Re: Skype asks FCC to open up cellular networks

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Steven Critchfield <ip () drunkenlogic com>
Date: February 25, 2007 12:08:35 AM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Skype asks FCC to open up cellular networks

On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 14:48 -0500, David Farber wrote:
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden () nokia com>
> Date: February 23, 2007 5:29:15 PM EST
> To: dave () farber net
> Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden () nokia com>, Bob Burger <rberger () ibd com>,
> dwayne () warpspeed com
> Subject: Re: [IP] Skype asks FCC to open up cellular networks
> Reply-To: bob.hinden () nokia com
>
> Dave,
>
> > Skype yesterday petitioned the FCC to lay the smack down on
> > wireless phone carriers who "limit subscribers' right to run
> > software communications applications of their choosing" (read:
> > Skype software). Skype wants the agency to more stringently apply
> > the famous 1968 Carterfone decision that allowed consumers to hook
> > any device up to the phone network, so long as it did not harm the
> > network. In Skype's eyes, that means allowing any software or
> > applications to run on any devices that access the network.
>
> To me, this is what "Network Neutrality" is all about.  Is it OK for
> the network provider to limit the applications that can use the  
> network?
>
> In this case, the cellular operators don't want applications to run
> that would compete with their own services.

I don't know how much of it is thinking they will have to compete. Even
if you did VoIP calling via a cellular phone, you would still need a
cellular plan and phones or data cards to connect to the network.

Problem here is defining where the demarc is. For home systems, there
really isn't any intelligence designed into the remote hardware. A phone
can be extrememly simple. All the intelligence is located centrally. So
by adding your own hardware or "applications" you don't really
communicate back to the central switch in any more trusted manner than
the simplest of phones do.

I am sure it is different when you start talking about cell phones. The
SIM card must identify you to the network and such. So the cell phone is
a little more tied into the network than say your analog phone at home.
If you have phone line troubles at home, you can go about unhooking
phones and hardware till your line either clears up or you have
identified the problem to be telco wiring.

Where would you draw the demarc point on a cell phone? And at what time
do you say the problems being experienced is application, cell phone, or
service? When you can't exactly decouple any of the components to test
them individually, who gets the support call?

I am a fairly sophisticated phone user. I have the crippled E62 from
Cingular. I know there are several apps on my phone that crash the phone
and make it unavailable. For instance I know that the free streaming
radio app for my phone from Nokia will crash the phone if I attempt to
exit the app without stopping the stream first. I know there are times
that I can trip the watchdog timer on the phone when I have my podcast
catcher downloading new content while I listen to cached content.

So far, I have not been told of any app I can not run on my phone. I am
sure I could run a skype or a open standard VoIP client on my phone.
Now, I may not want to deal with the instability of it running on the
phone though.

What I would like to see happen is the FCC force the phone carriers to
open up access to the PTT servers. The PTT service is a modified version
of the VoIP protocol SIP. I would like to see PC clients that could
access PTT/SIP URLs and chat just like they were using a PTT phone on
the same network. I have some interesting ideas for some applications
that could use such access, but so far inquiries have been turned down.

Between opening up access to the PTT service and eliminating the phone
lock in, I think these are our biggest hurdles to ovrcome with cell
phone companies.
--
Steven Critchfield <ip () drunkenlogic com>



-------------------------------------------
Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/@now
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com