The Internet telephony challenge

International Data Corporation (IDC) has identified voice over Internet protocol (VOIP) as a pivotal technology and says that the VOIP gateway market is expected to reach $290 million in 1999. This figure is up from the $130 million in 1998.

However, IDC warns that VOIP is still very much at trial stage and a number of major obstacles are standing in the way of its success. These include legislation, standardisation and quality.

In SA legislation is a big issue. Lisa Thornton, consultant at Edward Nathan and Friedland (ENF), says that a definite shift has taken place. "Previously, we regulated for traditional telephone services and the Internet was carried over the telephone network. Now we see telephone service being carried over the Internet."

She cites three possible regulatory responses to Internet telephony. One is to ban it. The second is to attempt to subject it to the existing regulatory framework. And the third is to allow it to operate free of regulation.

The debate in the European Union and US is whether to subject Internet telephony to the existing regulatory framework or allow it to operate free of regulation. In SA the debate is whether to ban Internet telephony.

Thornton writes in a white paper (The Legal and Regulatory Position of Internet Telephony in SA) that the relevant legislation in SA relates to the Telecommunications Act (103 of 1996). Internet telephony may or may not be permitted under the Telecommunications Act. Conventional wisdom is that it is not permitted.

The argument is basically this: Internet telephony is part of Internet service. Internet service is a telecommunications service as defined by the Act, in particular a value-added network service. The Act prohibits a value-added network service provider from permitting its service to be used for the carrying of voice, until a date set by the Minister of Posts, Telecommunications and Broadcasting. Because Internet telephony would entail the carrying of voice over a value-added network service, it is illegal in terms of the Telecommunications Act.

Thus, notes Thornton in the white paper, it is not Telkom`s exclusivity that makes Internet telephony illegal in terms of the Act. It is the restriction of carrying voice over value-added network services that makes it illegal. Therefore it is not only illegal for other value-added network service providers but for Telkom as well.

Thornton believes the Minister should set a date after which the carrying of voice over a value-added network service would be permitted. "There are two basic reasons for this. Firstly, illegality cannot be enforced. It is difficult, if not impossible, for Internet service providers (ISPs) to determine whether voice or data traffic is being carried over their service. But not only is it difficult for ISPs to comply with the Act, it is practically impossible for SATRA to determine whether the act is being complied with."

The second reason, according to Thornton, is that illegality is a bad policy. Presumably the prohibition of carrying voice over value-added network services is justified by the argument that otherwise Telkom`s revenues will be depleted and then it will not be able to abide by its universal service obligations to roll-out service.

The IT industry is renowned for its standards and inter-operability issues. VOIP is no exception. The IDC says that right now there are many proposed standards but no clear direction for the technology. The danger is that the VOIP gateway market could become bogged down in standards conflicts, which could hamper growth and development efforts.

Andre Vermeulen, technology consultant at Dimension Data Networking, says that although standardisation is important, it`s not the death of technology. "Yes, the product standards are not fully specified or rectified. Every vendor is putting their money on the technique developed by their company.

"In this light, PABX companies have several standards but even each PABX has its own proprietary protocols that support their specific enhanced functions."

Vermeulen explains that the new generation of VOIP equipment is already beginning to create an open standard for any third-party manufacturer to develop applications, which will enhance the functionality of the equipment. If they are successful, products that comply with the standard will be able to communicate with each other.

BSW Telecoms senior support engineer, Menahem Fuchs agrees and adds that vendors will get together to form partnerships, where each company can add its expertise.

Another issue is quality. Roy Morris, adjunct professor at Capitol College in Maryland, US, writes in a white paper that to ensure voice-on-data consolidation, commercial data network services must be able to provide voice transmission quality for voice traffic (http://members.aol.com/RoyM11/
LoopCo/index_voice_over_ip.html).

He notes that the IP protocol was neither designed, nor is it presently equipped to, offer a workable system for the duality of quality of service needed in order for voice to be effectively placed on a data network. "The original IP was designed to treat all traffic the same. Thus congestion on an IP network equally delays all traffic, whether it`s voice or data. While there are some quality of service features that are being made available for the IP protocol, these have not been widely adopted in internetworking situations."

DiData`s Vermeulen adds that TCP/IP was never designed to carry voice or any real-time traffic. "However, the new enhancements in IP will ensure that the network knows that the specific data is voice."

Most network equipment manufacturers have already enhanced their switches and routers to handle VOIP within the tolerances the service requires. Vermeulen says the use of policy networking and better networking equipment will ensure the correct amount of bandwidth is available to the correct service.

He explains that the integration of telephony services into the data network has the potential to drive major changes in institutions by delivering information more pervasively and completely than today`s multi-networked approach.

ENF`s Thornton concludes: "I suggest that SA should embrace new technologies and services, and create the appropriate regulatory responses to ensure that Telkom can meet its obligations for universal service while at the same time allowing our people to gain by utilising dynamic new services."