Slashdot Mirror


Canadian Telco Telus Moves All Call Traffic to the Net

justice0x1 writes "An article on the Tornonto Star about Canada's Telus making a large scale motion to move all call trafic over to IP caught my eye today. 'Telus will become the first dominant phone carrier in North America to make the risky transition, a move much talked about and which Telus will make happen on a dramatic scale.' Since I work in the Telus Internet Service department, it will be interesting to see exactly how this new technology fares. Seems almost premature to me, but I guess it's all or nothing with telecomunications these days; you need to get an edge on the competition somehow. Why not start by moving youre entire long distance network over to IP?"

18 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. Bandwidth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What kind of bandwidth would this require?

    1. Re:Bandwidth? by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Pumping data through a CPU do to intensive compression isn't exactly the best way to do this.

      On an Athlon XP2100+ box, I can encode Vorbis files at 9x realtime speed. You could do realtime encoding on 1/9th this amount of 'box'. OTOH, Vorbis is not necessarily optimized for speech.

    2. Re:Bandwidth? by RovingSlug · · Score: 3, Interesting
      the thing you most notice is that when no-one is talking, it is actually *silent* - you don't realise it until you try VoIP howe much noise is in a normal analog call.

      The background white noise in an analog phone call is artificially inserted ("comfort" noise). Studies showed users were not comfortable with a "dead" line, where the static reassures them the connection is still active.

    3. Re:Bandwidth? by billstewart · · Score: 2, Interesting

      90kbps is 64kbps uncompressed audio with IP overhead. Sure, they can compress it to 6.5kbps and get cellphone-quality speech, but if they don't have to compress it for bandwidth reasons, it simplifies a lot of other things. I'd have expected the IP overhead to be a bit lower, but not a lot lower, and one of the problems with VOIP is that the IP overhead doesn't shrink just because the voice does, because the voice needs to send 100 or more samples per second to sound good, so they're all tinygrams.

      --

      Bill Stewart
      New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    4. Re:Bandwidth? by halbritt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The encoding traditionally used by telcos (but *not* VOIP) is 64kbps ADPCM for each call. There are compression and silence-suppression technologies that can get this down to around 8kbps per call, however compression isn't something really considered for "carrier-grade" voice service. For a sense of scale, an OC-192 will handle 150,000 voice calls. I know that this isn't the first US carrier to move all of it's long-distance traffic over IP, though it may be the first to publicly do so. It's not too far-fetched really as long as the carriers that do it have their own IP backbones, it's just another form of switching.

    5. Re:Bandwidth? by oh · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Wow. Ogg Vorbis music files encoded at 45-kbps sound very close to the original. I think they need to use some better quality.

      You don't really care how long it takes to encode a music file, and you can compress in chunks as large as you like. What matteres to a telephone conversation is lag, if I say something I don't want to have to wait 10 seconds for a reply. I can't record 10 seonds worth of data, compress it, and send it. I have to record something like 10ms worth (80 samples), compress this, and send it.

      This limits the size of the packets, down to the point that the IP header takes up a substantial portion of the bandwidth. In additon, with only 80 samples, there isn't really much you can work with when compressing.
      --
      Democracy isn't about no one telling you what to do. It's about everyone telling you what to do.
  2. And So we move closer to integrated communication by SkArcher · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Turnabout is fair play it seems. No more than 5 years ago, I was using a phone line to access the internet. Soon i'll be using the internet to make telephone calls.

    --

    An infinite number of monkeys will eventually come up with the complete works of /.
  3. A matter of time by RosCabezas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In fact it was just a matter of time. At last, telcos are realizing that technology is a helper and not a foe. Probably 3rd generation as designed is not going to generate the expected revenue and some side paths need to be found.

  4. I wonder by mericet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder how much bandwidth they are going to allocate to a phone call once it's pure VoIP? and will it change according to load? what will be the effect on modem/fax data?

  5. not 'to the net' by delmoi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Dude, using IP dosn't mean they are transfering call trafic over the general internet. I really doubt they are going to give each phone line a real IP address rather then a 'local' one.

    It would be pretty cool if they did. Imagine an RFC standard phone protocol that was implemented on lots of telephone like devices. In conjunction with DHCP you could have an internet phone that worked as simply as a regular phone. And you could talk to anyone with a PC and/or another phone (maybe by typing in the IP address? :P probably not).

    Well, I can dream, can't I? (or is this not that far off? I know you can buy IP phones today, but I don't think that they can work with both the general internet and the general phone system)

    --

    ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
  6. Having worked for Telus by Frederique+Coq-Bloqu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    a bit outside of Québec City (I no longer work for them), I would say this is a generally good move. Most of the equipment, at least in Québec is shoddy stuff late 1950s. Needs constant maintainence. I can definitely see why they're upgrading.

  7. MPLS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They're not going to go on general IP network but with a carrier-class MPLS network. Lets see who they will choose for their backbone, Cisco, Juniper or perhaps Chiaro or Hyperchip??

  8. IPv6? by HaloZero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Will the software used for this transition support IPv6? Will it be BASED on IPv6? I mean, the point of IPv6 is to give us more IP addresses than the initial 256 * 256* 256 * 256, and moving an entire phone network would only make the IP addressing problem worse (if not using v6...), right?

    --
    Informatus Technologicus
  9. The future is convergence by metz2000 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From what I can see everything is heading toward one device - the PC. The PC of the future, as many of us know, will be compact enough to put on a table top (or under your TV) and will be a compliment to your lounge/living room as it may be well designed and stylish.

    So, what's going to come through this little wonder? Well pretty much everything. People will have wireless digital phones which connect to this 'base unit' via bluetooth or other wireless tech. All this telephone traffic will travel across a VoIP system and additional features will most probably be video links through built-in cams and possibly a text message feature to send info such as telephone numbers or addresses through on-the-fly without having to talk it out loud on the phone.

    Also coming down the high speed net links will be television on demand. No more arial/satellite systems, just pure internet provided media. It could be argued that radio is very much internet based already - I for one have no arial set up for FM signals.

    The international network coupled with a micro-PC in every home is the way of the future. Faster internet backbones will provide a media-rich lifestyle.

  10. Death of Alaxander Gram Bell's invention by zakezuke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Remarkably enough, telephone technology hasn't really changed all that much since it's invention. the infrastructure has changed vastly, but for the most part, you can still use a first generation telephone over copper, with the exception of the cellular model. This is probally why it's no great shock to me that mobile phones are the first to actually experiment with adapting.

    My first reaction to this move to tcp/ip based voice communication is great, dispite the fact that the telephone it self has a remarkable level of simplisity to it. Speaker, amp, microphone, even without a touch tone generator most networks i'm familar with still permit the rotery system, a call can be placed by touching wires together in that rythmic fasion.

    So what is there to be gained by TCP/IP transport for telephone use, assuming we are talking about the classic land line as well as the mobile, a great deal i'd say. Fax machines for one thing will no longer be barred by that pesky 9600/14000 bandwidth issue, color faxing can be an option. A "mobile" could in theory be jacked into a land line and calls can be recieved regardless of reception, eliminating the need for features like call forwarding. A push to upgrade to this cheeper form of transport could push the telcos to actually upgrade way out of the way regions to this new digital system, so even Farmer Joe miles away from the CO could get reliable network access. Let alone the boom to the deaf community.. even with present mobile text and instent messaging it has practicaly rendered ye old TDD terminal obsolete.

    But... there is a major downside. It puts control of network access back to the telcos, well not like they don't have it already. We create a dependence on high technology, requiring all homes being essentally wired for network. We also create a dependence on power, not that classic telephone doesn't take a bit of juice, but imagine if everyone's house had additional DA converters, and essentally hubs rather then splitters. Privacy could be made a think of the past, as packet sniffers could be employed to actually track specific people without the physical access that is presently required.

    But I'm leaning more tward the side of the fact that there is just so much crap I want rendered obsolete, and a level of digital intrigration I would like to achieve. I no longer want to be barred by the limits of dialup service being the only thing that can be actived on demand, I want phones to be TCP/IP ready.

    And yes... I want mobile phones to actually provide high speed internet and I want it everywhere! And if this means I can't use my circa 1970's phone that I bought specificly to be compatable with my first acustic(sp) modem and so be it.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  11. Re:Bandwidth - ITU recommends G723.1 - 6.3kb/s by fact0r · · Score: 3, Interesting
    VoIP Standards are all made by ITU-T.

    The most widely used VoIP protocol is H.323. H323 allows negotiation of a compression CoDec. The base (worst) codec which must be supported is G.711 (64kb/s - this is what goes down an ISDN line - this is regarded as lossless digital encoding).

    Latency is dealt with by using QoS. I make calls from Australia to Europe through a VoIP carrier at a cost of about 3cents/minute. The round trip delay appears less than 0.2 seconds. The recommended CoDec is G.723.1 which is 5.3 or 6.3 kb/s (switches dependent on complexity I believe). This CoDec gives speech quality better than a mobile network will give you.

    The bandwidth is only required in the direction of speech - when there is silence going the other way the bandwidth drops to near zero (just comfort noise generation and control signals send down the line). Comfort noise generation is done by a funny little algorithm that tells the other end the type of "silence" (static) to produce.

  12. Don't Worry... companies like BELL will ruin it by zaqattack911 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why not start by moving youre entire long distance network over to IP?

    Quite simply Large monopoly Telco's have invested large amounts of cash in the already existing (and out of date) telephone network, and would rather blow up the planet than see that change. Have a look at this .

    Bell , AT&T will start whining to governments for compensation or tax immediatly.

    All I'd like to know is when did the government make it a priority to start protecting large corps from the consumers, instead of protecting the consumers from corps.

  13. Internet via VPN by redback · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I assume that eventually they plan to run some kind of IP service to peoples houses, and use VoIP phones. What would be nice if you could use say, some kind of VPN, to get to a internet router, and obtain a public IP.

    Theres your broadband......