Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Voice-on-the-net (VON), VoIP, Internet (IP) Telephony -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1304)	9/16/1998 8:27:00 AM
From: Stephen B. Temple	Respond to of 3178

Bell Atlantic puts out welcome mat for 'Net voice September 16, 1998 Network World via NewsEdge Corporation : While other local carriers want to squeeze as much money as they can out of competitors that sell IP telephony, Bell Atlantic has ta ken a step toward keeping the service low-priced. Last week, Bell Atlantic agreed to make it easier for IP telephony vendors to complete calls on the company's regular voice network via a new IP gateway service. ITXC, an IP voice carrier that is piecing together a worldwide IP voice network using the Internet, private lines and multiple affil iates, is the first Bell Atlantic customer to use the gateway service that links IP nets to Bell Atlantic's circuit-switched network . Potential savings Incoming international IP phone calls from ITXC's network will be terminated at a Bell Atlantic IP gateway in New York. The gateway will dial up the destination phone number on the public phone network and patch the call through. Before, ITXC had to maintain its own gateway and access Bell Atlantic's network over leased lines, according to Mary Evslin, vice pr esident of marketing for ITXC. It costs ITXC less in staffing and hardware to hire Bell Atlantic to run the gateway, she says. Because Bell Atlantic's business is based on providing reliable phone service, the company is well qualified to run the gateway, E vslin says. "They're better at running a voice network. They know how to do commercial phone calls, " she says. In addition, the service lets ITXC focus on the IP end of phone calls, which is ITXC's main business. "We're trying to establish an IP voice network where currently there is none," Evslin says. The service handles only inbound calls destined for Bell Atlantic's network, not those originating from phones within the company's network. But Bell Atlantic is considering such an origination service, according to Hardy Moebius, director of business development for Bell Atlantic's carrier services division. The goal will be to price the service somewhere between the access fee IP telephony vendors pay now - nothing - and the full 2 to 3 cents-per-minute access fee the regional Bell operating companies charge long-distance carriers. While BellSouth is trying to apply the same access regulation to IP telephony vendors that it applies to long-distance carriers, Bel l Atlantic recognizes that IP telephony is different from traditional long distance, and is working on an alternative way to charge access, Moebius says. The service Bell Atlantic has in mind would route calls onto IP networks and give the IP telephony vendor call information needed fo r billing, he says. The IP telephony vendor would pay for that service. "Now we have to deal with, 'How do we charge for this?'" Moebius says. He could not say how close Bell Atlantic was to answering the question, but the company is studying various pricing models. RBOCs want to charge ISPs an access fee primarily because data calls to ISPs tie up RBOC networks far longer than typical voice cal ls. But so far, the Federal Communications Commission says RBOCs cannot charge an access fee for those data connections. However, the FCC says it sees no distinction between a circuit-switched voice call and an IP voice call. The FCC has fallen short of explicitly sanctioning access fees for IP voice service providers. <<Network World -- 09-14-98, p. 16>> [Copyright 1998, Network World]

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1304)	9/16/1998 11:39:00 AM
From: Stephen B. Temple	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 3178

Anyone: So what's so difficult about coming up with a solution that all can live with? If you consider letting the LD's have all "Local-LongDistance-Telephony" operations, the RBOC's have it all "Local-LongDistance-Telephony" operations, and the ITSP's have it all "Local-LongDistance-Telephony" operations. (easier said than done?) There are "reciprocal compensation" boundaries for all....right? If the RBOC's tap into IP via ITSP's, then the LD's using ISP's will show their support for an open switch-packet market, without restraints! The FCC should not dare "hint" at other possibility like the one currently churning: "we will charge ITSP's on a case-by-case basis". That statement only serves to "fueling the IP fire" ST