<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CableTechTalk &#187; Digital telephone service</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cabletechtalk.com/tag/digital-telephone-service/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com</link>
	<description>Technology &#38; Telecommunications Policy Discussion</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:41:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Rules of the Road for IP-Based Voice Services</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/digital-phone/2010/11/18/rules-of-the-road-for-ip-based-voice-services/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/digital-phone/2010/11/18/rules-of-the-road-for-ip-based-voice-services/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 20:19:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Steve Morris</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Digital Phone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Digital telephone service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PSTN]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public switched telephone network]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VOIP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/?p=1363</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently, Hank Hultquist of AT&#38;T posted some interesting food for thought on the evolution of voice services.  His general premise is that the traditional public switched telephone network (PSTN) is as outdated and old-fashioned in the telecom world as the Edsel is in the automotive realm.  Instead, we are moving to a world where voice [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/autobahn-300x173.gif" border="0" alt="Autobahn" hspace="10" vspace="3" width="300" height="173" align="left" />Recently, Hank Hultquist of AT&amp;T  posted some <a title="http://attpublicpolicy.com/government-policy/reinventing-the-edsel/wp-content/themes/demo_wordpress_theme/images/favicon.ico" href="http://attpublicpolicy.com/government-policy/reinventing-the-edsel/">interesting food for thought</a> on the evolution of voice services.  His general  premise is that the traditional public switched telephone network (PSTN) is as  outdated and old-fashioned in the telecom world as <a href="http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1658545_1657867_1657781,00.html">the Edsel</a> is in the  automotive realm.  Instead, we are moving to a world where voice service  will be merely another application riding on a “broadband autobahn” of Internet  protocol (IP) networks, and these IP networks will seamlessly interconnect  without the need for pesky rules or government intervention.</p>
<p>NCTA agrees with many of the points  raised by AT&amp;T.  For instance, it is true that many of the rules  created for the PSTN, designed to address a monopolistic environment, are  arcane and badly in need of updating.  Nowhere is this more true than in  the case of the intercarrier compensation regime, a complex set of regulations  governing the payments companies make to each other to get a voice call from  Point A to Point B.  It’s no secret that these rules are badly in need of  repair – <a title="http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-132A1.pdf" href="http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-132A1.pdf">the FCC has been grappling with their reform for nearly a  decade</a>.  Given the challenges of  applying these rules to modern networks, many in the industry agree that the  Commission should consider eliminating these rules entirely, allowing entities  to recover the costs of their networks from their customers, and handing  traffic to other carriers who do the same.</p>
<p>But  AT&amp;T’s premise breaks down (to continue  the automotive analogy) when it suggests that problems applying existing <em>compensation</em> rules to voice services  provided over IP networks (VoIP) somehow lead to the conclusion that there is no need  to apply <em>any</em> rules to VoIP, and in particular no need for <em>interconnection</em> rules.  Although  the telecommunications industry looks very different than it did when the PSTN  was created, the Commission already has concluded that a number of key  requirements, like E-911 and universal service fund contributions, should apply  to voice services even when those services are provided over IP networks.</p>
<p>The Commission also is keenly aware that the  ability to interconnect and exchange traffic with incumbent local exchange  carriers (ILECs) is the cornerstone of a competitive voice market and that  without some form of regulatory supervision, ILECs would  have the ability to deny interconnection to competitors.   For instance, while Mr. Hultquist sings the praises of IP networks in his blog  post, <a title="http://ws1000.ncta.com/cgi-bin/patience.cgi?id=7eb1740b-9f75-412c-9524-4522b1fb9dc4" href="http://interchange.puc.state.tx.us/WebApp/Interchange/Documents/26381_254_678811.PDF">his company has argued that it has no legal obligation to  interconnect its IP network with the IP networks of its competitors or to  exchange traffic with those competitors in IP format</a>.  Because AT&amp;T is by far the largest provider of voice  service with <a title="http://www.att.com/Investor/Growth_Profile/download/master_Q3_10.pdf" href="http://www.att.com/Investor/Growth_Profile/download/master_Q3_10.pdf">nearly 140 million total voice lines</a> (<a title="http://www.ncta.com/Statistics.aspx" href="http://www.ncta.com/Statistics.aspx"><em>six times</em> more than the entire cable industry</a>),  this is a matter of great concern.</p>
<p>Furthermore, to facilities-based  providers of VoIP services, voice is not just another data application  riding over an IP network.  Both cable operators and telephone companies, <a title="http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7020916485" href="http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7020916485">including AT&amp;T</a>,  offer VoIP as a specialized service, separate from their broadband Internet  access services offered to consumers.  VoIP packets are separated from  other broadband traffic to ensure the quality of service necessary to keep  calls from breaking up or dropping.   Without the ability to interconnect with incumbent networks, cable  operators and other competitive VoIP providers would be unable to offer these voice  services, <a href="http://www.micradc.com/news/publications/pdfs/Updated_MiCRA_Report_FINAL.pdf">which  have generated billions of dollars in savings for consumers</a>.</p>
<p>So, while it would be nice to be in a  world where all VoIP providers could readily interconnect their IP networks, for  now, some minimal rules of the road are required to ensure that the technology can  reach its full potential.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/digital-phone/2010/11/18/rules-of-the-road-for-ip-based-voice-services/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cable Phone Service Is Tops In JD Power Rankings</title>
		<link>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/cable-companies/2008/09/23/cable-phone-service-is-tops-in-jd-power-rankings/</link>
		<comments>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/cable-companies/2008/09/23/cable-phone-service-is-tops-in-jd-power-rankings/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:44:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Turk</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cable Companies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Customer Service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Digital Phone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cable]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[customer satisfaction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Digital telephone service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JD POwer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VOIP]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cabletechtalk.com/cable-companies/2008/09/23/cable-phone-service-is-tops-in-jd-pwer-rankings/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While I typically stick to discussions of policy issues, broadband, and emerging technology, when I see some really good news about cable and our ongoing efforts to improve customer service, I have to talk about it. Recently JD Power and Associates released their annual rankings of customer satisfaction with both local and long distance telephone [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I typically stick to discussions of policy issues, broadband, and emerging technology, when I see some really good news about cable and our ongoing efforts to improve customer service, I have to talk about it.</p>
<p>Recently JD Power and Associates released their <a href="http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pressrelease.aspx?ID=2008180" target="_blank">annual rankings of customer satisfaction with both local and long distance telephone service</a>.  The rankings measure five factors to determine overall satisfaction.</p>
<ul>
<li>Customer service</li>
<li>Performance and reliability</li>
<li>Cost of service</li>
<li>Billing</li>
<li>Offerings and promotions</li>
</ul>
<p>For the the second year, cable companies won all four regions. The latest study proves what we&#8217;ve said for some time &#8211; cable is your best value for telephone service. You can <a href="http://www.cabletechtalk.com/digital-phone/">learn more about cable telephony here</a>.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.cabletechtalk.com/cable-companies/2008/09/23/cable-phone-service-is-tops-in-jd-power-rankings/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

