[Users] Re: [Serusers] voip charging by ISP's

[Iqbal]

I agree, I mean the next step would be to charge ebay and yahoo per 
transaction, just wondering how easy it would be for ISP to setup a 
monitor and a billing model on this

Iqbal

sip wrote:

>I think that would get a LOT of pushback and may end up really screwing SBC.
>If they begin to self-regulate the TYPE of traffic going over their
>connection, they open themselves to a tremendous number of legal hurdles not
>the least of which being the fact that they're trying to live as an
>unregulated service provider. 
>
>That being said, they COULD keep track of Vonage traffic in that they can keep
>track of any traffic going straight to Vonage's servers, but as Vonage doesn't
>care a) whether or not the traffic passes through SBC's network in order to
>reach them and b) likely hasn't signed any sort of agreement which would ALLOW
>them to start charging, then SBC simply can't charge Vonage without a contract
>no matter what they'd LIKE to do. 
>
>Now, they could say that unless Vonage starts paying them fees for additional
>usage, that they're going to cut off access to Vonage's equipment, but they
>have to be VERY careful going down that road. If they don't have an equally
>viable and effective product set up for people, they're shooting themselves in
>the foot. There's also the negative stigma that advertising could very easily
>put on the move "SBC is trying to keep you from making cheap phone calls." 
>"If SBC does this, you will still be required to live out your contractual
>obligations to Vonage (and yes I know they say there are none, but you didn't
>read the fine print :) )! Switch to XXX Internet provider so this doesn't
>happen!" Etc, etc. 
>
>If SBC has a lot of Vonage users, they might find themselves having a drastic
>reduction in userbase on such a move. If they DON'T have a lot of Vonage
>users, Vonage isn't liable to care too much, but the media war that would
>ensue with the information that SBC doesn't let people get inexpensive phone
>service might still put a huge damper on SBCs growth. 
>
>I'm not sure they've throught that one through very carefully. 
>
>
>On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 12:13:01 +0000, Iqbal wrote
>  
>
>>The basis behind the query was because the CEO of SBC said a few 
>>days ago that they "may" start charging companies like Vonage
>>
>>Iqbal
>>
>>Roger Lewau wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hello
>>>
>>>Interesting thought, but I dont see why there would be a need or even a wish 
>>>to charge once for the Internet access with an agreed Speed or data transfer 
>>>limit, and then again for the type of traffic unless that specific traffic 
>>>is treated differently in the ISP network, as wth higher CoS. Why else would 
>>>they care what kind of traffic you are running on your connection as long it 
>>>is kept within the agreed speed/data transfer limit? But giving voip traffic 
>>>different CoS over the providers network as a differentiator to enable voice 
>>>traffic billing does not seem logical unless all providers on Internet do 
>>>the same, and map the CoS between the providers at peering points.
>>>
>>>I do not see how the VoIP providers would ever accept such an approach from 
>>>any ISP. 
>>>
>>>IP traffic is IP Traffic! You pay for the amount of traffic you send and 
>>>receive. More traffic equals higher revenue for the ISP, no need to charge 
>>>traffic differently just because the traffic happens to be VoIP and the ISP 
>>>has its roots in Telecom industry. I believe that the natural development of 
>>>this would be that most of the ISPs also start to offer the VoIP services. 
>>>It make a lot more sense to use the ISP as the VoIP provider than any remote 
>>>provider, since that will increase performance, reliability and make the 
>>>whole 911 issue and technical troubleshooting a lot easier. I strongly 
>>>believe that the ISPs at all levels will most likely replace the old PTTs 
>>>over the next 5-10 years. And in the case of PTTs also being an ISP, lucky 
>>>them.
>>>
>>>I think, Companies like Vonage probably will be outrun by ISPs providing 
>>>VoIP in the long run, but they will stay behind as alternate providers or as 
>>>gateways to the old pstn networks. 
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Roger
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Iqbal <iqbal at gigo.co.uk>
>>>To: "serusers at iptel.org" <serusers at iptel.org>
>>>Cc: "users openser.org" <users at openser.org>
>>>Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 17:54:35 +0000
>>>Subject: [Serusers] voip charging by ISP's
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Hi
>>>>
>>>>i was looking into a model where ISP may charge (SBC is already thiking
>>>>of charging Vonage :-)), now if an ISP wanted to charge, all they would
>>>>need is to extract the INVITE, BYE and all the stuff in the middle, to 
>>>>do some billing per VoIP provider sending traffic on there network, is 
>>>>anyone aware of any sniffers which could do this not from a proxy, but 
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>>from the network level at a ISP end.
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Iqbal
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Serusers mailing list
>>>>Serusers at iptel.org
>>>>http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>.
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Serusers mailing list
>>Serusers at iptel.org
>>http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>.
>
>  
>