Slashdot Mirror
Sprint Moves Phone Network to IP
Ryan Barrett writes "Sprint announced that it has 'begun transforming its telephone network so voice calls are transmitted in packets.' AP article here. Combined with a recent /. story about Telus doing the same thing, this sets an interesting precedent. Many telcos already use packet-switching to handle a significant chunk of their calls. Is this the beginning of the end for circuit-switched networks?"
The beginning of the end started when the equipment manufacturers started producing boxes that allowed VoIP calls to have the same quality as circuit-switched ones. We all probably make a lot more IP calls than we are aware of.
The quicker companies do this, the better it will be for their margins - this news from Sprint probably doesn't mean much for their users, but their shareholders should be happy. The cost of carrying VoIP is much lower, which is what allows those calling card companies to stay in business.
there is nothing new to this kind of thinking.
there is a paradigm shift going on through out the telecom voice/data industry
such a move is already being made in the "test-bed " countries like CHINA and INDIA where the telco network is newly gaining great importance in infrastructure.
already in INDIA the BhartiGroup and RELAINCE (2 main telco operators) have their backbones as IP based traffic.
it seems strange that such a move made in such "developing " contries is only being taken up in the US.
... I still doubt I'll be able to make calls on my Sprint PCS phone between 9-10pm. Once 'nights' kicks in in this town the network is perpetually busy.
nah you don't want fibre running to your door.
Otherwise you won't be able to get DSL services (well at least that's the pathetic excuse the use in the UK when you request aDSL and you have fibre to your door!)
Won't this be a loss of Quality? Bandwidth is money is also true for telephone companies. I used some cheap numbers for inernational calls an always noticed a few lost packets. Thrifty compression algorithms will do the rest...
They will probably be switching to an isdn network over glassfiber as backbone. Most of the world did this years ago. (You will have a hard time to find an circuit switching telephone network in the Netherlands, although most actual connections are still analogue it gets digitized the moment you reach the central)
Jeroen
Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
You can compress voice down below 20kbits and get a quality comparable with analogue phone lines.
I believe GSM uses 13kbits (or in that neighbourhood) and I have used the speex codec in 8kbits mode recently and it give good enough quality to make conversations.
If you use uncompressed audio you need about 32kbits.
Jeroen
Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
Part of my major complaint in the 21century is the fact that modem technology has not really improved a whole hell of alot. Sure we have Cable and xDSL service if you are lucky enough to live near a place where they saw fit to actually upgrade.
When I see stuff like this, I get this warm happy feeling inside when it seems like it's actually a *good* idea to actually upgrade from our old vintage phone system to something that can do a hell of alot more useful things. Datapackets can be uniquely identified as "voice" "fax" or "data", which could in theory make a whole slew of things possible...
Though it makes me wonder, if the telcos are going for packet based voice communications, why the hell would I bother placing a long distance call through them when I can use VoIP software. Don't get me wrong, i'll all for the idea digital packet based phone service, if for nothing else but making all phones with that service high speed internet ready.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Nice idea and all that but how will the consumer benefit from this ? will we get lower call charges or will the CEO just get another 5million on his paypacket ?
I found it interesting that Telus, a Canadian telco, will use equipment from American companies Cisco Systems and Juniper Networks whereas Sprint, an American telco will use equipment from Canada's Nortel.
I have nothing particularly insightful to say right now. Talk amongst yourselves ;-)
No need. E.164 number and DNS
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
I beg to differ.
Voice over IP is already standard part of corporate IT. It is rapidly leaking into the consumer space.
Historically, Big Dumb Pipes have continually displaced managed bandwidth type systems. Voice over IP is just the latest example.
I did a consulting project for Qualcomm as part of my classwork last semester studying whether 802.11b has the potential to disrupt CDMA networks. People might find the paper interesting, since it indirectly addresses many of the same issues.
http://web.mit.edu/~rwilley/www/Qualcomm.pdf
do you really want google searching your dns/phone entry? ugh i can just imagine.
Is Mr or Mrs. slashdot there? When would be a good time to call back?
I write code.
In my office for the last few years I've had a Cisco VOIP phone - the only connections it has are power and network. It works pretty well, and that's an older phone.
Voice over IP is the way voice traffice will be handled in the future. The article talks about sending IP traffic over ATM, at least for now - it's more expensive that way but the cost of new switches is also quite high.
You might want to read more on the "Martini Draft" and MPLS to get a sense of how ATM will be replaced by IP technologies.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
They already do that 1-800-TOO-MANY-DIGITS thing.
The longest one I actualy saw was 1-800-333-DIAMONDS, and they did emphasize the S at the end (unlike 1-800-MATTRES, "leave off the last S for savings").
Do they do that idiocy outside the US too, or is this another example of our monopoly on stupidity?
Boy, does this take me back. One of the better articles in Wired magazine's history, in my opinion, was the one on "Netheads vs. Bellheads" highlighting an internal battle at Sprint as a microcosm of a bigger battle of packet-switching vs. circuit-switching. It's long but entertaining and worth it, talking about philosophical differences and ATM and IP.