|
|
Kevin Werbach
(Supernova):
| The communication network has become multi-application, even though
the network is just a transport network and is applications agnostic.
| Even the telephony
network is applications agnostic – it supports human voice, fax and
data. The applications are realized only at the end points. If this
feels far fetched, replace POTS access technology with ISDN, but keep
everything the same. Now ask the same question. |
|
| The applications are realized only at the end-points. |
| Many applications use voice as part of their communications, but may
not be “telephony” in the traditional sense – to wit, if the gamers
communicate is it voice? Should they have support for E911? |
| VoIP is not just for arbitrage. |
Charles Giancarlo (Cisco):
| IP is more reliable than PSTN |
| Can offer new features like multiple lines, phone numbers, IM,
Presence and Push-to-talk |
| Service providers’ revenue will go down.
| There will be a
corresponding decline for VoIP service providers as well. Indeed, the
revenue of these service providers is inversely proportional to the size
of the VoIP users. There are no purple minutes; at most there could only
be purple database dips. VoIP is a product and not a service. |
|
Jeff Pulver (pulver.com):
| “Telephony” is not the only thing realized by IP Communication (so
don’t apply all the voice regulations on it) |
| Social policies can be addressed by the industry (self regulation) |
| The industry needs to address many open issues (regulations will
stifle the innovative spirit) |
John Hodulik (UBS):
| Access revenue is declining ~8% per year. |
| Investors will be hesitant till the regulatory picture clears. |
John Billock (Time Warner):
| Willing to play within a regulatory regime. |
| Viewing it as a facilities-based service
| That means it is a
capital intensive game; no need to worry about price wars too much. We
should ensure that broadband facilities providers do not do things that
ensure that only they can offer voice service. Such a trend is already
being used by at least one service provider. |
|
Follow-up Discussion:
Some interesting questions were raised by the
commissioners soliciting thought provoking responses.
| Powell asked whether regulation will drive the
service providers offshore there by driving economic activity away from
this country. Pulver replied that since these service providers need to
interconnect to our PSTN network, the economic activity can not totally
disappear.
| If I haven’t
misinterpreted, this is an unexpected remark. Since the need for
interconnection to PSTN will diminish as VoIP takes off, this
reassurance is not satisfactory. |
|
| Abernathy wanted to know the impact rising VoIP
will have on existing players. Hodulik responded saying that incumbents
will invest only in new services. Pulver observed that IXCs and other LD
companies will be affected before RBOCs feel the pinch.
| It is a shame that
incumbent vendors are not addressing this need. Probably he was thinking
that RBOCs can provide “parasite” service and mitigate the downside. |
|
| Copps made an observation that since broadband
is unprofitable, worrying about VoIP is not that important.
| I am sure I didn’t get
the point; otherwise, the panelists would have made a vigorous rebuttal.
|
|
|
|