VOIP operators (at least in the US) are not classified as telecom operators, and are exempt from taxes. After their tremendous growth, things might change. Here's a nice article about this issue.
I think this is yet another indication of the disparity of treatment of traditional providers and over the top providers, with the latter being treated more like content providers than service operators. I don't see this working out well in the long term of physical network providers, and would certainly see voice dropping almost entirely from the traditional networks, being replaced by over the top only options.
The issue with over the top application as VOIP, it does not provide the same Quality of service (QoS) as the voice provided by telecomm networks. The reason is that a telecom network cannot be aware of the IP based application running over the top to provide the right resources. The IP based application is transparent in this case.
Operators do have strict requirement on obtaining products providing the right voice QoS, and this is quite challenging in standardisation work and product equipments. This is why the mobile networks (and fixed line broadband networks) have standardised the IP Multimedia system (IMS) to help identifying the IP based service and indicating that to the underlying network which in turn provides the required QoS. IMS has been deployed by several operators around the globe, mainly if they plan to provide VOIP.
QoS is not the only reason, all the supplementary services the user are used to have (ex. Call Forwarding, Call Hold, ...etc) should be continued to be maintained, based on the operators requirements.
Saying this, it is possible in the near/far future that people may get familiar to other technologies means and applications (which may still emerge in the future) and use the embedded voice service to these applications without really caring much for the voice quality and the extra services it may or may not provide… so the traditional voice provided by telecom operators may decline within time… but when?
These services need to have a statefull protocols and the IP using SIP is stateless... but IMS does help IP based Voice to maintain these supplementary services.
when UMTS started, the market estimated to maintain the GSM Circuit switched for another decade... after the decade passed and we developed an Packet based solution - LTE, which is a wireless broadband, operators required the standards to provide a solution to allow them to continue using the GSM and Circuit Switched solution for their voice and SMS... operators need this if they do not deploy IMS. Hence, I doubt that circuit switched will be dead in 5 years :-)
I think this is yet another indication of the disparity of treatment of traditional providers and over the top providers, with the latter being treated more like content providers than service operators. I don't see this working out well in the long term of physical network providers, and would certainly see voice dropping almost entirely from the traditional networks, being replaced by over the top only options.
ReplyDeleteof = for
ReplyDeleteThe issue with over the top application as VOIP, it does not provide the same Quality of service (QoS) as the voice provided by telecomm networks. The reason is that a telecom network cannot be aware of the IP based application running over the top to provide the right resources. The IP based application is transparent in this case.
ReplyDeleteOperators do have strict requirement on obtaining products providing the right voice QoS, and this is quite challenging in standardisation work and product equipments. This is why the mobile networks (and fixed line broadband networks) have standardised the IP Multimedia system (IMS) to help identifying the IP based service and indicating that to the underlying network which in turn provides the required QoS. IMS has been deployed by several operators around the globe, mainly if they plan to provide VOIP.
QoS is not the only reason, all the supplementary services the user are used to have (ex. Call Forwarding, Call Hold, ...etc) should be continued to be maintained, based on the operators requirements.
Saying this, it is possible in the near/far future that people may get familiar to other technologies means and applications (which may still emerge in the future) and use the embedded voice service to these applications without really caring much for the voice quality and the extra services it may or may not provide… so the traditional voice provided by telecom operators may decline within time… but when?
Excellent point on QoS, although I'm unsure why call hold etc. could not be implemented in an IP service?
ReplyDeletethe traditional voice provided by telecom operators may decline within time… but when?
Dead within five years in markets with easily-available broadband connections :)
These services need to have a statefull protocols and the IP using SIP is stateless... but IMS does help IP based Voice to maintain these supplementary services.
ReplyDeletewhen UMTS started, the market estimated to maintain the GSM Circuit switched for another decade... after the decade passed and we developed an Packet based solution - LTE, which is a wireless broadband, operators required the standards to provide a solution to allow them to continue using the GSM and Circuit Switched solution for their voice and SMS... operators need this if they do not deploy IMS.
Hence, I doubt that circuit switched will be dead in 5 years :-)
But that suggests that today's network operators will be the ones supplying voice services in five years' time :)
ReplyDelete