Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #3681 > unrolled thread

What net neutrality means for VoIP

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  What net neutrality means for VoIP RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-06-15 12:40 +0000
    Re: What net neutrality means for VoIP 2phar <none@example.com> - 2014-06-16 13:59 +0000

#3681 — What net neutrality means for VoIP

From the «ca-can-yo-you-ha-ha-hear-hear-m-m-me-now-ow?» department:
Title: Why the net neutrality debate also matters for VoIP
Author: Alexey Aylarov, Zingaya
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2014 13:30:01 -0400
Link: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/OmMalik/~3/1bYQd0tWc1w/
Podcast Download URL: http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f61183cf1974afda4981596f4a1e7cde?s=96&d=retro&r=PG

At my company, Zingaya, we work on VoIP solutions in click-to-call technology
(which is one segment of a big industry, with Skype being the most well-known
VoIP company). Given our position in this industry, my colleagues and I have
watched the developments of the net neutrality court case and subsequent
moves by ISPs very closely, with an eye on how these changes will impact
innovation in the rapidly changing VoIP field.

With the end of FCC enforcement of open internet rules, a few select
companies will very quickly be making major decisions on how fast most users
will be able to access content across the web. Video streaming, as we know,
takes up a plurality of bandwidth usage (and will only increase in
popularity). However, the danger isn’t just limited to video. The major ISPs
in the United States — Comcast and AT&T among others — often also provide
voice services that directly compete with many of the services provided by
VoIP. As industry analyst Phil Edholm points out, it would be easy for ISPs
to push VoIP providers to a lower level of service[1] unless those providers
pay extra to be bumped up to a better service level. Since VoIP requires a
certain threshold of data speed to deliver an effective sound or picture
quality to customers, reducing that quality negatively impacts customer
willingness to adopt VoIP over the alternatives.

What’s more, the innovative possibilities of VoIP and VoIP-related
technologies, like WebRTC, will also be throttled by the lack of open
internet standards. New VoIP technologies are often not just limited to
voice; they incorporate video capabilities as well. VoIP services require
simultaneous high quality upload and download streams, instead of just
download streams as with a service like Netflix. As such, VoIP shares many of
the same concerns as video streaming, and the dangers for VoIP services may
be even greater.

Having a level playing field for telecommunications in particular is vital,
and there’s a reason why the FCC already regulates telephone service. In the
absence of net neutrality, nascent VoIP services will have a harder time
gaining traction. They, like up-and-coming video streaming services, will
have to pay for the data quality they need. As a result, firms in the future
will not compete on the true merits of their products, but will instead
compete in an environment where the best quality is granted to the firms that
can pay the most — a surefire way to stifle innovation.

WebRTC is perhaps particularly interesting here, as it continues to increase
in adoption and thus will be intertwined with net neutrality. According to
the WebRTC standard, all media traffic is encrypted (via Datagram Transport
Layer Security, or DTLS) and sent using Secure Real-time Transport Protocol
(SRTP). This encryption may confound ISPs seeking to throttle bandwidth based
on what kind of traffic is passing through their channels, because they will
not be able to recognize the precise nature of it. In response, some ISPs
have invested in expensive hardware (like DPI, deep packet inspection) for
examining the packets running through their networks. Since WebRTC can and
will be used in a variety of ways, there will certainly be questions
regarding how providers detect what’s running inside the encrypted channels.

But in any case, net neutrality isn’t dead. First, this ruling only applies
to the United States. Second, though the FCC is not appealing the ruling, it
is exploring other means of enforcing open internet standards. The oversight
of particular actions will occur on a more case-by-case basis, but the FCC is
still also considering reclassifying internet service if those other means
are not effective[2]. These efforts are heartening, and those of us
interested in the future of VoIP should be invested in supporting these open
internet standards.

Alexey Aylarov is the CEO of Zingaya[3], which enables online calls from web
pages. Aylarov is also the founder of VoxImplant, a communications cloud
platform for mobile and web app developers.

Photo courtesy of Shutterstock user imagedb.com[4].
[image 5]

[image 7][6]

Related research and analysis from Gigaom Research:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial[8].

* How consumer media consumption shifted in the second quarter[9]
* The state of the converged-mobile-messaging market[10]
* The future of mobile: a segment analysis by GigaOM Pro[11]

[image 13][12][image 14]

Links:
[1]: http://www.nojitter.com/post/240165404/will-net-neutrality-ruling-impact-voip-and-uc-services (link)
[2]: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/20/business/fcc-to-propose-new-rules-on-open-internet.html?_r=1 (link)
[3]: http://zingaya.com (link)
[4]: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-113663284/stock-photo-businessman-on-the-phone-with-his-face-covered-by-phone-cord.html?src=O9bNV4N1DVP7rZQglyuJyw-2-57 (link)
[5]: http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=gigaom.com&blog=14960843&post=849460&subd=gigaom2&ref=&feed=1 (image)
[6]: http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?iu=/31971080/Gigaom_RSS_300x250&sz=300x250&c=450818 (link)
[7]: http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/ad?iu=/31971080/Gigaom_RSS_300x250&sz=300x250&c=450818 (image)
[8]: http://research.gigaom.com/?utm_source=techutm_medium=editorial&utm_campaign=auto3&utm_term=849460+why-the-net-neutrality-debate-also-matters-for-voip&utm_content=aprilkilcrease (link)
[9]: http://research.gigaom.com/report/connected-consumer-second-quarter-2013-analysis-and-outlook/?utm_source=techutm_medium=editorial&utm_campaign=auto3&utm_term=849460+why-the-net-neutrality-debate-also-matters-for-voip&utm_content=aprilkilcrease (link)
[10]: http://research.gigaom.com/report/the-converged-mobile-messaging-market-analysis-and-forecast/?utm_source=techutm_medium=editorial&utm_campaign=auto3&utm_term=849460+why-the-net-neutrality-debate-also-matters-for-voip&utm_content=aprilkilcrease (link)
[11]: http://research.gigaom.com/report/the-future-of-mobile-a-segment-analysis-by-gigaom-pro/?utm_source=techutm_medium=editorial&utm_campaign=auto3&utm_term=849460+why-the-net-neutrality-debate-also-matters-for-voip&utm_content=aprilkilcrease (link)
[12]: http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/OmMalik?a=1bYQd0tWc1w:KF4zv_s9HIs:yIl2AUoC8zA (link)
[13]: http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/OmMalik?d=yIl2AUoC8zA (image)
[14]: http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/OmMalik/~4/1bYQd0tWc1w (image)

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#3705

On Sun, 15 Jun 2014 12:40:25 +0000, RS Wood wrote:

> Having a level playing field for telecommunications in particular is
> vital,
> and there’s a reason why the FCC already regulates telephone service.

Aboslutely. A dependable uniform network is the basis for a large part of 
the technolofy economy.

Think of how much design and engineering effort has been, and will be, 
wasted trying to develop workarounds and compromises to deal with 
uncertain network speed/availability/reliability, much like it was in the 
period where access to broadband was restricted to the chosen few by the 
telcos while the rest of us were forced to make do with dial-up.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web