paulspain: Grant17 - good description - but you'd need to be careful which wires you're cutting if you internet connection run over DSL.

lchiu7: OK - that makes sense. Basically what you're saying is

...
3. Connect the phone end of the Linksys to an existing phone outlet in the wall. Then since all the phone lines are in parallel (well something like that) it's as if I connected one phone to the Linksys and used double or triple jacks to connect other phones to it.

lchiu7: Any issues with active alarm monitoring?

jpollock: 3) Switching costs are lower in VoIP, because conceivably your customers could talk amongst themselves once address resolution has happened.

geek4me: Does anyone know if/when TelstraClear are planning to offer voip services. A search for voip on their website produces 0 hits. I have TelstraClear cable and am looking at what voip services are available. Xnet, iTalk and even Skype are contenders all now offering local voip phone numbers in NZ. How far away are TCL in offering the same on their cable network and what would the charges be - perhaps someone from TCL would care to comment?

TinyTim:

jpollock: 3) Switching costs are lower in VoIP, because conceivably your customers could talk amongst themselves once address resolution has happened.

Even this isn't a given when all costs are taken into account. In fact it seems the only consensus on cost saving is the reduced operating cost from only having to run one network. If they do in fact turn off the legacy PSTN.

Fraktul: Telstra Clear have been doing things on the Corporate side for awhile, it just has not been successful at many levels.

I've heard the same about TNZ. :)  Doesn't stop them winning the business though.  I've been hearing about problems with:
1) Cisco handsets - crashing software loads.
2) Inability to get fiber to the business on schedule.
3) Poor project management.

In fact, the one contract I heard where TNZ won over TCL for VoIP, it was because TCL said, "We can't meet that schedule".  Then again TNZ couldn't either, but they were smart enough to not admit it. :)

Anyways, that a roll-out has problems doesn't mean the tech is bad.  It doesn't even mean that the project is a failure!  I've been involved in many, many projects for telco's and each one has been a failure for one reason or another.  However, after the project is live, and you went to the customer and asked, "So, do you like it?  Was it worth the hassle?"  They would say "Hell yes!".  Well, perhaps not so positively, that would mean they were happy with the service, and they can't let on about that!

So, how many businesses are turning off their VoIP systems and going back to POTS?

jpollock:

Compelling reasons....

1) VoIP has lower infrastructure costs. No DSP's required, your customers pay for their own.
2) VoIP doesn't require obtaining wholesale access to Telecom's analog network, only the DSL network.
3) Switching costs are lower in VoIP, because conceivably your customers could talk amongst themselves once address resolution has happened.
4) The traffic represented by voice is miniscule compared to your data traffic.
5) VoIP hardware is cheaper than a regular carrier switch.
6) VoIP offers a migration path to fixed/mobile convergence, including such very cool things as femto-cells and UMA.
7) Once it's a VoIP call, integration with international VoIP wholesalers is cheap and easy. The wholesale cost of international calls is something like .1c/min (probably less).
8) The software is simpler too. More happens in the edges of the network. This results in failures being more localised.
9) Service creation. It moves service creation out of the Telco tower and into general IT/WWW development. Compare SIP (runs on top of HTTP) with SS7.
10) Endpoints get more control of their calls. How would you like a tool on your PC that can re-direct calls to your mobile phone? How about writing that tool yourself?
11) You are selling a lot of VoIP lines to your business customers including government departments.

There are more, but I'm tired now. :)

1) you still have to transcode at the telco side if the call is getting handed over to another network which is not supporting the codec transcode on the customer CPE.
2) it requires wholesale access to the data network or building your own, either way you need access to network be it data or analog.
3) Your terminology is a bit confused given this is circuit switched vs packet.
4) But a far higher pps rate meaning extra load on your network devices vs data.
5) Sure
6) Ditto.
7) I wouldn't say easy, maybe easier - generally the quality is somewhat more dubious also . Successful call terminations on a cheap calling card vs TCNZ would be case in point..
8) SS7 and TDM are pretty mature compared to most VoIP implementations it could be argued. As to the localization that is very much dependant on the network design. If you only have one STM interconnect with TCNZ for UBS/UBA traffic and this falls over I would argue this is far more centralized than TCNZ analog service?
9) Woah, ok...and so you need a whole new set of skills for SIP and SS7. SIP isn't exactly one easy RFC and SS7 will be around for awhile yet.
10) Yup, also makes things more complex for end users to some degree also. Flexibility and complexity often go hand in hand.
11) Great

Not saying I disagree with you, just saying you need a balanced argument.

jpollock:

TinyTim: Even this isn't a given when all costs are taken into account. In fact it seems the only consensus on cost saving is the reduced operating cost from only having to run one network. If they do in fact turn off the legacy PSTN.

Actually, I disagree.

ReaperZ: i just thought of something ! during power cuts you cant use a VOIP phone lol

ReaperZ: i just thought of something ! during power cuts you cant use a VOIP phone lol