HVN,
You've made a very interesting observation, IMO, and one that I think deserves some attention:
and I couldn't believe it was VOIP.
What gives you the assurance that it was VoIP?
As good as circuit switched.
Rest assured, and I'm not saying that this holds true in your referenced experience, necessarily, but there are carriers today that have both capabilities in place residing in their nodes, and they are intermixing these products to satisfy traffic demands on the basis of what is available, sometimes providing traditional POTS even when the user falsely thinks they are using a VoIP-based service. Forsooth! <?>
When summoned on this, these carriers will say that they are offering a generic service, and not a specific technology, and they'd be right about that, unless they offered a tariffed version with specific stipulations to the contrary. They'd be right, of course, all except for how the regulatory implications could be construed. Then, it gets to be sticky business.
In fact, some of the most sensational press releases to date by some rather large carrier entities that have spoken about deployments of VoIP are, in reality, cases where these carriers are using traditional switched circuit technologies, almost exclusively in some instances, to satisfy their users' LD requirements. This should tell us something about the elasticity of the margins that they have to play with in the international arena.
FWIW, and Regards, Frank C.
|
