Slashdot Mirror
Intel: VoIP is Beachhead to More Collaboration
Rob writes "VoIP is old news. Long live SoIP. That was the message from Intel Corp's
director of VoIP strategy in its digital enterprise group Michael Stanford at a recent
industry conference in San Francisco, California. Stanford, who works with business
managers and engineers in and outside Intel, said that, while 2005 has been a good year
for VoIP, the technology is the "first drop in the deluge" of IP network
applications. "VoIP is a beachhead, so to speak, of services over IP. I can't
emphasize that enough," Stanford said, referring to collaboration services that
could benefit from running on infrastructures optimized for VoIP."
I thought it was SEX over IP.
Sex is a service... right?
... "The Internet" ...?
Doesn't matter if it means anything.
-Peter
... but what's SoIP?
"the technology is the 'first drop in the deluge' of IP network applications."
Yeah, I wonder what comes next over IP... email, downloading media and maybe even chat!!!
Oh, I can't help quoting you because everything that you said rings true
Thank G-d they never came to Australia... you americians can keep them... we will have some stupid company here that will do SoIP for $10
Bahahahahaha!
j0b.org - A famous domain name for sale
After all, the technologies underlying VoIP, such as SIP, RTP, QoS and IMS, also support videoconferencing, presence, document sharing and rich collaboration, he said. "VoIP has enormous power to change the way we work," he said.
Because we all know how popular NetMeeting is!
Sex Over IP?
hell, I've been doing that for years!
guess I'm old school that way...
Wow, if you think you have latency problems now with your VoIP, wait until they cludge on all of these other services.
But seriously, the use of these other services are going to cause a major headache to those trying to get VoIP in the short run,In the long run, however, making the networks streamlined for the other services as well is really going to make the VoIP service stream great.
Luke
----
ChristianNerds.com, the Easy-to-Understand Computer Encyclopedia
Oh man! Asterisk isn't even out of *beta* yet!
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
What's old is new again.
-- www.globaltics.net
Political discussion for a new world
SoIP stands for what now? One can only infer that it means "Services over IP."
Yes, I am a smart ass; it's better than the alternative.
Not that I think this will go through, but in case it does: Asterisk ( I'm trying to stay relevent ).
Now, on to bigger and better things. Who borked the comments?
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
I haven't heard the term SoIP?
My Vonage rocks the party for over a year now. I like my $26 a month for unlimited phone calls, and the quality is great.
"I cannot think of any need in childhood as strong as the need for a father's protection." -- Sigmund Freud
I predict this new "tele-phone" invention will change society as we know it!
test post
Speaking from a non-corporate perspective, MP3 was probably the real first beachhead, with the iPod, XBox Media Center, and podcasting enhancing IP's reach into the world.
It seems like a short distance from voice to sound and from person-to-person to peer-to-peer. I wonder when people will use modified forms of VOIP to share music. Sure the QOS needs to be better and they'll need a way to do stereo (two data channels embedded on one VOIP transmission? sequential transmissions? parallel transmission on 2 VOIP calls?), but technical specs have a way of getting better with time.
Since telephony is a peer-to-peer network, using VOIP for file sharing seems inevitable.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
Static over IP? I see they want to recreate the cell phone user experience :-).
Why use a Cell or a land line when in the future, your TI Calc will make calls too.
What would be nice is if Cell phone companys made long distance free, not just in the US, but world wide.
Mark
wow. posting broke?
321
I for one welcome our new SoIP overlords.
... application integration and network convergence . A resounding "DUH" for the Intel guru ...
== With enough Will Power, one could move mountains. With enough Brains, one would just leave them where they are ==
It should come as no surprise that Intel is interested in "services over IP", given that Intel processors will most likely be powering these services. Intel is trying to make the PC become more important and require better hardware, as their revenue is directly proportional to the number of Intel processors sold every year.
Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
Services over IP? Like ftp, http, etc?
Cool...I can't wait until they get that working.
This is probably old news to most /.ers, but to those who just joined up yesterday, everything is going to be over the internet soon. Phone and Music was first to be made popular. Soon Videos will be mass marketed, and then TV and Movies. You can get them already, but I'm talking an iTunes type store for content, not P2P.
This is all due to Network Layer Abstraction. The internet is based on the idea that networks have different layers. The physical cable is one layer, while the protocol, TCP/IP is another. The data itself is yet another. The is a bit simplified, but idea is that if you change one layer, the other layers remain unchanged. I can use DSL or cable or dialup for internet data, but I can get music from iTunes no matter which service I chose. I could replace IP4 with IP6 and again still get that data. I could switch to Napster from iTunes and not affect my Internet service. I can switch from Vonage to Speakeasy or even to that godawfully expensive comcast phone service if I wanted (though it's more likely I'll switch from that TO vonage).
This is what truly opens us up to innovation and competition. The internet simply transfers data, but that data can literally be anything. Phone networks can only transfer voice information, and their transmission of data is limited. By separating out all these services, people can insert themselves anywhere in the network chain and make something new.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Like, ya know, like applications, messaging and colaboration tools running over IP?
What a neat idea!
Strange that they haven't noticed that this has been going on for what, decades?
Intel seems to be jumping on the VOIP bandwagon a bit late. Service over IP seems like just an attempt to re-frame the work already done so that consumers think of it as an Intel-developed product. The applications mentioned such as VOIP and teleconferencing have been in use for years. The only thing holding them back (which skype solved) was poor-UI. If people can work on that the applications of this type of technology can spread throughout society.
Does SoIP stand for... you know...
Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
BTW, Is this a first post? If so, why - did I miss the memo on boycotting /. or something?
.. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
propz2rolloffle
Ron dies in chapter 9 of book 7.
You know it's true people.
I'll try for FP also.
Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
Services over IP?
Wow, what a great idea! We could put a port number (just for example) in the IP spec, and then different services could be available on those ports... OVER IP!!!
This is clearly the next great step forward for the internet.
My cell phone already is a 100% replacement for my desk phone. Or at least it was until my boss decided my cell phone bill was too high, so I was downgraded to a desk phone and a cell phone plan wher I have to sweat the monthly minute limits.
Are fancy network roaming handsets gong to be cheaper to use then current cell phones? I doubt it.
This sounds like more technology being pushed by the technology producers, not the solution to a problem.
Give me my current cell phone with a $20/month unlimited minute plan and you have solved a problem. Give me a fancy roaming handset with a plan I can't afford and you are wasting your (and more importantly my) time.
How can someone really say that VOIP is just the beginning of providing services over IP networks? I have been receiving services such as web, ftp, radio and video over IP networks. This whole voice calling thing, for me, came after all of that.
That's like saying that HDTV is just a beachhead and there will be AMAZING services offered over RF in the future.
Maybe that's why I can't understand marketing. To me technologies like RSS aren't exciting enought o get my attention since XML over HTTP has been around for ages. The whole difference is how you package it and sell it.
I guess if they can "sell" the internet to people all over again as SOIP then he's right. Intead of hooking your computer up to the internet, you really need to buy a web appliance, a VOIP phone and a set top box for downloading movies. Your computer does the internet, but these new devices from Intel do SOIP! There's a HUGE difference!
Yeah, I saw Stargate too. Looky, looky, we all have an expanded volcabulary now.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
Isn't this the sort of thing IP is usually used for anyway? Like TCPoIP, that sort of thing....
What's new about this?
With the internet acting flaky like it is now, I wonder how many VOIP systems are still working at the moment.
I read Slashdot for the headlines, because the headlines, unlike the articles, are usually original and never duplicated
could he be hinting at apples new movie/video store?
Am I the only one who thinks that moving TV over to IP is an intresting idea. Either in sort of a pod casting distribution method or in a tradtional method of channels, or maybe both. DTV http://participatoryculture.org/download.php seems intresting but i havent tried it yet (im waiting for the Windows version).
Am I the only one who thinks that moving TV over to IP is an intresting idea. Either in sort of a pod casting distribution method or in a tradtional method of channels, or maybe both. DTV http://participatoryculture.org/download.php seems intresting but i havent tried it yet (im waiting for the Windows version).
by SoIP?
Slashdot over IP doesn't seem to be working today though.
Sure 6Mbps downstream speed is great, unless you're trying to upload a video to a web host or worse, stream it from your machine. Upload speeds must be 50% of download speeds for this sort of future to happen. I'd love to have multiple VoIP phone lines once I have two or three teenage crotch goblins, but I can't do that if the upstream speed is only 768kbps (or whatever it is with Comcast).
Fix the upstream bandwidth gap, run some fiber to the home and then we'll talk about more services over IP.
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
This seems like more like hype and no substance as everyboy is working on inproving VoIP for broader services.
Maybe the poster should clarify SoIP, since TFA doesn't.
Servive over IP?
Storage over IP?
or my favorite:
Sex over IP
I'm waiting for DOIP (Data over IP). Now thats gonna really rock!
oh, the pain.... it was only a dream, just a dream....
MoIP for Multimedia over IP that should solve all the xxIP terminology.
With online shopping, I get all my stuff over IP.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Have a great time with it, I'm busy with other things.
:-)
Yeh, like posting to slashdot
Infuriate left and right
I think people should work on Data over IP. I can't wait until someone invents a device that will let me hook up my computer, that will be sweet!
This is not the greatest sig in the world, this is just a tribute.
Long live Sex over IP
/ http://suffocate.us
/ http://johngrayson.com
Bandwidth and VOIP applications is obviously subject to a bottleneck limit if the threshhold is too low (less than 128kb up is gonna be tough)
However, 768kbp is WAY more than adequate to satiate the average small office, and is overkill for a family.
My office is 100% VOIP & asterisk.... we currently have 9 VOIP lines running fine (4 vonage, 5 broadvoice... phaing out vonage)
The key here that everyone seems to miss is that bandwidth costs are only aggragate during active phone calls.
If you've ever installed a PBX (traditional) you'll be remiss not to have backup POTS lines with that office Voice T1. When you plan how many "hard lines" you want available to the system in the event of an emergency, you normally account for the average simultaneous call vaolume during peak hours (an office of 20 people float around 6 simultaneous calls depending on the industry)
So while you may have a family of twelve, it's HIGHLY unlikely everyone will be wanting to use the phone at once..... you'd be lucky to have four phone calls at once.
This is when you start to add up your real-world "peak" bandwidth usage. While it may technicaly possible for all twelve people to pick up the phone at the same time, it's extremely unlikely.... the current "standard" codec g.711 Ulaw (US) is a 64kbps codec (per stream... 64k up, 64k down).... so 768kbps up should (theoreticaly) support 12 SIMULTANEOUS phone calls.
in the real world, network congestion, overhead, latency, other traffic (web pages, file uploads/downloads, streaming, etc...) should make a pragmatic sys admin cut the number in half to be safe..... thats 6 SIMULTANEOUS calls on a 768 connection.
Latency is a bigger issue than bandwidth for just about any home/office except the larger ones. And i assure you, if you have that many people who need to make calls.... get two seperete DSL's and call it a day (because it will still be cheaper).
Now if you want to account for use of alternative codecs (GSM & speex come to mind)... your talking progressively smaller bandwidth needs (8, 16 and 32!!!)
Currently, using asterisk, i have users with "softphones" in europe (were in the US), with a dozen SIP phones on site, and 9 total VOIP lines.... and were fine. this is all on a single 3mb/768kb verizon DSL (dont ask).
your biggest concerns are network lag (ISP flooding during peak times) and latency.... DSL is outstanding for VOIP as far as latency go's.
When high-res Video conferencing becomes common, then youll have major headaches.
--Idiots, Every single one of YOU, A flaming mass of conglomerated morons, hey wait a second, isnt that how RAID works?
Like 'hype' if you are from New York City.
No, no, no... it's SPAM over IP... Talk about yer old news...
This is why Brooks wrote "Mythical Man Month", basically. The more you need to "collaborate", the slower you move. If this tech causes an explosion of context switches for people who try to do "real, actual work" (such as myself), then you can bet those people will resist this technology.
Where I work, all work is done behind closed doors with "email only" post-it note underneath the name tag. Otherwise you can bet your ass you will see ten PMs and fifteen testers come by because they have nothing better to do than distract me. Sometimes, when people stop reading the post-it note, I simply grab my laptop and go work somewhere so that no one can find me. Yeah, it's that bad.
And this, not "lack of collaboration" is a BIG problem in large orgs. Collaboration needs to be succinct, adequate and preferably asynchronous (so that people who do work don't get distracted), but making an emphasis on it and making it unnecessarily easy is shooting oneself in the foot.
Meanwhile, TCP/IP was developped to transfer data, and could run on the same kind of network used by the Bell System, but did not charge either by connection time nor amount of data transferred.
Now, we see people talking about making voice-circuits over packet-switching networks, and that the network oughta be optimized for such "voice" use. All this to avoid the connect-time-priced-voice-circuit pricing scheme used by phone companies...
Talk about re-inventing the wheel!!!
Well.. in france we got an ISP who provides a SetTop Box with mpeg-2 TV + Phone + Internet (O_O Internet over IP ?), the STB also does Routing, and with a PCMCIA card, wireless routing. This may be seen as old stuff by /.ers, but for the Lambda User, this is very interesting :)
When fiction hits reality, dreams have no air-bag.
From the no shit section:
Company finds a way to make money from new technology, announces that the technology is great and going somewhere!
Up next, instant messaging
It seems to me that we have heard about converged services and handhelds that allow us to do everything from one device and technically this has been possible for years... so what is the hold up? I was thinking that it's possibly the business model and that maybe we should spend less time working on how technology is going to solve a problem that doesn't really exist and more on how are these companies going to make their money? traditionally it is made by selling "unique features", but no-one today wants to be tied down to one manufactures devices for everything. (when is the last time one company does everything good?) so why not use open standards you might say... and that works for the most part, but really what we need is open services and I don't see large companies providing this anytime soon. Just something to think about... Hopefully I'm wrong.
lame lame lame lame lame lame lame lame lame lame lame lame lameness filter, oh how I hate thee.
Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
Strudel over ip [halfbakery.com]
Aliant (Telephone/Internet/Satelite provider in the east coast of Canada) offers about 15 channels of television (lots of news, comedy network, tech-TV, music, et al) over IP to your computer. It's not much, but it's a start- There's so much excess downstream bandwidth that could be used for television... and since it comes from your cable/DSL company, it's not on the Internet as a whole, so latency is really low.
-M
when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
Yeah, I would also like a single WiFi/GSM/WiMAX auto-handoff radio in my phone and in my laptop. Won't happen. The mobile carriers and incumbent fixed-line providers have too much at stake to permit it. Their numbers might even be better were they willing, but they can't see beyond their current business models.
And for that matter, VoIP hasn't yet found its own "killer app" beyond bypassing certain wedged regulatory regimes. The main providers (vonage and the like) really don't provide much more to the end user (speaker?) than the POTS guys do. "Shared collaboration"....err, how does that "build" on VoIP again?
Either this guy is seriously confused or he's in marketing. Oh wait, this article is a shill for Intel's upcoming marketing presentation!
They'll need to invent a support over IP if they want these services to work correctly for end users. How do they plan to diagnose problems with Services over IP (SoIP) such as router mis-configs, bandwidth limitations, Adware problems, etc?
It is the stream-lining of the INet for the real time delivery of services over IP while conserving bandwidth. So I don't have drops in my phone call, or so my alarm system does not have to wait while you send your email or login to with that bandwidth hogging telnet application. It also has to do with determining were all of the bandwidth is going. With technologies that support VoIP, a network eng. can build a nice fat pipe for VoIP calls and charge accordingly for its usage. That way you don't have to pay five cents per min for your telnet connection just because you are on the same IP network as a bunch of Asia calling VoIPers.
Greetings Programs,
The sad part is that IP is not necessarily the best network to provide some of these services. There are effectual monopolies over the "last mile" physical networks that we depend on as basic utilities.
For example the copper pair which carries the most basic electrical signaling circuit, a telephone line, is owned by SBC in my area. SBC decides to multiplex the telephone with a DSL circuit and then overlay it with FrameRelay and then IP over that so they can build an Ethernet bridge over the IP network to form a tunnel to run a Point to Point connection (yes like dialup) through it so IP again can be put over the Ethernet so you can get your tcp and eventually your VoIP and telent applications alike. If you have heard of PPPoE then you are in this group of bandwidth and CPU cycle wasting MoFos. If you think I am confused about the network topology of SBC DSL, then that just proves how convoluted it really is.
The next group of bandwidth wasters is the cable users. Time Warner Cable is owned by Time Warner which of course is the borg. But it will take more than a transphasic torpedo to push future technologies over their network. They use a fiber-coax network over which they supply a noisy and crappy analog TV signal. Don't believe it's noisy, check out one of those cable trucks with that PVC pipe rig used to see who in the hood is stealing cable TV. If they can tell you your watching cable from the street, then it's gotta be crappy. Then they multiplex another signal with that one over which they can deliver digital TV and of course IP, so you can have your VoIP, so you can wait on hold with TW Cable, so you can talk to the hive queen to complain about the fuzzy lines on the SciFi channel while I watch picture perfect HBO in High Definition and while running telnet.
Now I don't know what kind of technology TW uses to deliver the digital signal, or what is going down on the fiber side of the fiber-coax hybrid network that still uses those crappy F connectors that I can't unscrew anyway. I don't want to know because I am sure it is crappier than I can imagine. However, they could just give me a fiber-fiber network with a fiber to my house and into a box where I can connect a SONET ring, FDDI, DWDM or maybe just a $99 Gigabit Ethernet card into. Then I can have VoIP, video-on-demand, video conferencing, a regular telephone line and of course my telnet app all while running an Internet Provider out of my bedroom with just one piece of fiber. But that would make too much sense.
So would using the DSL line in an efficient manner make too much sense for SBC. Anyone could provide much more speed over that pair of copper by delivering voice, video-on-demand, video conferencing, and IP services all in parallel to each other using ATM over DSL without all of that extra encapsulation and tunneling. Unfortunately you have to have a clean DSL line to deliver those services and who has heard of a growing DSL provider other than their local phone company in the last few years.
So you think that sux, don't even get me started into FM/AM and all of the other frequencies that are wasted by FCC regulation. Ever wonder why your new cell phone, cordless phone, WiFi router, Bluetooth headset, wireless weather station, outdoor speakers, door bell and personal radios all manage to use the same tiny frequency while just barely interfering with each other? You can bet it is not the protection that the FCC provides to Clear Channel and other radio operators.
Next time you are thinking, "Gee, VoIP is so great!" remember that we would not even need it if we had started using packet technologies in the 1970s like we would have without media monopolies. Cash over IP would be the 2007 goal for Intel if there was someone to compete with Time Warner Cable, SBC, Comcast, Clear Channel and the other grubberment licensed power brokers.
EOL