FCC Seeks Input on Transition to VoIP

The Federal Communications Commission wants public and industry comment on the policy framework for a transition from circuit-switched to voice services on all-IP networks. The FCC will use the comments to issue a possible "notice of inquiry" on the subject.

"In identifying the appropriate areas of inquiry, we seek to understand which policies and
regulatory structures may facilitate, and which may hinder, the efficient migration to an all IP world," the FCC says. "In addition, we seek to identify and understand what aspects of traditional policy frameworks are important to consider, address, and possibly modify in an effort to protect the public interest in an all-IP world."

Among other issues, the FCC will be looking at consumer protection issues such as how the needs of people with disabilities can be assured. A look at the role of "carrier of last resort" obligations in an all-IP framework also is expected.

All comments should refer to GN Docket Nos. 09-47, 09-51, and 09-137 and title comment filings
as “Comments – NBP Public Notice #25."
 
Filers using the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System should enter the following text in the “Custom Description” field in the “Document(s)” section of the ECFS filing page:  “Comments – NBP Public Notice # 25."

Where is Unified Communications Going?

It looks like we are in the midst of yet another acronym cycle in the unified communications business. Nobody really likes "VoIP" or "IP communications." UC had been the preferred term until a year or two ago. "Collaboration" is the term some prefer. But there are other candidates.

Some people use the term "UC4" to describe where the next wave might be building for "unified communications, collaboration and contact center." And that wave is supposed to feature tighter communications integration with key enterprise software and job functions, as well as more use of video communications and mobile devices.

To be fair, people don't agree on what "collaboration," "unified communications" or "communications-enabled business processes" actually mean. All of those phrases include elements of VoIP, audio and video conferencing, presence, instant messaging, email, voice mail, mobility, business phone functions, unified messaging and the ability to initiate and receive voice and other communications from inside a consumer or business application.

As a general rule, when something doesn't sell well, it gets rebranded. Other times, marketing staffs want to refresh an existing product, or create a different spin, to play to a particular provider's strengths. Sometimes the buyer value proposition changes, so marketing pitches are adjusted to match the new end user priorities. Perhaps some of all those drivers now are at work.

Verizon Ranked First in Consumer Reports’ "Best Wireless" Service Survey

In a survey of more than 50,000 readers spanning 26 U.S. cities, Consumer Reports found Verizon had the highest consumer satisfaction scores, while AT&T had the lowest customer-satisfaction rating in 19 cities surveyed. In fairness, the rankings are fairly close for three of the four service providers ranked.

Verizon received an overall score of 75, while T-Mobile USA got 70, Sprint got a score of 67 and AT&T got a score of 66. Consumer Reports itself says that differences of less than three points are not meaningful, so Sprint and AT&T essentially got the same score. And just three points separate T-Mobile from both Sprint and AT&T.

Another way of looking at matters is that while Verizon got scores noticeably different from the other three providers, and while T-Mobile USA was a clear number two, Sprint and AT&T were fairly close.

Comcast Launches Usage Meter: Some Users Might be Surprised

Comcast is launching a "free to use" data usage meter in the Portland, Oregon market, with plans to roll the application out nationally. . The meter will help customers understand how much data they consume in a month. It is an essential sort of tool if users someday are required to buy data packages the way they buy mobile buckets of voice and data.

That is not to say Comcast has any current plans to do so; simply to point out that since few, if any, consumers know what their usage pattern actually is, they certainly cannot be expected to be rational consumers of subscription plans that require such knowledge.

Nor will most users have any problems, even if retail pricing plans were to change, someday. Comcast defines "excessive use" as consumption above 250 gigabytes a month, and the median usage for Comcast’s customers at present is about 2 to 4 Gbytes a month.

The meter is accessible by logging in to "Customer Central" at http://customer.comcast.com and clicking on the “Users and Settings” tab. From there, click on “View details” in the “My devices” section (located toward the upper right hand of the screen) and that will go to the meter page. The meter will show usage in the current calendar month when it’s first launched. Over time, it will show the most recent three months of use (including the current month). The data is refreshed approximately every three hours.

The meter measures all data usage over a cable modem, including any other devices connecting using Wi-Fi. Online gaming consoles, smartphones using Wi-Fi,  digital video recorders, printers, cameras or the iPod Touch are examples.

The Windows operating system and most popular software applications have automated update programs. These updates often download and are installed automatically without the need for user intervention. The automation is generally designed for the convenience and protection of the consumer, but the traffic it generates may come as a surprise.

Cable modem connections supporting multiple PCs will have a correspondingly higher amount of such update activity.

Aggressive update settings, with some default settings checking each hour and downloading every possible option even though they are not all needed, could cause unexpected levels of traffic.

For example, a software program may load its interface in a dozen languages even though all household members only know how to read English.

Another possible “surprise” upstream traffic source is online file backup or uploading to photo sharing sites. Also, many news and information services preload content onto their subscriber's PC or smart phone over the Wi-Fi home network. The content often arrives overnight for convenient viewing in the morning.

Assume each night's upload is only 1GB, which takes up a modest 1GB on the device's storage, and assume too that it never consumes more than 1GB because it overwrites the old content with fresh content each night. That can add up to 30GB over a month on the meter.

A large volume of traffic may be going to digital video recorders such as TiVo. A user in the home may have rented a movie from Amazon, Netflix or Blockbuster. Renting the movie will be a known traffic-generating event. But many services also preload the start of other movies as well as trailers to make them instantly available should they be called for.

The meter will be a useful tool for managing both intended and unintended bandwidth consumption.

A Real "Google Phone" Coming?

A Google-branded smartphone running a version of Android not yet seen on other devices is coming, and it will feature a large screen, Gizmodo speculates. Since any such device presumably would be built directly to Google's specifications, it is possible the device would feature a more-tightly integrated hardware and software experience than is possible on "open" devices.

Oddly enough, such an approach would resemble nothing so much as the iPhone experience, which is just about the diametrical opposite of an open approach.

Huge Increases in Consumer Communications Value Since 1990, Data Shows

With the caveat that the product of a fraction always changes as either the nominator or denominator change, huge increases in consumer spending on communications and information technology since 1990 have been more than matched by broader increases in household income, holding the percentage of household spending on communications flat over the entire period.

(click image for larger view)

Since 1990, consumer spending on information and communications technology has grown from $197 billion to $545 billion, 5.1 percent of national disposable income in 1990, peaking at 5.9 percent in 2000, and falling to 5.4 percent in 2008.

Spending on communications services has tripled over the same period, from $77 billion to $243 billion, and at 2.3 percent of national disposable income, up from 1.8 percent in 1990 but below its peak of 2.5 percent in 2001.

Basically, the story is one of large increases in consumer value. Consumers are spending more on communications and infornation technology, but a steady percentage of disposable income.

Yet consumer value has grown exponentially in the intervening years. U.S. communications expenditures as a share of national disposable income has been flat since 1997, but users have added over 100 million broadband and video connections and over 100 million wireless connections, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Content Delivery Networks and Network Neutrality: Net Is Not Neutral

Much discussion about network neutrality seems to assume that the issue is bit or application "blocking," and from one perspective that is correct. The existing Federal Communications Commission rules about a users' right to use all lawful applications already prohibit blocking of legal applications on wired networks. The issue is whether those rules, and the other "Internet Freedoms" principles also should be extended to the wireless domain.

In another sense, popular perceptions are misguided or worse. There is a separate issue, that of whether it ever is permissible, for any legal reason, to shape traffic, either to maintain network performance, provide an enhanced service to a user, or create a new level of service.

Some will maintain there are other ways of maintaining end user experience aside from traffic shaping. That is arguably correct, but might cost so much that the entire consumer access pricing regime has to change in ways people will find objectionable.

Some argue that any traffic shaping of legal bits should be banned, because such practices have undesirable business impact. "No bits should have any priority," that line of reasoning suggests.

One might simply note that about 60 percent of video bits--almost universally served up by media companies--already enjoys such "unequal treatment." Indeed, that is the purpose of a content delivery network: to expedite the delivery of some bits, compared to others, so that a better end user experience is possible.

In fact, about $1.4 billion was spent in 2008 precisely to deliver such expedited bits. The U.S. market currently generates an estimated 55.8 percent of the global CDN traffic, though international traffic is now increasing at a faster rate than its domestic counterpart, according to Research and Markets.

And though video delivery historically has been the CDN staple, new growth areas include whole site delivery, dynamic content, "live" video, high-definition video, mobile and smartphone applications, other non-PC devices and adaptive bit rate streaming, Research and Markets notes.

Of the 22.5 billion professional video views served during 2009, Akamai delivered 31.9 percent, Limelight Networks 12 percent and Level 3 11.2 percent, says Research and Markets.. Additional CDNs active in the market include CD Networks, Velocix, Liquid Compass, Abacast, Mirror Image, Edgecast Networks, Highwinds, BitGravity, Cotendo and Internap, the firm notes.

The point is that preferential delivery of bits already is an established part of the way the Internet works. Private network users, especially businesses, also commonly set up traffic priority systems for their internal communications and content, as well.

The ability of a consumer end user to choose to use such services and applications is one of the implications of the network neutrality debate that often is lost. To reiterate, preferential treatment of bits already is happening on a wide scale, and for very good reasons: to preserve end user experience. Perhaps we ought not to be in such a rush to foreclose practices and capabilities of obvious value.