[VOIPSEC] VOIP for free??
br at brianrosen.net
Wed Apr 13 13:17:33 BST 2005
While I expect that we will see some very "light touch" regulations on U.S.
VoIP service providers, I don't think that we can count on that to get the
kind of service we want. We have to make it so easy and inexpensive to
handle an emergency call that they all do it because they have a very small
liability if they don't, but the cost of complying is smaller than the "net
present value" of the liability. If it takes a couple hundred lines of
code, and nothing else but an Internet connection, I think that would do it.
The fundamental problem with regulation is that you can't regulate non-U.S.
suppliers, and yet they can offer the same services to U.S. customers.
I have reason to believe if we do make it that easy and that inexpensive,
then systems like Skype (your example) would implement what is necessary.
That's the plan. Of course, Skype has PSTN connections now.
You are very wrong about devices that look like a phone and don't offer
emergency call services. There are very few such devices except VoIP
devices that look like phones and don't work for emergency calls today.
Many, many people care, especially the authorities. Sometimes the
authorities are misled by incorrect assumptions made by service providers on
their costs of complying, or by vested interests whose business is better
served by high costs and low compliance rates.
Let me ask it to you this way:
If it costs a service provider an average of $.0001 per month per subscriber
to support emergency call services, and one person per year per service
provider loses their life because they couldn't get help from the service,
is that a good tradeoff?
Suppose it was $.001 per sub per month? $.01? $.1?
Suppose one person sues the service provider because they didn't provide the
service? Would that be a good tradeoff?
Now, if it costs $1 a month a subscriber to provide the service, and you
have 10M subscribers, then you can decide if its worth it. Maybe it would
be to you. Probably not to me, but at least we're in a range where you can
make the argument with a straight face.
I'd like the cost of compliance to be a couple hundred lines of open source
code, and access to a public routing database.
Now, this does NOT include the issue of location determination, which is a
more substantial cost, born by the Access Infrastructure Provider. That's a
bigger deal, and more difficult, and probably subject to more regulation,
and a more level playing field for the regulation (the AIP is always local).
From: Voipsec-bounces at voipsa.org [mailto:Voipsec-bounces at voipsa.org] On
Behalf Of Alexander
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 7:24 PM
To: voipsec at voipsa.org
Subject: Re: [VOIPSEC] VOIP for free??
On Mon, Apr 11, 2005 at 09:14:50AM -0400, stuart jacobs wrote:
> Unfortunately, in the USA, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
> does care about 911 and mandates support by any supplier of
> telecommunications services currently over the PSTN but will eventually
> apply to non-PSTN Local communications system as well.
What about closed services like Skype? There might be community with
computer-only network (i.e. no access to/from PSTN at all) - will this
be considered as "telecommunication services"? If yes, what about 911
routing, if there are (say) no phone numbers involved?
To be honest, I don't really understand why anyone who is offering voice
services (whatever it is - VoIP, Skype or like) must provide 911
routing... No, "looks like phone" is not an argument here - there are
many devices which looks like phone and are not capable to provide 911
or equivalent service, and nobody (including authorities) cares.
Voipsec mailing list
Voipsec at voipsa.org
More information about the Voipsec