To: Bill Zeman who wrote (2621 ) 3/13/1999 2:29:00 PM From: Frank A. Coluccio Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 30916
Bill, this is only speculation on my part, but... I think that something may be getting lost here. The VoIP process does not have to take place over AOL's backbone. True, the access line and the first central office appearance where the access devices are, needs to be relatively clean and uncongested, as do the first routers they hit. But voice telephony calls will very likely hop off of AOL's backbone at that point, and onto a separate swath of banbwidth (perhaps IDTC's own VoIP network overlay?). Or some combination thereof in dynamic fashion that makes sense. [Or, maybe a separate Layer Two tunnel will be constructed for voice and other time sensitive needs. Don't know.] The above scenarios are not only possible, but they make a lot of sense, because a dedicated IP backbone or VoIP overlay, even if it is Internet-protocol- based, is less prone to the anomalies of www activity. The fly in the ointment may have to do with negotiations and positioning, maybe proprietary matters that have to do with [non-?]exclusivity, etc., and not technological factors. OTOH, if the VoIP traverses AOL's b-b along with everthing else, then they'd better redouble their backbone upgrade projects, but quick. It's not so much the bandwidth, per se, that needs the upgrade (although that is an ongoing phenomenon unto itself) as it is the quality of service, or QoS, provisions in the routers and switches that need massive amounts of attention. As things stand today on the open backbones, e-mail messages and MLM chain letters have just as much priority as voice. Streaming video and delayed audio feeds -both of which are on AOL's near-term schedule for delivery- can tolerate jitter and time lapsing far more painlessly than voice. FWIW, Frank_C.