Will A Price War Run VoIP Out of Business?

ElCheapo writes "News.com looks at the recent price war that has erupted amongst VoIP providers. How much lower can costs for unlimited long distance go before next-generation phone services run themselves out of business? How does this compare with free services that don't offer connectivity to the PSTN? Packet8 offers service for $19.99/month, a level analysts say is unsustainable. Vonage recently dropped their rates to $35/month to match VoicePulse. VoicePulse is known to use a softswitch based on the Asterisk open source PBX. Will open source allow startups to compete with the traditional LECs?"

Comments

NO.

[Anonymous Coward]

ntil they make something that pay's me to use it they will never EVER hurt my VOIP system.

Mine is 100% free, I have at least 6 nodes throughout the united states that all I do is pick up line 2 in my house and dial to connect ot the other nodes for free.

and yes it's as good or better than the telephone service using really low cost Creative VoiP blasters and fobbit.

voip will be around as long as there are people willing to use it and have access to the hardware. and no I dont care to dial out to a landline.

I'll settle for 0$

[jilles]

The problem with VOIP service providers is that from a technical point of view they are redundant. Skype is currently demonstrating this point in a very convincing way (good quality connection, convenient lookup service, 0$). So anyone depending on charging their customers for this is going to have some revenue problems in the near future.

The only reason you would need an actual service provider is to connect to 'legacy' telephone networks or to offer services like voicemail. Once the traditional telecom providers figure out that there is a market for this kind of thing, they'll be in an excellent position to offer that kind of services.

I dont get it

[luckytroll]

I always imagined that at some point someone would come up with a standard cheap widget that everyone could plug into their POTS jack which would enable a distributed P2P style of VoIP system - Sure, sometimes you might have to wait a few minutes to dial out on your voice line while its in use by the commons, but its a small price to pay if you get to dial anywhere in VoIP or POTS land. These centralized services remind me of Napster - centralized services, legislatable out of existence.

No, what is going to get interesting

[AbbyNormal]

is the emergence of high-speed internet providers jumping into the ring. My cable network recently got upgraded to a pretty decent speed and while chatting with a technician I found out that the company will soon be offering VOIP package that will be less than our current Phone company. Hmmmm.
Ten times as many features, less price, all in one package. Good bye Verizon! Your lack of DSL in my area, disturbs me.

There's a lot of room for a price war

[Halvard]

I'm the president of an business only ISP and we've been looking at adding voice services for 4 1/2 years. We sell select office buildings where each tenant gets separately firewalled service. I was offered wholesale long distance last year by Worldcom for an insanely low rate of about 1/10th of a US cent per minute. Yes this was to be tied to a voice circuit terminated in a colo we were already it. So for about US$250 per month and US$0.00014 per minute in excess of 500,000 minutes, it's easy to be able to afford long distance bunding even without VOIP for long distance. Even if that's about 1/5 the number of minutes in a 30 day month, it's kind of like bandwidth; a T-1 goes a long long way for a lot of people especially if you minimize bandwidth usage.

Couple that with a soft phone switch like Asterisk with it's pseudo-TDM devices and you've got an incredibly inexpensive solution. Your real costs are advertising and support, not long distance.

Not unless they ban encryption

[anti-NAT]

The moment end-to-end encryption and authentication is enabled, either via tunnels or by just encrypting the IP payload, no authority trying to assert control over VoIP will be able to identify one application verses another e.g., VoIP verses HTTP verses SMTP.

They will have to either ban encryption, or ban all applications, which is the equivalent of banning the Internet.

Deploying encryption in this manner will actually restore the Internet to its original design - an application agnostic network, whose sole job is to just make a best effort to deliver bits between the hosts at the edges. Only the hosts should know and will know what applications the Internet is being used for.

The technology already exists, albeit in early forms :

• DNSSEC
• Opportunistic tunnel setup within IPsec

This will also obselete firewalls, proxy servers, NAT, and any other devices that perform applications processing within the Internet. The only applications processing devices left will be those at the edges. Security, aka firewalling for example, will be deployed on each edge device.

Steve Bellovin (one of the Wily Hacker authors) wrote about distributed firewalls in 1999, here : Distributed Firewalls