"Lifeline"? In state commissions that have defined the term for regulatory purposes, the primary criteria has been high availability. The press release seems to capture that, but it pushes the burden ( a heavy burden, I think) back onto the cable operator, with a system design that calls for network powering. < First, the network interface unit is powered by the network to ensure that the telephone connection remains in operation even in the event of a power failure.> These in-home devices have typically had fairly substantial power drain, which would require, as you know, a complete power redesign as part of a cable rebuild. Even some very recent rebuilds would have to be reworked to support this powering load, adding standby power systems, respacing power insertion systems, and, if not already upgraded, changing out the taps to the power-passing variety. All of that work would seem to be an up-front, system wide requirement before "lifeline" service could be offered. But I don't want to steal Ray Jensen's topic ...
<Secondly, the IP telephony system will offer competitive, enhanced features such as call forwarding, call waiting, conferencing and caller ID. This functionality is not currently available in other IP telephony solutions.> These features are certainly attractive and probably necessary for selling high volumes of lines, but they have never been considered part of "lifeline." Access to E911 or basic 911 usually is a requirement for "lifeline" services. Since E911 access is such a commonly encountered requirement, it seems odd not to find it among ADC's list of ancillary capabilities. Incorporating E911 access to a city-wide telephony system is not a trivial undertaking. |
