Voice over IP discussion note


Published on

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Voice over IP discussion note

  1. 1. Voice over IP (VoIP) – background and regulatory aspects Olli Mattila Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority ( Chairman of the IRG FN WG / VoIP Subgroup) Background for discussions at ERG meeting 17.6.04
  2. 2. <ul><li>Technical concept of VoIP vs PSTN phone </li></ul><ul><li>Comments on market development / impact on PSTN </li></ul><ul><li>Comments on regulatory issuers </li></ul><ul><li>Ficora`s decision on VoIP service </li></ul><ul><li>IRG FN WG / VoIP subgroup </li></ul>Content
  3. 3. Technical concept of VoIP vs PSTN
  4. 4. Next Generation Networks (NGN) / IP-architecture approach All services and applications ( voice , data, video) Internet protocol (IP) All network technologies Services Transmission
  5. 5. Voice is one service inside NGN-communication services Messaging Person-to-Person – Communication Services Content-on-demand Browsing Download Streaming Push Broadcast Peer-to-Peer Conversational <ul><li>Voice call </li></ul><ul><li>Video call </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Chat call </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li> Multimedia call </li></ul><ul><li>e-Mail </li></ul><ul><li>SMS EMS </li></ul><ul><li>MMS </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>IM </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Concept of IP Communication <ul><li>Protocols split transmitted data into packets, add necessary addressing information to the packets and transmit them and assemble again data in receiving end </li></ul>
  7. 7. PSTN telephony vs VoIP <ul><li>PSTN telephony VoIP </li></ul><ul><li>- Circuit switched - Packet switched </li></ul><ul><li>E.164 numbering - URL SIP names, E.164, IP addr, </li></ul><ul><li>Intelligent network / - Dumb network / </li></ul><ul><li>dumb terminal intelligent terminal </li></ul><ul><li>Charging bases - Charging bases </li></ul><ul><ul><li>location, distance, min - more limited </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Closed system - Open system </li></ul><ul><ul><li>inherited security - security vital issue </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Tech quality - Tech quality </li></ul><ul><ul><li>standardised transmission - depend mainly on delays </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>characteristics and delay variations </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Co-existance of IP phone and PSTN phone Internet PSTN Gateway Today and long in the future publicly offered VoIP has to co-operate with PSTN (terminated, originated at PSTN) This reflect to questions, like - numering
  9. 9. <ul><li>Nature of VoIP service creates problems with several consumer protection issues, like </li></ul><ul><li>Location independence (”nomadicity”) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>customer is able to register at any access point in any country </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>service provision can be controlled from any point world wide </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Active terminals </li></ul><ul><ul><li>requires electric power </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Open network ( compared with closed PSTN network) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>security questions </li></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Comments on market development / impact on PSTN
  11. 11. <ul><li>VoIP market trends </li></ul><ul><li>At present at its infancy, estimated in September 2003 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>less than 200 000 VoIP users world wide </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>less than 20 000 VoIP users in Europe </li></ul></ul><ul><li>But expected to grow rapidly because </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reduced capital and operating costs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>voice services with a number of new features </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>new revenue opportunities for access providers through “triple play”, </li></ul></ul><ul><li>that means voice, data and broadband internet </li></ul><ul><li>Growing number of broadband internet access will accelerate </li></ul><ul><li>the use of VoIP </li></ul><ul><li>Public VoIP service is at least on plan/ trial basis in most of EU countries </li></ul>
  12. 12. Estimations of VoIP switch over varies 2006 -2015 PSTN IP based <ul><li>Today 10 – 15 % of international voice traffic is based on VoIP </li></ul><ul><li>Optimistic estimations suggest that 50% of world`s telephone traffic will be based on VoIP by 2006. More pessimistic estimates refer to year 2015. </li></ul>
  13. 13. Comments on regulatory issues
  14. 14. Regulatory discussions have started <ul><li>USA </li></ul><ul><li>FCC published a proposed rulemaking in March 2004 </li></ul><ul><li>several state regulators are considering the issue. New York Public </li></ul><ul><li>Service Commission issued decision (in May 21) on Vonage´s VoiP </li></ul><ul><li>EU </li></ul><ul><li>Ficora made regulatory decision on TeliaSonera`s VoIP service </li></ul><ul><li>in October 2003 </li></ul><ul><li>Several EU countries are establishing national working groups or about </li></ul><ul><li>to launch national consultations on the issue </li></ul><ul><li>EU Commission plans to put document on VoIP regulatory aspects </li></ul><ul><li>for public consultation </li></ul>
  15. 15. Categories of VoIP services from regulators point of view <ul><li>Outside of regulatory concern </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Corporate internal use on business LAN/WAN </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IP phone – IP phone, self provided </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2. In principle under regulation (end user services) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Carrier internal use </li></ul></ul><ul><li>3. Inside regulatory concern </li></ul><ul><ul><li>IP phone to PSTN phone </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>PSTN phone to IP phone </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IP phone – IP phone service provided by operator </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. <ul><li>Dimensions of regulatory issues on VoIP </li></ul><ul><li>a) Consumer protection </li></ul><ul><li>USO directive: PATS definition / obligations? </li></ul><ul><li>b) Market / competition control, for example </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Relationship with relevant markets – substitute to </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>PSTN voice telephony? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Interconnection / termination - regulatory costing? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Retail prices – location / distance independent? </li></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Definitions in the USO Directive <ul><li>Electronic communications service (ECS): A service normally provided for remuneration which consists wholly or mainly in the conveyance of signals on electronic communications networks … </li></ul><ul><li>Publicly available telephone service (PATS) : a service available to the public for originating and receiving national and international calls and access to emergency services through a number or numbers in a national or international telephone numbering plan … </li></ul>
  18. 18. Basic regulatory questions Are VoIP (which of VoIP services) classified as publicly available telephone services (PATS) and thus regulations set for traditional telephone service apply ? If yes, can the obligations be obeyed ( due to technical restrictions) in practice ? Note: see as an example list of obligations set in the Ficora`s VoIP decision
  19. 19. <ul><li>Emergency arrangements do not fit calls over internet, </li></ul><ul><li>because the nature of internet </li></ul><ul><ul><li>customer is able to register at any access point in any country </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>service provision can be controlled from any point world wide </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Basic problems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>problem with reach the emergency centre </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>problem with wrong or lack of caller`s location information </li></ul></ul>Emergency calls
  20. 20. <ul><li>Quality classes defined by ETSI/TIPHON for </li></ul><ul><li>end to end quality </li></ul><ul><li>ITU has technically standardised 5 QoS classes. Two first are regarded acceptable for VoIP service </li></ul><ul><li>Current international VoIP is mainly based on “Best Effort” </li></ul>VoIP quality <ul><li>Mainly affected by transmission delays, </li></ul><ul><li>delay variations, packet losses (and bandwith) </li></ul>
  21. 21. <ul><li>Legal interception </li></ul><ul><li>Difficult to administrate due to (international) location </li></ul><ul><li>independence of IP </li></ul><ul><li>VoIP also makes use of encryption more easy </li></ul><ul><li>ETSI is working on the issue concerning technical arrangement </li></ul><ul><li>Communication security </li></ul><ul><li>Network integrity /service availability (power failures, terminal closing due to spam and network overloading) </li></ul><ul><li>Communication confidentality </li></ul>
  22. 22. <ul><li>Numbering issues </li></ul><ul><li>VoIP numbers in national numbering plans </li></ul><ul><li>Is there reasons to aim specific number series for VoIp service ? </li></ul><ul><li>Is there need in future for common URL to identify for emergency services (for example SIP:SOS@ home-domain) ? </li></ul><ul><li>Universal service issues </li></ul><ul><li>review USO models including VoIP ? </li></ul><ul><li>Extra territorial issues ( services coming outside Europe) </li></ul><ul><li>influence of possible unsymmetric regulation ? </li></ul><ul><li>obligations for services coming outside of EU ? </li></ul>
  23. 23. Ficora`s decision on Sonera`s VoIP service in Finland
  24. 24. VoIP regulation in Finland <ul><li>TeliaSonera’s VoIP Service (”Sonera Puhekaista”) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>service is offered only to TeliaSonera’s broad band users </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>offered as a subsitute for PSTN connection </li></ul></ul><ul><li>FICORA’s decision in October 2003 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>www. ficora . fi /englanti/ document / SoneraPuhekaista . pdf </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>TeliaSonera’s VoIP service was considered to be PATS because </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>the service is available to the public </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>the service is offered through a number in the Finnish numbering plan </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>users can originate and receive national and international calls and use emergency services </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>the service was also considered to be offered at a fixed location </li></ul></ul>
  25. 25. <ul><li>TeliaSonera’s VoIP service has to comply with </li></ul><ul><li>the obligations set for PATS in the national regulation, </li></ul><ul><li>main obligations beeing (1): </li></ul><ul><li>ensure that users are able to make international calls </li></ul><ul><li>using access code 00 </li></ul><ul><li>ensure that users are able to access the emergency call </li></ul><ul><li>number 112 and other special emergency number free of charge </li></ul><ul><li>on request of user , free of cost, arrange a categorised </li></ul><ul><li>barring service </li></ul><ul><li>free of charge provide itemized bills </li></ul><ul><li>ensure that user`s nme, address and telephone number is </li></ul><ul><li>collected and published in telephone directory </li></ul>
  26. 26. <ul><li>equip its communications network and communications service </li></ul><ul><li>with technical facilities that allows legal interception </li></ul><ul><li>service that recipient can see calling number (CLI) </li></ul><ul><li>ensure that its activities can continue under exceptional circumtances </li></ul><ul><li>ensure that network and service satisfies the quality requirement of the Act </li></ul><ul><li>follow provision of the Act on protection and Data Security in Telecommunications (for example regulation how to treat , store and use call data) </li></ul>TeliaSonera’s VoIP service has to comply with the obligations set for PATS in the national regulation, main obligations beeing (2):
  27. 27. IRG / FN WG / VoIP subgroup <ul><li>Just starting the work, first meeting on Monday June 21th </li></ul><ul><li>Co-operation with </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Commission </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>IRG End User group </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CEPT / ECC / TRIS group </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>” / NNA – VoIP PT </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Follow </li></ul><ul><ul><li>National regulatory development in Europe </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>USA (and Japan) regulatory development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Work of other organisations (OECD, ECTA, etc) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Standardisation work (ETSI, IETF, etc) </li></ul></ul>