in most markets is U-verse for Internet, Voice (VoIP), and usually TV as well.

More and more people seem to be moving from POTS to Cable VoIP or Phone company VoIP (U-verse, FiOS, etc) to save money, especially with bundle deals. Wireless is moving to VoIP (Voice over LTE).

gweidenh

join:2002-05-18
Houston, TX
kudos:3
reply to nitzan

The point of these initiatives is to figure out a new billing model for phone calls. As we transition from a circuit switched telephone network riding on its own wires, to an 'over the top' IP service, traditional billing models and regulations may not make sense anymore.

The Bandwidth.com/Verizon deal sets a new model.

Its very similar to what VCVX wants to do. Break away from the current regulations and billing cycles.


pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..
reply to nitzan

said by nitzan:

As everything else, this is all about critical mass - if enough carriers adopt these standards to make most calls go through it, it has a chance of succeeding. It's interesting to see CLECs like Level 3 and Bandwidth.com absent from the list, as well as some of the largest "small" providers like Vonage and MagicJack. $10k is a steep price and at least so far I don't think you actually get anything from it other than being part of the discussion. Also interesting that it's set as a "non-profit organization" yet the price tag is so high - I guess it's not making a profit after you pay Daniel Berninger, lol...

AT&T going all VOIP by the end of 2014, and planning to use an agreed "standard" HD protocol doesn't sound like bad news to me.

It should lower VOIP termination rates, and improve call quality. The faster PSTN is replaced by a non-tariffed Internet based VOIP the better imo.
--
"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand." - Milton Friedman"

nitzan
Premium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:8

1 recommendation

Don't get me wrong- I like the idea of going all IP. The problem I see with this particular initiative is that it is led by one person who is very likely making a huge profit from this "non-profit" initiative, and the price tag on participating in the discussion (and later implementation if it ever comes) is so high it is prohibitive to most companies.


PX Eliezer7
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms

1 recommendation

said by nitzan:

Don't get me wrong- I like the idea of going all IP. The problem I see with this particular initiative is that it is led by one person who is very likely making a huge profit from this "non-profit" initiative, and the price tag on participating in the discussion (and later implementation if it ever comes) is so high it is prohibitive to most companies.

Bingo!

If they were truly interested in having broader representation, they would not want to charge the same membership fee to all size companies.

Other industry initiatives do NOT work this way.

For example, MANY industry groups charge annual dues based on the number of employees that a company has.

---------------------------------------

What's the attraction with Daniel Berninger

His own resume does not list anything new since Free World Dialup, and it's not clear if he ever finished his doctoral dissertation from the 1990's.
»www.danielberninger.com/document···ume.html

I am sure he is a fine fellow, but I never liked that TV show, "The Six Million Dollar Man".

----------------------------------

THIS Berninger/Pulver project looks to be dead in the water since 2010. Under "devices" it lists just 3 phones as the latest and greatest, including the outdated Gigaset A580IP !!

»www.siptosip.net/about.html
»www.siptosip.net/devices.html

[This siptosip NOT to be confused with SIP2SIP which is actually useful].

pandora
Premium
join:2001-06-01
Outland
kudos:2
Reviews:
·ooma
·Google Voice
·Comcast
·Future Nine Corp..

1 recommendation

reply to nitzan

said by nitzan:

Don't get me wrong- I like the idea of going all IP. The problem I see with this particular initiative is that it is led by one person who is very likely making a huge profit from this "non-profit" initiative, and the price tag on participating in the discussion (and later implementation if it ever comes) is so high it is prohibitive to most companies.

This brings back an age old question ... how the heck does Ooma do it? Ooma's finances never made sense, but they can afford $10,000 a month to be part of this initiative? What do member companies, or particularly, Ooma get out of it??
--
"If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand." - Milton Friedman"

gweidenh

join:2002-05-18
Houston, TX
kudos:3

If this type of initiative works, these companies will benefit from much lower costs of doing business. They will also benefit from being in a much less regulated business as well.



mgraves1
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Houston, TX

2 edits
reply to pandora

I think that some of you are being too hard on the folks behind VCXC. I suspect this simply reflects the fact that that folks hereabouts represent only a small, somewhat niche portion of the market. The very fact that Dan is able to get some of the most significant players in the industry to engage is a considerable achievement.

What they do, or how they do it may not apply in this end of the pool. However, if they redefine how the mass market of voice calling is billed it will cause waves that are felt across the entire pool. Even the ability to exchange traffic via IP in some standardized, sensible manner will open doors to things like HDVoice and more widespread video calling.

Long ago, back in the late 1980s, I once knew a gentlemen who was in the business of advising small cities on matters of economic development. He told me that if he didn't charge them $2K/day that his customers simply ignored his advice. With the very largest companies it could be a lot like that with VCXC. They need to stay above the noise floor presented by smaller players, but nonetheless need someone to coordinate how things get done. If they can't get that put together then they risk it being done for them by a regulator, which noone would want.
--
Michael Graves
Houston TX
»www.mgraves.org