Re: potpourri (Re: Clearwire May Block VoIP Competitors )

[Paul Vixie <vixie () vix com>]

thegameiam () yahoo com (David Barak) writes:

> Well, here's the catch - it wasn't the VoIP subscriber who was
> complaining, it was the PSTN subscriber.  The experience left her with
> the opinion that VoIP = bad quality voice.  I suspect you'll see a lot of
> this...

like the libertarians like to say, "use your dollar-votes."

> > ... the most the gov't should be allowed to require is that i put a
> > warning label on my front door and on anthing inside my house that
> > looks like a phone.
>
> occam's razor?  We have government regulations regarding things which
> look like (and function similarly to) light switches, no?  We have
> government regulations regarding the nature of water and sewer pipes, why
> not regulations regarding the nature of data pipes?

because some phones look like model cars, and that's not something any
gov't ought to have a say about.

> ... specifically configured to respond to 911 OR 9-911 to avoid a
> problem.  Would YOU want to have been the person who didn't enable one of
> those options, and thus delayed response time?

i'm in favour of the warning labels and standardization.  my point is that
out there in POTS-land there is wide variance in attitudes, and selective
enforcement of the rules.

> ... I see this as a public safety issue, not a freedom issue.  It is in
> the public's interest for 911 to work the way we expect it to, everywhere.

to that end, i've wondered why the US doesn't join other industrialized
nations in regulating cellular roaming agreements and tower spacing and
coverage.  in the parts of sweden with a density less than 10 people per
square kilometer, cell phones work.  in similar parts of the US, they don't.
market forces are allowed to dominate this equation even though we'd save
a lot of lives if cell phones worked in the hinterlands.  yet the FCC is
ready to fine vonage if 911 doesn't work universally.  why is it okay to
let the public's interest suffer so as to promote innovation and competition
when it's old money vs. old money, but not when it's old money vs. new money?

> But VoIP companies calling their product a "communications service" and
> saying that they're exempt from 911 regulation, and at the same time
> beating up the ISPs for deprioritizing their traffic based on the same
> 911 access is completely fine, huh?

don't take it so personally.  MMORPG companies also beat the stuffing out
of ISPs who can't maintain isochrony of packet delivery, too.  anyone whose
application isn't supported by the infrastructure is going to complain --
and rightly so.  especially, Especially, ESPECIALLY if it's done on purpose
with anticompetitive goals.

> Voice is an application, but a gov't regulated one.  In this regard it is
> fundamentally different from email or ftp.

ah, yes, but when i run a voice app on my computer and use domain names to
reach out to folks rather than "phone numbers", it's fundamentally The Same
As email or ftp, and that's what makes it so wonderful and full of potential.

> > and when 20% or 50% of the homes in a region lack this service because
> > the people who live in those homes don't want to pay a POTS tithe,
> > we'll see some interesting legislation come down, and you can quote me
> > on that.
>  
> Yes, I'm certain we will.  The legislation will likely be due to a
> particularly bad fire during a power outage or some other event which
> makes national news.

sure as hell, we'll see laws requiring every home to have a telephone, to
have that telephone in the kitchen or other main room of the home, and to
be clearly marked.  then the POTS tithe comes back, it'll be with vengeance.
-- 
Paul Vixie