ET
Mar 14, 2004, 2:37 PM
Post #5 of 5
(853 views)
Shortcut
|
"Esteban" writes:
The powers that be have been threatening the VOIP for many years now..... 1. Actual reading of the PC Magazine advisory, or better yet the CERT Vulnerability Note would have shown you that the warnings pertained to vulnerabilities in the ITU H.323 and H.225 protocols, a majority of which will result in VOIP equipment being vulnerable to Denial of Service attacks. DoS attacks are the tool of an individual or small group who seek to disrupt IP services to another individual or corporate entity. For the latter, because of the distributed nature of IP services, damage would be limited limited to a specific service. The combination renders the VOIP vulnerabilities identified as considerably less than effective tools for a corporate entity or group of entities who are threatened by VOIP to attack their VOIP rivals.
....If Carlos Slim wanted to make a whoop over VOIP calls, he would have done it already. When you look at the fact Prodigy is also part of the Telmex empire, I don't see any problems in the future.... 2. Both Telmex (Telefonos de Mexico S.A.) and Carso Global Telecom, another of Carlos Slim Helu's corporate incarnations, sold their stakes in Prodigy to SBC Global in November 2001. Although Mr. Helu is on the board of directors of SBC Global, his direct holdings in the corporation don't trigger the SEC's 5% reporting threshold, and his various operating companies do not hold significant shareholdings. In fact, the opposite is more true, with SBC Global owning an approximately 7.5% stake in Telmex and being part of the consortium that controls all Telmex Class AA shares and consequently voting control over the company.
.... In fact, as wireless takes over, the maintenance will be more intellectual than taking care of the physical copper lines This will take the cost of operation down to a much lower level along with the cost of a call. I've heard rumors that the reason Telmex is fighting new competition is because the new competitors don't want to help with the maintenance of existing physical infrastructure.... 3. Wireless is, and will for the foreseeable future focus on (a) consumer "final mile" services, and (b) long-haul for interconnect providers. In between the two, copper and glass infrastructure is still required, particularly when connecting between different service providers. It's in this arena where the argument between the incumbent service providers and new competitors is being fought out. Rather than being rumors, by reading even the popular media you'll find that the argument goes beyond Telmex to pretty much anywhere where communications infrastructure was built either by a governmental entity or in a highly-regulated (public-utilities type) environment, and then privatized. Incumbents claim that they're bearing the costs of the construction, maintenance, and expansion of the infrastructure as part of the privatization plans, challengers claim they're being charged too much to use facilities that were constructed at the consumer's expense and have already been paid for. The US/Mexico trade dispute over long-distance interconnect fees, which Telmex is reported to have lost in a WTO ruling late last week has an element of this, with Telmex in part claiming the elevated fees are responsible for the amortizing and paying to upgrade switching facilities, and the US claiming otherwise. Regardless of the truth, if the ruling is sustained, the result should be an intermediate-term reduction in long distance call costs between the US and Mexico, and vice versa.
PS to HHerrington - Off hand do you know which consumer-channel VOIP providers are using H.323? I believe Vonage is using CIS.
|
Forums Index
Search Posts
Who's Online
Log In or Sign Up
