Re: Message that JoAnn asked me to post

[Stephen Kingham <>]

Hi Joanne

I would like to provide some feed back I hope will contribute to a
discussion.

Walts intro deleted

>From Joanne:
> >Hi Walt
> >

Intro removed

> >We question, though, whether it makes sense for multiple higher ed
> >institutions to essentially try to replicate the pstn backbone with new
> >technology when long distance rates are already so low as to be almost
> >free for domestic calling. 

Talking to Carriers old and new they all see VoIP as a cheaper way to
provide telephony as they only need to support on network rather than
several.

I understand that for some I2 members (even in the US) that telephone
calls are not so cheap to make VoIP a non business issue.

> >Unless gatekeepers have become devices which
> >can learn of changes to the mapping of IP addresses to phone numbers as
> >they are added or subtracted by individual endpoint gatekeepers, it
> >means replicating a system that already works very well and is very
> >labor intensive, requiring great communication and coordination across
> >the members of the network. Even if gatekeepers are now able to learn
> >this type of information from each other it is still a complex technical
> >and administrative undertaking with much room for screw ups to reduce
> >the quality of a service which our user communities expect to work
> >flawlessly.

I have been involved with large telephone networks and the recent the
Australian Research Network VoIP and the routing programming in VoIP is
amazingly simpler using Gatekeepers that static routing in the PBXs and
Carrier switches.  I have no question is saying that one of the huge
advantages on VoIP is the routing supplied by the Gatekeepers.

Our faults on calls ending up at dead ends and wrong numbers and
mistakes in routing have almost disappeared.

The complexity of using Gatekeepers is much less than for PBX switches.

> >So, if the object is interoperability testing this seems like a good
> >thing, although isn't it something that the vendor community should be
> >doing more of as well?

I thought they are.  All the PBX and Carrier Switch vendors I know are
building VoIP into their boxs.  In fact our long term planning tells us
that we will have difficulty maintaining traditional TDM based PBXs.

> >If the object is replicating the long distance network for calls between
> >schools (and ultimately hop off to local communities) what is the
> >service or economic justification?

Couple of summary VoIP points for me:
- the technology is going this way anyway so lets find out about it now
- it is cheaper according to our analysis
- it is easier to change and manage telephone routing

IP Telephony is a bit different:
- the technology is going that way anyway
- the business case is not that obvious, more break even over 3 years
(then cheaper?)
- need VoIP infrastructure is needed first.
- moves and changes are heaps easier and cheaper.

If you would like supporting material on one or more of the above please
let me know and I will see what I can supply.

Hope this assists with some healthy discussion.

> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Joanne R. Hugi
> >Associate Vice President Information Services
> >Computng Center
> >1225 Kincaid Street
> >University of Oregon
> >Eugene, OR 97403-1212
> >541.346.1702 (voice)
> >541.346.4397 (FAX)
> >541.953.7104 (Cell)
> >http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~hugi/
> >
> >
> 

-- 
Stephen Kingham, MIT, BSc, E&C Cert
Project Manager and Consulting Engineer 
mailto:
Telephone +61 2 6276 6223 (office)
          +61 419 417 471 (mobile)
Voice over IP
for The Australian Academic Research Network (AARNet) and
IP Telephony Project for
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)
http://www.aarnet.edu.au and http://www.csiro.au

---------------------------------------------------------------wg-voip-+
For list utilities, archives, subscribe, unsubscribe, etc. please visit the
ListProc web interface at 

    http://archives.internet2.edu/

---------------------------------------------------------------wg-voip--