<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<div align="center"><font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><a
href="www.viewsletter.com"><img alt="VL on VoIP"
src="cid:part1.03050701.02070807@viewsletter.com" border="0"
height="67" width="133"></a></font><br>
</div>
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice.org 3.1 (Linux)">
<dl>
<dt><font size="4"><b>There Goes the Cellular Neighborhood</b></font></dt>
<dt> <br>
</dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>By William Flanagan</dt>
<dt> <br>
</dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>Did you notice? </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>It wasn't a big bang, just a mixed series of product
introductions, service announcements, and speeches that appear to point
the way for the voice network of the future.</dt>
</dl>
<ul>
<li> If you want fast Internet access on fiber to your premises, be
prepared to give up powering your phone from the central office battery
and settle for 99.9% uptime rather than the "five nines" of the PSTN
(Verizon FIOS). The difference is about 8 hours per year of outage.</li>
<li> Carriers who resisted voice over frame relay recently agreed
with equipment makers on a standard for handling voice over IP on 4G
(LTE) <i><b>data</b></i> networks (Voice over LTE, VoLTE; GSM
Association).</li>
<li> The telephone company that isn't a telecommunications service is
working with Verizon to put an always-on VoIP client on cell phones
that can use a 3G or 4G data plan for worldwide voice calls (Skype). </li>
<li>4G radio service--either LTE, WiMAX, or both--will soon cover the
globe with enough capacity for a video feed to every phone at once
(thus providing bandwidth for a few billion phone calls, too).</li>
<li> SIP trunking gains respect as an enterprise service.</li>
</ul>
<dl>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>The common thread is that each item depends on Voice over IP.
Each item reinforces the others. The trend to "all IP" is, if possible,
<i>gaining</i> momentum. Ten years ago I didn't consider an IP
network suitable for everything, particularly not voice telephony. Now
the standards have developed, network capacity is vastly increased, and
a new generation of users values mobility above reliability. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>So here's a take on where we're going.</dt>
<dt> <br>
</dt>
<dt>The avalanche of traffic moving to IP networks (including MPLS
and their supporting Layer 1 optical components) likely will sweep away
not only circuit switching for voice but also the POTS land line. Why
pay to install and maintain copper loops any more? The upside for speed
over copper, despite the leaps in DSL performance, will never exceed
the capacity of 4G wireless. What carrier really wants to pay to power
those stationary lumps of low functionality called desk phones?
Eventually what we've heard for years will be true: There's no real
need for a dedicated voice network; voice is just another form of
traffic on the IP network. Voice (and real-time video conferencing)
will need low latency so the network will have to prioritize these
packets, but we know how to do that.</dt>
<dt> <br>
</dt>
<dt>Why put in any cable, even fiber, if 4G radio links can provide
adequate capacity and acceptable availability? Instead, drop in a
picocell/WiFi router, with an LTE/WiMax uplink, for phone, fax,
Internet, TV, gaming, burglar/fire alarm, etc. The very product showed
up while I wrote this edition:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.greenpacket.com/dl_devices.html">http://www.greenpacket.com/dl_devices.html</a>. Some devices will have
their own 4G radios/modems. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>Truck roll? Let the customer buy and activate the picocell like a
cell phone. Repairs? Bring the device into the phone store to swap for
a new one. That will be hard on the unions. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>Legacy Cellular? Yeah, it will hang on, the way circuit switching
did. A few people will use it because they like the simple 2-function
handsets with the large numbers on the screen. HSPDA will be enough
from many machine-to-machine applications. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>E911? GPS in the picocell or the handset tracks locations,
stationary or mobile. This service will require additional
infrastructure to route calls to the proper answering point.</dt>
<dt> <br>
</dt>
<dt>Long distance? How the world has changed. Recall that AT&T,
when forced into divestiture, had the choice between Long Lines and the
Local Exchange Carriers. They chose to stick with LL--oops. The
AT&T name survives today only because the LEC that bought it chose
to keep the name. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>Costs of cell phone plans today are determined almost completely
by the number of minutes of local air time. Distance no longer matters
within the US. Skype on a phone does almost the same for international
calling. So what's the future business model for long haul
transmission? Perhaps it will look like some other forms of transport:</dt>
</dl>
<ul>
<li> Early highways in the US started as private tollways. A few
still operate that way, but most roads (including toll roads) are owned
and maintained by some governmental body.</li>
<li> Subways in New York City and many other locations started as
entrepreneurial enterprises, generating profits for their owners.
During hard times, profits stopped; owners walked away or ceded the
"lines" to the government.</li>
</ul>
<dl>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>Let's make some assumptions about the future: all transport is
IP; net neutrality on the Internet requires equal access to all comers;
LECs are based almost entirely on IP over wireless local loops. Won't
that make the Internet the natural (least expensive) choice for
backhaul from "cellular" base stations? Most of the traffic will be
"Internet" or data, much more than voice. There might be some extra
margin in charging more for prioritized voice/video packets, but the
bulk of traffic (data) won't need that level of service. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>Will any private corporation want to bother with LD? Even today,
carriers contend that net neutrality will make the Internet
unprofitable. If true, carriers could decide to sell their long haul
facilities. The buyer of last resort? Some new government or non-profit
agency set up to run the public Internet. Carriers could lease back
capacity for base station backhaul. The new "public corporation" will
restore the concept of "common carrier" to telephone service. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>A few carriers would probably keep a private wide area network,
to offer premium services. But it would be a content distribution
service, rather than a telephone company. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>Hey you copper thieves! Bring it on! You're making way for the
future. Just leave my neighborhood alone until 4G is fully deployed. </dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt><br>
</dt>
<dt>NEXT ISSUE: provisioning VoIP as a service.</dt>
<dt> <br>
</dt>
<dt>To comment, visit our post at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.webtorials.com/discussions/">http://www.webtorials.com/discussions/</a></dt>
</dl>
__<br>
<dl>
<dt> <b>How Can Flanagan Consulting Help You?</b> <br>
We understand not only the technology of networks, but also<br>
the surrounding business processes: procurement, bid<br>
preparation/analysis, statements of work, financial analysis,<br>
consensus building around a solution, and more.</dt>
<dt><b> Find out now: call +1.703.242.8381</b> or email <b><a
href="mailto:Bill@Flanagan-Consulting.com">Bill@Flanagan-Consulting.com</a></b></dt>
<dt>___<br>
</dt>
<dt><b>Flanagan Consulting Supports Litigation Professionals</b></dt>
<dt> Several associates are experienced in analysis of patents,
trademarks, <br>
contracts, and other intellectual property related to IT and
communications. <br>
We have assisted attorneys preparing claims, depositions, and
testimony. <br>
How can we help you? Queries to +1.703.242.8381.</dt>
<dt>___<br>
</dt>
<dt> <i><b>Advertise Here</b></i> </dt>
<dt><i>Reach over two thousand interesting people in Telecom and
IT.</i></dt>
<dt><i>For details, </i><i>call +1.703.855.0191 </i></dt>
<dt><b>__</b></dt>
<dt><b>Responses to <i>ViewsLetter</i> and Subscriptions</b><br>
Mail is welcome when addressed to <a
href="mailto:publisher@viewsletter.com">publisher@viewsletter.com</a>.
<br>
</dt>
<dt>Mailman, the Linux application, keeps the mailing list, which
does not</dt>
<dt>accept postings. Replies to this message are discarded. <br>
</dt>
<dt>You can unsubscribe or subscribe at:<br>
<a href="http://lists.viewsletter.com/mailman/listinfo/vl2006">http://lists.viewsletter.com/mailman/listinfo/vl2006</a>
<br>
</dt>
<dt> You will need a password to unsubscribe, but Mailman<br>
will send you one on request. <br>
</dt>
<dt> __ </dt>
<dt><b>Special thanks</b> for supporting ViewsLetter to <a
href="http://www.webtorials.com/">www.webtorials.com</a><b>,</b><br>
your best source for communications tutorials and white papers.<br>
</dt>
</dl>
-- <br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2" width="800">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="300"><img alt="Flanagan Consulting"
src="cid:part2.00090807.07060701@viewsletter.com" height="75"
width="225"></td>
<td valign="top" width="50"><br>
</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle"><b>In Converged Networking <br>
We Have the Experience</b></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
3800 Concorde Parkway, Suite 1500, Chantilly, VA, <small>
</small><big><small>USA</small><br>
Ph: +1.703.242.8381 Fx: +1.703.242.8391</big><br>
<b><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.Flanagan-Consulting.com">www.Flanagan-Consulting.com</a></b><br>
<i>Flanagan Consulting is a Service Mark of W. A. Flanagan, Inc. </i><br>
<br>
"Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance." <br>
--George Bernard Shaw <br>
<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>