more on NZ VoIP

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: david.e.young () verizon com
Date: August 31, 2005 8:24:08 AM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] more on NZ VoIP



Dave,

It seems to me that the original poster made an incorrect assumption  
which has been carried throughout this thread.  Specifically, he  
assumes that NZ 's VoIP telephone will be delivered over IP all the  
way to the subscriber's home.  I doubt that is the plan.  More  
likely, they are planning to replace all of their end-office and  
tandem switching infrastructure with a VoIP/softswitch architecture.   
This will almost certainly include line gateways in the central  
office which will provide dial-tone and battery over the existing  
copper wires to the home and look to the customer no different than  
today's services.  These gateways provide the same 'line power' and  
battery backup capabilities of the existing circuit switches.  So why  
make the change?  NZ can probably achieve efficiencies by moving to a  
converged IP-based core network, plus they can more easily add and  
integrate IP-based features with this architecture and ensure a  
smooth transition to voice over broadband for those homes and  
businesses with broadband who want that capability.

Best regards,
David

--------------------------------
David E. Young
Verizon Communications
1300 I Street NW, Suite 400W
Washington, DC 20005
+1 202-515-2517  <Office>
+1 202-365-4755  <Mobile>
david.e.young () verizon com


"David Farber" <dave () farber net>
08/30/2005 09:07 PM
Please respond to
dave () farber net


To
"Ip Ip" <ip () v2 listbox com>
cc
Subject
[IP] more on  NZ VoIP







Begin forwarded message:

From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
Date: August 30, 2005 8:28:50 PM EDT
To: gav () rediguana co nz
Cc: dave () farber net, lauren () vortex com
Subject: NZ VoIP




> I assume that it will occur over DSL as that
> is the only broadband we have capable of reaching a large percentage
> of the population.
>

Seems to me that "large percentage" isn't good enough.  If the entire
system is going to be converted (though the number of lines involved
is relatively small in the scheme of things), it has to be 100%
coverage one way or another.  Then there are all the related issues
of phone backup power supplies, getting recharge power to those
supplies, maintaining the batteries, and lots more.  All *sorts* of
interesting issues come into play when you convert everyone's lines
to VoIP, since they have to be emergency capable.  I wonder if those
quoted dates turn out to be about as real as our analog TV cut off
dates here in the U.S. have been?

--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren () pfir org or lauren () vortex com or lauren () eepi org
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
  - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, EEPI
  - Electronic Entertainment Policy Initiative - http://www.eepi.org
Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
DayThink: http://daythink.vortex.com



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as david.e.young () verizon com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- 
people/



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/