> and your phone number has to be local to your location.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Thanks for proving my point.
And who says that a location needs to have only a single
phone number. Many VoIP providers will sell you extra
vanity numbers anywhere in the USA or a number of other
countries:
http://www.telphin.com/numbers.php
http://sipphone.com/virtual/
These are redirected to your phone in the same way that
a personal 800 number gets redirected. A telephone number
is rather more like a domain name than an IP address.
So if the E-911 VoIP service requires that you have
a base phone number that is within your E-911 region
that doesn't seem like a problem to me since you can
have any number of virtual phone numbers in addition
to the base number.
--Michael Dillon
If VOIP doesn't run on your network because you've oversold your capacity,
no amount of QoS is going to put the quality back into your service.
People will find better ISPs. If you deliberately set QoS to favor your
services over a competitor, whom your customers are also paying for
service, you'll be staring down prosecutors, at some point. It's
anti-competitive behavior, as you're taking deliberate actions to degrade
the service of a competitor, simply because you can.
Let's say I sell a premium VoIP offering for an additional fee on my
network. I apply QoS to deliver my VoIP offering to my customers but as a
result all other VoIP service is literally useless during heavy use
times you'd consider this anti-competitive behavior?
Adi
Applying QoS to your VOIP traffic at the expense of *all* other traffic would be edging against a gray area. Applying QoS to competitive VOIP traffic specifically to improve the quality of your service at the expense of theirs is likely to be a problem. Again, I am not a lawyer. I would strongly suggest consulting one if this is a serious concern.
The Internet is not regulated because operators tend to be effective at self policing. Engaging in these kinds of practices is asking for regulation.
- billn
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 08:45:30AM -0600, Adi Linden said something to the effect of:
> If VOIP doesn't run on your network because you've oversold your capacity,
> no amount of QoS is going to put the quality back into your service.
> People will find better ISPs. If you deliberately set QoS to favor your
> services over a competitor, whom your customers are also paying for
> service, you'll be staring down prosecutors, at some point. It's
> anti-competitive behavior, as you're taking deliberate actions to degrade
> the service of a competitor, simply because you can.
Let's say I sell a premium VoIP offering for an additional fee on my
network. I apply QoS to deliver my VoIP offering to my customers but as a
result all other VoIP service is literally useless during heavy use
times you'd consider this anti-competitive behavior?
Possibly, but even if not it's a glancing blow at another violation. At the
very least I would consider it failure to deliver service.
Unless you explicitly and frequently refer to this non-QoS-ified service as
"best effort" (read: in this case, no effort at all) and in the interest of
anti-liability full disclosure explain that this traffic is regularly
superceded by your premium subscribers' traffic (spin doctor as appropriate),
you wll be fielding the angry phone calls of customers who rightfully feel
that they were mislead. While you may not be hit with antitrust suits,
you're pushing the envelope with the generic SLA that acts as junk drawer
for the rest of your traffic, I would think...
Then again, no one pays me to think.
RTI,
--ra