We can classify IP data network technologies as belonging to one of two basic groups: Local Area Networks (LANs) or Wide Area Networks (WANs). A LAN connects many devices that are relatively close to each other, usually in the same building. A WAN connects a smaller number of devices that can be many miles apart. Different transmission facilities can be used in a WAN to support remote operations — everything from digital connections (e.g. ISDN, cable and DSL) to dedicated T1/E1 and frame relay connections. This is one of the reasons that IP data networks offer so much flexibility and cost-effectiveness in reaching all types of remote locations and workers. See the chart below for a bandwidth comparison of various WAN connection types.

The Internet Protocol (IP) was designed specifically for the Internet to act as the first truly universal networking language. It is the method or protocol by which data is sent from one computer to another via the Internet

An IP data network is a highly distributed networking environment in which clients access information stored in servers throughout the network. These servers can be anything from giant mainframes to small departmental file servers running on PCs. An IP data network utilizes packet-switched connections, routers and IP addresses to communicate with the different networked devices.

IP data, whether in the form of a Web page, a downloaded file or an e-mail message, travels over a system known as a packet-switched network. The the data is broken down into small packets, with an address on each one telling the network where to send them. When the receiving computer gets the packets, it reassembles them back into the original data.

A router is an advanced networking component that determines the route that IP packets of data will take. It serves to ensure that information does not go where it is not needed. This is crucial for keeping large volumes of data from clogging the connection. It also ensures that the information arrives at the intended destination.

A router essentially is the hub between two networks, passing information from one to the other. It also protects the networks from each another, preventing traffic from unnecessarily spilling over. Regardless of how many networks are attached, the basic operation and function of the router remains the same.

In order to route data through a network, routers need a way to locate each other. Therefore, every device on the TCP/IP Network has a unique identifying number, called an IP Address. A typical IP address looks like this: 10.100.1.45. An Internet Service Provider (ISP), or network administrator, permanently or dynamically assigns an IP address to a network device.

For years now, people have relied on the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN), otherwise known as POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service), for voice communication. Although the PSTN is a very reliable network, it uses a very basic and inefficient method for making a connection called “circuit switching”.

First, you dial the number of the party you wish to call. The call is routed through the switch at your local central office (CO) to the party you are calling opening the circuit. Depending on location, the call may be routed through multiple CO connections opening a circuit through each one. During the call, the line establishes a dedicated connection between the two parties. This means no other information can travel over the line, even though there is plenty of bandwidth available.

For larger companies, voice communication has traditionally been handled by proprietary platforms called private branch exchanges (PBXs). A PBX is essentially a switch used to connect a number of phones (extensions) to each other and to one or more outside phone lines. To further decribe how a PBX works, when a user picks up a phone (extension) a PBX dial tone will be heard. At this point, the user can dial any other extension on the PBX. To reach an outside line, the user typically dials a “9” (or presses a preprogrammed button) to access the PSTN network. A PBX was originally designed to save the cost of requiring a line for each user to the telephone company’s central office (CO).

One limitation of owning a traditional PBX is that it can only be used at the physical location of the company. The networking options do not extend voice communications to other remote locations (e.g. branch offices, sister companies, satellite offices, telecommuters, etc.)

One option, if the remote office is large enough, is to add another PBX at the remote site, and set up a private network between the two using tie lines that are leased from the phone company. To make an outgoing call to the remote office. The user would simply dial an “8” (or some other pre-programmed button) to access the tie line and then dial the remote office extension. Tie lines, however, are expensive because they add additional monthly charges to your bill. Furthermore, the telecommunications engineers are often faced with the challenge of networking together two dissimilar proprietary PBX systems that are not designed to work together.

An additional option for larger companies is to provide remote offices with a key telephone system. A key system is a cheaper, reduced functionality version of the PBX. Because it is a scaled down system, it is not designed to be networked with other phone systems. Therefore, calling a remote office is like calling a completely separate company.

1. Nokia, Cisco, OnRelay, and IBM to offer advanced enterprise voice mobility solutions
   • By working with partners, Nokia focusses on improved call routing and VoIP connectivity between mobile devices and company IP PBXs. The roles for the companies are:
     • Nokia offers the hardware (mobile phones)
     • Cisco offers their knowledge and backbone for IP PBX
     • OnRelay offers the software that installs on the PBX and their mobile phone, so that employees receive and dial out from the same telephone number (and possibly same phone)
   • Hot - employees face miseries when they travel - the task of forwarding and unforwarding phones, or asking your clients to phone two separate numbers is a hassle. Enterprises are willing to pay big bucks if their employees are more efficient at work and time management.
2. AOL will launch VoIP service under partnerships with Level 3 Communications
   • AOL, by accessing Level 3's network infrastructure and emergency call services, plans to launch consumer VoIP integrated with its instant messaging service. Consumers will be able to dial different communications from AOL's Instant Messenger interface.
   • Not - Not everyone uses AIM and your buddy list, buddy. AIM is not particularly user friendly either. Calling someone from the computer is a hassle for the technologically sophisticated, and spells trouble for the technologically challenged. Just think of the sound card, speaker, microphone configurations and installations necessary to make a call from your desktop application. If anything, Skype does this, for almost free.
3. Packet8 and Pitney Bowes Enter Co-Marketing Relationship for Packet8's Small Business VoIP Offerings
• Pitney Bowes, who offers mail/document/billing management systems, will begin selling Packet8's VoIP hosted PBX to small to medium sized businesses
• Hot - Small businesses often do not have the resources to build office systems in-house, whether they are mail, accounting, or phone systems. Phone systems, as an essential office need, fits in nicely to Pitney Bowes strategy for one-stop shopping for small business set-up

• 1 bill to pay for all three services (video, voice, DSL)
• Single point of contact for billing and support inquiries
• Established brand recognition boosts consumer confidence

• Lack of technological and product expertise (in telecommunications); Thus, may not pioneer innovative product features.
• Phoneline may be fixed (even though it is VoIP)

So exactly how much more convenience does paying only 1 bill offer? Currently, I just handle all my bill payments online. It doesn't take that long to pay one extra bill - 20 seconds of my time maybe. So, that would not be a compelling reason to use triple play rather than a dedicated VoIP only provider.

I am currently using my cable company for both my television cable service and internet broadband service. Contrary to "streamlining" support, they actually have separate tech support teams that separate voice from video tech support inquiries. For example, when I call to order services, I am forced to select whether it was for cable or DSL services. So my provider didn't really offer added convenience.

Therefore, when I do order VoIP service for my home, my primary concern would be whether cable/dsl providers have the know-how in offering telecommunications services well. While they may have a strong history in television and internet service, voice is a completely different type of service. Do they have the drive to innovate in that arena? Would they lose their focus in their cable or DSL service in order to dedicate resources for phone service?

Japan's NTT Docomo, however, is planning to launch a voice-over-WLAN hybrid next year, which allows users to combine their wireless and landline phone numbers. Users will use a single Wi-Fi enabled cell phone to access regular mobile networks when they are on the go, and their home LAN connection when they're at home. Docomo plans to offer it at a lower price than cellular service.

The pro for this is the convenience that this provides over the current process involved in being reachable all the time, at one number. Ususally, this means, a road traveler will always be forwarding and un-forwarding a cell phone in order to save on long distance costs and to avoid missing calls. Currently, although landline VoIP offer advanced forwarding options, such as find-me or follow-me, Docomo's service seems more convenient and automated. However, the idea may be crushed when WiMax becomes a reality, as users break free from mobile networks altogether.

Powell believes that although small strides have been made in the area of security and privacy, the world still needs to do an enormous amount more. He strongly believes that it is up to the industry to work with the government on critical issues such as 911, legitimate law enforcement access to communications, and universal service obligations. The industry would not only need to educate policy makers but lead the way.

I agree that the FCC alone cannot fix network security and reliability issues that could imperil Internet communications, but regulators do need step in if the industry does not do more to fix existing vulnerabilities. It seems like the industry is more concerned with more pressing priorities assuming that someone else will figure out the regulatory issues. However, security in my opinion should be the primary concern. With billions of VoIP minutes being published, solutions that are NOT secure are being deployed. For the residential market, VoIP is less of an issue but if the Enterprise and Business markets want to be VoIPerized, then it will surely be a bigger issue.

A distinct advantage that Telecom companies have is their ability to bundle their Internet, Phone and Long Distance services into one package making this convenient for the customer. Additionally, these larger companies have greater mindshare and brand value in the Telecommunications space.

There are other non-Telecom companies who are trying to enter into this space. These companies focus on providing communication services to larger customers handling bulk long distance charges including companies offering Carrier Services.

The termination services market extends to all companies that have existing PBX equipment, own a PRI line and want substantial savings to their long distance. In other words, the market is extremely large. The difficulty for new companies entering into this market will be in gaining trust from the company. Because phone services are an essential part of a business, customers would be reluctant to allow other companies to install equipment on their premises.