The Evolving SIP Trunk

Posted on May 21, 2013 by David Byrd

Burstable SIP Trunk It is important to note that SIP Trunks have evolved from just providing cheaper more reliable VoIP calling. Of course, there is nothing wrong with cheaper business quality phone service. However, our industry spends so much time reminding people about the ability to save up to X% that it tends to forget to mention the other benefits of having a SIP Trunk.

SIP is first and foremost about managing sessions. For that reason a SIP Trunk innately supports business continuity through either remote call forwarding or alternative routing when a session cannot be established. Similarly, dynamic load balancing and geographical distribution of calls can be done based upon real-time information gathered while setting up the session based upon SIP requests and SIP responses from user agents or end-points. Business continuity, dynamic load balancing, and geographical distribution of calls have been SIP Trunking options for years. However, recently a couple of new capabilities have been added to the mix.

A burstable SIP Trunk has been long desired by call centers, support organizations and marketing companies. Burstable SIP trunks allow a user to exploit more call capacity than purchased for a period of time or up to a given amount. For example if a customer purchases a SIP trunk capable of supporting 10 simultaneous calls, then the 11^th call is either blocked (busy signal) or sent to voice mail. With a burstable SIP Trunk the 11^th call can still be delivered if there is enough bandwidth available. Obviously, there is a charge for the burstable service and a limit as to how many calls can exceed the original order.

An intelligent or featured SIP Trunk offers basic phone functionality for SIP Trunking customers that do not have a key system, PBX or IP PBX. BroadSoft and other hosted communications platform providers provide features that can enhance the value of a SIP trunk such as call waiting, forwarding, voice mail and more. This dramatically expands the market for a SIP Trunk to include businesses without any phone system that are dependent upon the local ILEC or CLEC for actual phone features.

Finally, SIP Trunks are expanding beyond unlimited long distance calling within North America. ANPI and a few other SIP Trunking providers have expanded the number of countries to include some in Europe, South America and parts of Asia. While several VoIP providers have done this for residential and SOHO customers, only recently has this been offered using SIP to SMBs and enterprise customers. ANPI may be unique in offering 37 countries over a SIP Trunk.

SIP Trunking will take over T1s not just on price but because it offers the best path to future applications and services.

What is a SIP Trunk?

Posted on May 17, 2013 by David Byrd

The answer to this question continues to evolve and is influenced by one’s understanding of either telecommunications or packet switching. I like to begin first with the definition of SIP or Session Initiation Protocol. The session is not just about voice but can also be used for many forms of sessions involving the Internet. The protocol allows SIP endpoints (phones, computers, applications, etc.) to discover, locate, negotiate and create sessions. The sessions can be VoIP, call control, instant messaging, presence, video, gaming, mobile or many other applications or services. Although, the original protocol specification has often been eluded to as a recommendation and hardly a standard, SIPconnect 1.1 removes much of the variability associated with SIP. This release of the protocol improves interoperability between the various endpoints and SIP stack implementations continuing SIP on the path to fulfill its destiny of being revolutionary.

Few in our industry deny that SIP has succeeded in becoming the protocol of choice for session management and given the much reduced cost of providing VoIP using SIP, few deny the tremendous cost savings. However, as we communicate SIP and SIP Trunking to a market without technical IP savvy, ANPI and other SIP Trunking service providers may as well be inhabitants of a tower of Babel. SIP, concurrent call session, talk path, channel, trunk, latency, jitter and many other terms associated with VoIP and SIP are not commonly used by our target market, SMBs. Even some of the benefits often listed as reasons for buying can be unclear or unknown to most SMBs. The most often used benefit is cost savings over traditional phone service. However, even that can become mired in an educational session if TDM versus IP is mentioned or the discussion leads to the need for IADs, routers, or an IP PBX to support native SIP. None of these words are part of the common vernacular of most SMB decision makers.

Wikipedia describes SIP Trunking as “… a Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) and streaming media service based on the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) by which Internet telephony service providers (ITSPs) deliver telephone services and unified communications to customers equipped with SIP-based private branch exchange (IP-PBX) and Unified Communications facilities.“ Good luck with using that to clarify what a SIP trunk is and why a small business owner should want one.

Whenever I hire someone from outside our industry I am reminded of the complexity of our industry terms and acronyms. It is very important to use terms that can be easily communicated by our sales teams and understood by our target market. Cost savings, avoiding service interruptions, anywhere access, consolidation of services, remote presence, phone line replacement and many other terms are better suited for non-technical people.

We have made great strides over the last 5 years to market, sell and install SIP Trunks and SIP associated technology and applications. As an industry, we need to continue to develop marketing collateral, articles, case studies, etc. that educate using as little jargon and few industry specific terms as possible. A vast market awaits our SIP Trunks. Communicating with it may be our only barrier.

The FCC May be Getting a Much Needed Wheel

Posted on May 13, 2013 by David Byrd

President Barack Obama announces the nominations of Rep. Melvin Watt as Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and Tom Wheeler as Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission

President Barack Obama announces the nomination of Tom Wheeler, right, as Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in the White House, May 1, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Lawrence Jackson)

Last week it was announced that President Obama would nominate Thomas Wheeler to replace Julius Genachowski as FCC Chairman. On the surface Thomas Wheeler does not seem like a questionable choice but given the state of things in Washington one can never be sure of anything. Wheeler has been a lobbyist for the wireless and cable industries and served as the president of the National Cable Television Association and CEO of the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association. So, he comes into the position rather well versed about the issues facing the industry.

The FCC was established by the Communications Act of 1934 with the mission of regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television and wire. Over time satellite and cable were added to the list. However, the essence of the rules guiding the FCC remained unchanged until the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The principal purpose of the Act of 1996 was to open the telecommunications industry to a broader range of competitors to fuel innovation improving services and pricing for consumers. It has achieved the objective of accelerating innovation and new services but prices continue to rise unabated. Moreover, like so many things written decades ago, the rules governing our industry are often archaic and seldom represent the current state of technology or how services are used.

The Connect America Fund is intended to address the unserved or underserved Americans in rural areas without or inadequate broadband services. The FCC has begun the task of transforming the Universal Service Fund and InterCarrier Compensation to support expanding broadband infrastructure to rural America. While this is a noble task, it ignores that the U.S. in general lags most of the world in how it delivers broadband. Several years ago I initiated a discussion of broadband that examines three elements, Access, Price and Speed. When viewed objectively, our fragmented approach to providing telecom services leaves rural, suburban and urban America behind all of the developed nations and many developing nations.

Wheeler, if confirmed by the Senate, will face the challenge of addressing the needs of 18 million Americans living in rural areas that require broadband to participate in ever diverse online communities, expand business opportunities and meet educational challenges. However, he will also need to address the other 300 million that continue to pay higher per megabit rates than most of the world and at speeds that are embarrassingly slow. The current FCC definition of broadband is 4 Mbps downstream and 1 Mbps upstream. This was established in 2010 and is insufficient to support today’s video and data demands.

America needs an FCC that is willing and able to address the rapidly changing environment of telecommunications and IP communications. The transition to IP and wireless is affecting the direction of communications, business processes, entertainment and education to a point where most of the rules established by the Communications Act of 1996 are no longer applicable. The FCC faces a considerable number of challenges and I’m hopeful Wheeler is the guy to resolve them.

ANPI Goes to Washington II

Posted on May 2, 2013 by David Byrd

NTCA Legislature and Policy Conference Day One of the Legislature and Policy Conference was on process and preparation for the scheduled meetings on the Hill. Shirley and the team from NTCA did a good job of setting expectations for first timers, such as myself, and securing the participation of key congressional staff members, a FCC Commissioner (Ajit Pai) and others. NTCA also provided a list of rural carrier issues they are currently lobbying the 113^th congress on our behalf. For those of you not in attendance, I want to share the list of issues with you:

USF and ICC stability such that the transformation ultimately removes or resolves how the carriers should view investing in their networks and overall infrastructure.
Call completion rates to rural areas continues to fall and congressional and FCC intervention has reached a point of criticality.
As carriers migrate their TDM based networks to IP, how regulations are applied is important. The larger ILECs want their IP services to be completely unregulated. Somewhere between their position and the past is the right level.
Expanding the base of USF contributors
Revising the rules and policies regarding wireless communications
FirstNet; NTCA wants FirstNet to consider its members for partnerships in addition to other telecom service providers, ensure rural areas are treated similarly to metropolitan areas.
Fixing the Regulatory Flexibility Act to strengthen protections for small businesses and carriers
Protecting small businesses and carriers from Patent Assertion Entities
While the NTCA supports the USF Lifeline Program, it also urges congress and the FCC to establish a budget and tighter controls on program administration.
Cybersecurity legislation that is effective but does not become a default unfunded mandate that penalizes small businesses and carriers.

Next year I hope to have more time to participate in the actual visits to the Hill. I’ll also do my best to maintain visibility of NTCA’s efforts in this blog as Congress and the FCC move various legislation and policies forward.

ANPI Goes to Washington

Posted on April 29, 2013 by David Byrd

NTCA Legislature and Policy Conference Last week the NTCA Rural Broadband Association had their annual Legislature and Policy meeting in Washington, D.C. For me it represented an opportunity to participate in a process that is cloaked in secrecy and looked upon with disdain. I was going to learn about the effort by rural telephone companies to lobby congress. The first day of the process began with a discussion of the process, aids that would represent the actual congressman and senators, and key talking points.

The process was fairly straightforward. Meetings had been set up with the staff of various members of congress. I requested and was accepted to join a group from Texas as ANPI has developed a significant presence in the state and I had the opportunity to meet with staff members of my congressional representative, Sam Johnson. I would have preferred meeting with the actual members but given the amount of money NTCA has available for lobbying compared to the larger ILECs, cable companies and wireless carriers this was not unexpected. According to an earlier presentation the amount of money spent by the larger players in our space totaled just over $70 million per year. That is 100 times the amount that NTCA has for the same purpose. It is therefore important for members of the NTCA to take advantage of the opportunity to raise important issues with as many members of congress as possible. Additionally, it is important for us to understand that we must also maintain contact after these meetings. As briefed by an aid to Mitch McConnell, Minority Leader of the Senate, communicating with them only once per year will not be effective in conveying critical needs or affecting the legislative directions.

NTCA represents nearly 900 companies, however, according to the Center for Responsive Politics there were 12,389 lobbyists in 2012 spending an estimated $3.3 billion to influence legislation. Getting the attention we deserve is not easy and much credit should be extended to Shirley Bloomfield, NTCA CEO, for her efforts and the presence she has established.

Older Entries »