Slashdot Mirror
VoIP Advances And Trends For 2004
gardel writes "So everyone's top-tech predictions for 2004 says it will be the year of VoIP. What does that really mean? This may narrow it down. Here's Voxilla's list of the top-10 advances and trends in the world of VoIP. On the list: VoIP and cellular converges, IP phones take over, Chinese and Mexican phone numbers come to the U.S., Asterisk hits it big. What would you add?"
Intel is currently working furiously on a cellular chip that will seamlessly roam to WiFi networks. They also want it to carry prodigous amounts of data. Known as the Digital Briefcase specification, any compliant PC will automagically recognize the phone and allow you to log into the PC as if it were your own. Mail, favorites, documents/music and even wallpaper and settings will appear seamlessly. Check out my sig for more...
POTS will die a quick death unless the big TelCos start lobbying for taxes. Slashdotters move these companies up on the list of Evil entities.
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
EPIC's VoIP letter to the FCC
People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
Why IP and not by e-mail address? Think about it, e-mail is a way for some one to contact you through text, well why not just say that e-mail is a way to contact you which ever way you wish. Why not have everything done to your e-mail address?
Then if you have a cell phone and a home phone why not have it setup like cell.myaddress@host.com? Dialing by IP would be too much to remember. I can hardly remember a regular phone number now! But I know just about every one's e-mail address by heart because it's just english and not a string of numbers.
Why? Local IP access for too many Internet users is still limited by 56Kb/s dialup, which is too slow for reliable, comprehensible voice exchange. Providers emerging from the rat's nest of former state telco monopolies have been unable to introduce anything remotely resembling a widespread DSL service at a sensible cost (remember ISDN? :-)
Perhaps in city areas in the USA we will see VoIP start to make it, but for the real world it's simply a myth (but I would adore to be proved wrong!)
I though it was one of the more informative things I have seen posted to slashdot in a while. He makes no attempt to hide that it is his site.
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
Dial by IP? Lets see which IP will you dial me by today since I get on the internet through a DSL service provider who periodically switches my IP address. Fixed IP you say? Well certainly the IPv4 will run out then. You going to remember an IPv6 address? For all your friends? Maybe we don't need phone numbers, but dialing by IP is not very well thought out either.
The problem with VoIP is that it isn't half as good as people think it is -- there are certainly good niche applications, and ways to use it profitably, but it simply isn't the be-all and end-all. Why do people fawn over it so much? I think it's largely because "IP" has that "k3w1" quality of the Internet in general, while phones are passe -- hardly a good way to make rational decisions.
s /HotNets0 2-IP_conquest_of_the_world_with_authors.pdf
This paper is pretty useful:
http://klamath.stanford.edu/~nickm/paper
In the meantime, VoIP grows because some countries allow it to be used for a sort of regulatory arbitrage. It popped up before the rules covered it, or they didn't know how to deal with it, so it got special favored treatment. That's not the same as saying it is "unregulated"! In the USA, long distance is almost unregulated, but the local telephone monoplies are regulated -- they have a stake in how much they can charge for VoIP calls that use their networks the same way other long distance calls do. Expect an interesting year at the FCC while this is debated.
I do not expect computer-to-computer VoIP to be regulated (in the USA) at all; it's simply not anyone's but the users' to deal with. But of course some cable or DSL providers might try to block it, in order to sell their own phone services -- that'll be interesting to watch.
I'm sure it works, but it's still a hack on a hack. Thinking like this ("it works, why fix it") will surely cause problems in the future. It will be a real mess, or rather a bunch of hacks rather then a clean implementation. I hope I don't get to be here when we hit the roof :)
NAT (ups and downs):
- Too much configuration needed.
+ Security (we _know_ that some OSes really aren't ready for being 'naked' on the world wild web (Yes, I know it's wide) - in the sense of not having a firewall.)
NAT prevents this straightforward implementation, which must make telcos very happy.
Again people dont confuss VOIP with being over the internet all the time, it is simply "Voice over IP", IP does not equal Internet.
Most the time people assume they are talking about some shitty software and mic hooked to thier computer. Others might only think of VOIP as being in the last mile, liek a new VOIP PBX they just installed at work that lets them do some really cool shit.
VOIP can be all that and allot more, but what this is talking about it telco's racing to replace all their internal voice equipment with newer IP switchs that will save allot of time and money.
Also once telco's do that, Yes the goverment will want a good way to listen is on those converstations at the telco's CO, jsut liek they do now. The telephone companies will have to have a way to give they access to each phone call etc..