x
Optical/IP

Verizon Embraces Packet Voice

With most carriers avoiding spending money on much of anything these days, Nortel Networks Corp. (NYSE/Toronto: NT) was celebrating what it calls a “good strategic win” yesterday, after Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ) announced that it is using Nortel's packet switching equipment in large switching centers in New Jersey and Florida (see Verizon Deploys Packet Switches).

In yesterday’s release, Verizon stated that the deployments, which are designed to evaluate the reliability of packet technology, represent the largest application of packet switching technology for voice transmission by a local exchange carrier in North America. The deployment in New Jersey alone has, according to the statement, already successfully completed more than 1.8 million voice phone calls.

The announcement is important because it shows that Verizon, a relatively slow-moving RBOC, is finally coming around to using packet switching technology in its voice networks. Verizon, which did not return phone calls, didn’t mention in the release which other vendors’ equipment was evaluated for the deployment.

The financial impact for Nortel is less clear -- there was no dollar amount specified for the contract, and some analysts believe that Verizon may later buy similar equipment from other providers.

"This is not a complete deployment,” says Frank Dzubeck of Communications Network Architects, indicating that coming deployments may quite possibly be with equipment from other vendors. “No one that I know of is committing to just one vendor... [And] Verizon has a history of never giving all the jewels to a single vendor.”

Nortel officials declined to say what other vendors were involved in the bidding, but they did say it was a contested bid. Observers say they expect that Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO), Lucent Technologies Inc. (NYSE: LU), and Siemens AG (NYSE: SI; Frankfurt: SIE) were among the runners-up.

Still, most observers agree that yesterday’s announcement is good news for Nortel, which, as the incumbent vendor at Verizon, was expected to win. “It certainly gives them credibility,” says Current Analysis analyst Brent Wilson, pointing out that Nortel will likely keep its incumbent business at Verizon. “Without a doubt, Nortel is having success protecting its installed base. That doesn’t mean they have the best technological solution.”

“This is important for them,” Dzubeck says. “It verifies the fact that they have an excellent product.” More importantly than validating one vendor, however, he says, is that the move validates the technology being deployed. “Here’s an RBOC making a commitment. That blessing... shows that the technology is now deployable.”

Jenna Stanley, the director of Voice-over-IP Solutions Marketing at Nortel, says the announcement demonstrates that packet switching is replacing voice circuit switching: “This not only marks an increase in the volume of packet switching equipment being deployed... but also an increase of carrier comfort with the technology.”

Stanley claims that packet switching technology will enable Verizon to do faster call routing, as well as free up excess capacity that in a circuit switching environment is used just to get different tandem switches talking to each other. This use of packet switching technology to carry voice is known as voice trunking over ATM switches, or VTOA.

This is the third packet switching deployment deal for voice that Nortel has signed with carriers over the past year. Last fall, the company signed similar deals with both Sprint Corp. (NYSE: FON) and Qwest Communications International Inc. (NYSE: Q) (see Sprint, Nortel Ink Billion-Dollar Deal and Qwest Pushes Packets). Nortel refuses to put a price tag on what the Verizon deployment deal will mean to them, but if it comes close to what they claim they’ll pull in from the Sprint deal -- $ 1.1 billion -- it’s a big deal.

Current Analysis's Wilson, however, says that while this might be the largest completed deployment, other announced -- but yet incomplete -- deployments, like one at Sprint, will be far larger when they’re done.

Farooq Hussain, a general partner at Network Conceptions LLC, downplayed the size of the announced deployment. “1.8 million calls -- that’s less than a couple hours work,” he says, insisting that many carriers have already been doing packet switching for voice for years. “This is a good announcement for Nortel, but as a carrier announcement, it doesn’t carry any weight at all. They’re way, way behind everyone else."

— Eugénie Larson, Reporter, Light Reading
http://www.lightreading.com
lucifer 12/4/2012 | 10:07:32 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Netskeptic -- you're right; I misread your comments as ironic. Apologies.

Who is going to speak up about the VoIP myth? I see lots of Marketing hype (principally from Cisco but nobody is innocent) proclaiming that VoIP is the holy grail. Mixing metaphors, when will the naked emperor show up?

Light bearer
netskeptic 12/4/2012 | 10:07:49 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice > These discussions began with a disparaging
> comment that Nortel's deal with Verizon was not
> for VoIP, but (...gasp, shock, horror...) for
> VoATM! Implication: VoIP is better than VoATM
> and Nortel is not "with it".

You got it 180 degrees wrong, I started this discussion with phrasing Verizon for ignoring the hype and skipping VOIP (which IMHO is nothing else than wothless vapor as long as we are talking about carrier side) for something more realistic.

Thanks for info,

Netskeptic
lucifer 12/4/2012 | 10:07:53 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice These discussions began with a disparaging comment that Nortel's deal with Verizon was not for VoIP, but (...gasp, shock, horror...) for VoATM! Implication: VoIP is better than VoATM and Nortel is not "with it". I have some background in voice and packet data (goes way back to X.25, right up to ATM and IP and even MPLS), so I hope I am qualified to reveal the emperor's clothes...

VoIP, VoATM --- who cares? As long as the packet network is reliable and supports the CoS or QoS that voice requires, not a big deal!

Voice is probably the most difficult kind of traffic to adapt and transport on a packet network. Our physiology and psychology means that we expect low voice (guidelines are typically < 150ms one-way latency ) and will not tolerate change in time delay (jitter). Voice codecs are also sensitive to packet loss; I have seen requirements as demanding as < 0.01% packet loss.

Another really important factor is carriers' (and their customers') conservatism. Voice is a high revenue, profitable service; we expect that when we pick up the phone and dial that the call will always go through. If we dial 911, we want to be connected to emergency services ALWAYS. IP networks, certainly the Internet, don't provide this sort of guarantee without very careful engineering.

Put these service needs and voice over packet technology characteristics together and see what packet infrastructures meet the needs...and it turns out that there are several ways to build VoP CARRIER networks, at this time:

Use "native" IP (IP transported over a L2 without strong QoS capabilities) and engineer the network to minise latency and jitter. Usually requires over-provisioning of bandwidth on the IP network (which does cost money .. check the prices for GE and high speed POS interfaces). Worry about what happens if a link goes down, if the network routing tables have to be recalculated (can't make any CoS guaantees during reconvergence, can we?). Use diff-serv mapping to best effect.

Use IP with a QoS-enabled L2 (FR or ATM). Focus on the IP as offering the voice service transport and the ATM or FR as ensuring that the QoS and reliability needs are met.

Use VoATM, either AAL1 (simple mapping of Circuits/DS0s to ATM) or AAL2 (saves connection space in the ATM network and is more efficient in use of bandwidth)

There is lots of talk about MPLS as a network technology enabler that provides IP networks with the QoS and Reliability controls needed for voice. It's all talk right now; MPLS is used (in my experience) for IP Traffic Engineering and needs lots of simplification and real-world testing before it could be applied in a carrier's network for voice. Some experts even think that MPLS is getting more complex than ATM and what problem were we really trying to solve anyway...

And remember, VoIP, VoATM --- who cares? As long as the packet network is reliable and supports the CoS or QoS that voice requires, not a big deal!
Light bearer...
litemyfiber 12/4/2012 | 10:08:50 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice This kind of garbage belongs on Yahoo, not LR. I call on LR to ban this ID and anyone who posts this kind of tripe. This is a forum for professionals, not wackos and juveniles!
techdocs 12/4/2012 | 10:08:56 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice VERY SOON!! Canadian Press Release:
Nortel Sales May Miss Creditors' Covenant Demands, Post Says
By Joe Schneider

Toronto, July 5 (Bloomberg) -- Nortel Networks Corp., North America's No. 2 maker of telephone equipment, will likely miss sales and operating profit targets set out by the company's creditors, the National Post reported, citing an analyst report.

Nortel won't have positive cash flow until mid-2004, because sales of about $3.2 billion will fail to meet its break-even position, according to a report by Mark Rosen of Rosen & Associates Ltd., the Post said. Bank covenants require the Brampton, Ontario-based company to have operating earnings of $50 million by the second quarter, the paper said.

Even if Nortel renegotiates the terms with its bankers, it will be forced to cut its workforce by another 10 percent to readjust for even lower sales than the current projections of about $11 billion a year, the Post said.

Separately, the Post reported that a retirement plan for U.S.- based Nortel employees lost $1 billion last year investing in the company's shares, because the stock has plunged in value. The plan's assets shrank to $2 billion from $3 billion a year ago, the paper said.

(National Post 7-5 FP1) For the National Post Web site see {NPST }
BANKS ARE READY TO CHAIN THE DOORS SHUT!!!! ONLY DEBT FREE CASH RICH CISCO WILL BE LEFT.
umustbejokin 12/4/2012 | 10:09:05 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Litewave wrote;
For me the point, especially if you want read the "tea leaves" is Nortel's point that this is an important stategic win as they put it.

Strategic win it may be, for now, but I wouldn't be so quick to guage any long term "migration" as you put it, you obviously missed my original point...

http://www.lightreading.com/bo...


I can't think of anything dumber than being locked-in by a vendor for both Voice switching and a Packet switching backbone, which is what Nortel is trying to do obviously. But Verizon ain't dumb :-)
===============================================

So, to my point if as you say;

"That Nortel's ATM gear is not doing anything special in Verizon's current deployment and can easily be supplanted with those from any number of next generation ATM switch vendors."

Why did they win?

Litewave 12/4/2012 | 10:09:06 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice For me the point, especially if you want read the "tea leaves" is Nortel's point that this is an important stategic win as they put it.

Strategic win it may be, for now, but I wouldn't be so quick to guage any long term "migration" as you put it, you obviously missed my original point...

http://www.lightreading.com/bo...

That Nortel's ATM gear is not doing anything special in Verizon's current deployment and can easily be supplanted with those from any number of next generation ATM switch vendors.

I can't think of anything dumber than being locked-in by a vendor for both Voice switching and a Packet switching backbone, which is what Nortel is trying to do obviously. But Verizon ain't dumb :-)
stryke_d 12/4/2012 | 10:09:07 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Actually I think her name card says

JENNIFER STANLEY, Leader, Circuit To Packet Marketing

Most of the folks I meet from the Nortel "Sucession Team" talk Circuit to Packet not ATM vs IP.

If you can deliver a DS0 to a customer at 1/2 the price why do we care if it is ATM or IP? No one ever marketed DTMF so why do we get into the technology underlying next gen voice?
rs50terra 12/4/2012 | 10:09:07 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Because it is so similar to POTS as to not matter? :-)
umustbejokin 12/4/2012 | 10:09:07 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Exactly;
For me the point, especially if you want read the "tea leaves" is Nortel's point that this is an important stategic win as they put it. The migration will take 15 years, it is estimated and the impotant fact is that they are an early leader.
I think it would be more instructive to understand why, than to debate wether or not this is so.
stryke_d 12/4/2012 | 10:09:08 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice It appears my terse reply to a question about BHCA on the various switch platforms has sparked a lot of controversy.

I didn't mean to imply that Verizon is using this, just replied to the question that was asked

"Does anyone know how many BHCA the newest Succession boxes can handle?" asked by EdgeCore.

That being said I don't think many of the incumbents need additional switch capacity as they probably have plenty of spare. They may be looking at softswitches but remember it took them 15 years to move to digital switches that last time we had this kind of technology evolution.

In fact in some markets carriers are looking a VoPacket to trunk lines from other markets to where they have excess switch capacity.

I apologize if I implied that Verizon was using the switches at these capacities.
Litewave 12/4/2012 | 10:09:08 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Well at least now we know your real name and phone number, or is this your brother in law who also owns Sonus stock? ;-)

Actually, its my brother's wife's sister's neighbors that own Sonus stock, not I.

..that you have some kind of agenda going on. I think that reduces your credibility somewhat, or am I just being naive?

Of course you're not being naive, you're just stating the obvious (to any halfwit), and it has little to do with my credibility.

Everyone that posts on LR has some agenda, the question is whether that agenda is malicious or otherwise.

In my case, I feel the need to expose the truth behind these obvious yarn spinning press-releases from the likes of Nortel (now you know my real name - Fox Mulder ;-)

I prefer not to go with your reading of the tea leaves in this article..

You call Verizon's press-release tea leaves? Thats funny fella. What about these tea leaves from Nortel itself...

http://www.nortelnetworks.com/...

And I quote...

"Verizon Communications has successfully deployed Nortel Networks Packet Trunking - ATM solution..."

How much more obvious does it need to be?

There is apparently a CS2K deployed at VZ.

"Apparently"? So! Even an ardent supporter such as yourself has become skeptical about any CS2K carrying live traffic at Verizon today huh. We're making progress then. Now we just need Kephill to speak up ;-)
umustbejokin 12/4/2012 | 10:09:14 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Litewave wrote:
Tell you what, make it easy on yourselves, call up Mark Marchand (Verizon) at 518-396-1080 and ask him specifically if the CS2K is actually taking live traffic as we speak.
===========================================
Well at least now we know your real name and phone number, or is this your brother in law who also owns Sonus stock? ;-)

It's obvious from your other post today

http://www.lightreading.com/bo...

that you have some kind of agenda going on. I think that reduces your credibility somewhat, or am I just being naive?
I prefer not to go with your reading of the tea leaves in this article, beside I have access to some other sites which I unfortunately am not at liberty to post here which tell me otherwise. There is apparently a CS2K deployed at VZ.

Get over it...
Roy_Bynum 12/4/2012 | 10:09:19 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Scott Raynovich: "We quote Frank because he ... speaks his opinion, and isn't afraid to be quoted.
You'd be surprised at how hard this is to find.
______________________________________________

I can well understand this.

I have allowed myself to be quoted under my name in the past and got all kinds of flak for it from my employer's management. Additionally, the reporter made a very human error and misquoted me, giving a wrong "slant" to the information.

In allowing himself to be quoted under his name, Frank knows that he will be considered as somewhat unreliable relative to keeping close on things that others might not want to have made known. Only those that do not want to be able to have information sensitive jobs within telecom or vendor companies will put themselves in that position.

In spite of the turndown, I am still trying to find work in this industry. This means that I have to be careful about how much I can help the reporters, such as Scott, in bringing to light the information that most would like to have revealed. Given what is going on in the industry today, there are a lot of people like me that are willing to give background information, but are hesitant on allowing them to quoted under their name.

LightGaugeGuitarString 12/4/2012 | 10:09:21 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Litewave,

Thanks! Now THAT's the kind of info I was looking for!

LGGS
Litewave 12/4/2012 | 10:09:22 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice LightGaugeGuitarString , umustbejokin, you guys are so naive, all the clues you needs are in Verizon's press release. Let me show you...

...represent the largest application of packet-switching technology for voice transmission by a local exchange carrier in North America.

Hello!? Did they "voice transmission" instead of voice switching? Gosh! I guess they did!

This use of the packet-switching technology to carry voice calls is known as voice trunking over ATM switches, or VToA.

Hello!? Did they say "voice trunking over ATM"? Gosh! I guess they did!

During the initial Verizon VToA deployment, voice calls are being transmitted through major regional call- and data-switching centers known as tandems.

Hello!? Did they say "tandem"? Gosh! I guess they did!

The two switching centers used products from Nortel Networks VoIP portfolio including the Succession* Communication Server 2000 softswitches,..

Interesting how they use the word "used", don't you think? Notice the past tense fellas? In otherwords, it may have been tested, but its certainly not used now.

If the Call Servers were actually taking live traffic, I bet the press release would not have been this ambiguous.

Tell you what, make it easy on yourselves, call up Mark Marchand (Verizon) at 518-396-1080 and ask him specifically if the CS2K is actually taking live traffic as we speak.

And then come back and report to us skeptics will you :)
LightGaugeGuitarString 12/4/2012 | 10:09:24 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Dreamer said:
A) Should I trust a press release from a vendor??
or
B) Someone from the actual customer that is deploying the solution???
Your choice: A or B..
----------------------------------------------
Dreamer,
You forgot:
C) Someone posting on this board who implies insider knowledge

Here's a snippet of the Verizon press release (identical to Nortel's):
The two switching centers used products from Nortel Networks VoIP portfolio including the Succession* Communication Server 2000 softswitches, Succession Multi-service Gateway 4000 and Passport* 15000 Multiservice Switches for ATM transport.

http://newscenter.verizon.com/...

There you have it, we have both A) and B) in your list.

Now, with that as a backdrop, if you or Litewave truly have some insider knowledge about what was actually deployed and why Verizon would lie in their press release, I personally would love to hear it.

LGGS.
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 10:09:25 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice A) Should I trust a press release from a vendor??

or

B) Someone from the actual customer that is deploying the solution???

Your choice: A or B..
umustbejokin 12/4/2012 | 10:09:26 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice So, you're implying that Verizon is using a Call server in their live network!? Thats BS!

Anyone one of us thats been at Verizon knows thats not true. Maybe they tested something, but definitely no Call server in this deployment.

Lets set the facts straight shall we.

==================================================

Yes, let us get the facts straight.

From the Nortel Site:

http://www.nortelnetworks.com/...

Read the release for yourselves, but I have included the snippet below FYI.

"During the initial Verizon VToA deployment, voice calls are being transmitted through major regional call- and data-switching centers known as tandems. The two Verizon tandems are located in Newark, N.J., and Tampa, Fla.

The two switching centers use products from Nortel Networks voice over IP portfolio, including Succession* Communication Server 2000 softswitches, Succession Multiservice Gateway 4000, and Passport* 15000 Multiservice Switches for ATM transport.

VToA technology also offers the potential for a cost-effective way to migrate to a voice over IP platform, if the market and future technology justify that move at some time in the future."
So:
1. Yes there is a softswitch involved.

2. Yes, it is VToA not IP (today)

3. The MG4Ks are subtending to the PP15Ks which are doing the trunking.(Apparently)

Get over it...
Litewave 12/4/2012 | 10:09:27 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Using XA Core 1.5m BHCA going to 2
Using CS2K 500K going to 750K


So, you're implying that Verizon is using a Call server in their live network!? Thats BS!

Anyone one of us thats been at Verizon knows thats not true. Maybe they tested something, but definitely no Call server in this deployment.

Lets set the facts straight shall we.
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 10:09:27 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Let me repeat one more time...
This is not VoIP..
It is Voice over ATM...
If NT do VoIP, they would have loss this deal..
They master the act of saying something but do something else...
dsb 12/4/2012 | 10:09:32 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Yea, but when they are half the market, it's a good start!
kephill 12/4/2012 | 10:09:33 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Does Roth get some credit for NT's wins with VoIP and Succession? The product was developed and first marketed on his watch. He pushed for NT to pursue IP technology.
dodo 12/4/2012 | 10:09:36 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice agreed

but unfortunately only 2 SP bought into it
willywilson 12/4/2012 | 10:09:38 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice 1 meg Modem (which is pushing daisies these days)back in 1998/1999

---------

This product, along with Paradyne's ReachDSL, works better than anything else out there.
dodo 12/4/2012 | 10:09:39 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice "No, the bottomline is her title is Director, VoIP Solutions because the Portfolio of products WOULD OFFER (when) customers those capabilities"

Boy, haven't we heard those promises on upcoming features with , say:
1. 1 meg Modem ( which is pushing daisies these days)back in 1998/1999

2. the xDSL blades for the UE 9000 that have been sold to someone else back in 1999/2000

3. And now Succcession .
stryke_d 12/4/2012 | 10:09:43 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Using XA Core 1.5m BHCA going to 2
Using CS2K 500K going to 750K
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 10:09:47 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Hi BobbyMax,
Which Qwest are you talking about??
The regulated or the unregulated side??
As far as I know, the unregulated side is using DMS 500 with VoIP trunking.. This has been going on before the merger with US West. In fact, Qwest is among the first big carriers that use VoIP for long distance calls..
Litewave 12/4/2012 | 10:09:48 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice What kind of performance are we talking about with the Nortel gear?

Doea anyone know how many BHCA the newest Succession boxes can handle?


This isn't a Succession deal, its just voice trunking over ATM using Circuit Emulation. There are no Succession Call Servers in Verizon's deployed network (regardless of the impression Sauron is trying to give).

Theres no big deal here, any decent ATM switch can do what the Passports are doing in this instance.

Infact, all the analyst in the article are probably alluding to a known fact that Verizon is infact evaluating decent "Next Generation" ATM switches from the likes of ... ;)
BobbyMax 12/4/2012 | 10:09:48 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice This technology is useful where the network is experiecing congestion. Verizon is is a very high volume calling area. So the VoP makes sense.

There is not much nned for this technology for Qwest.
strands555 12/4/2012 | 10:09:50 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice "...because he returns our calls and has been in the industry a long time, speaks his opinion, and isn't afraid to be quoted."
====

Do you encounter this a lot (people afraid of being quoted)? Just curious.

I guess having a name assigned to the quote adds "perceived" credibility, but it's the words that really matter, not who said them.

I guess you have a triple dilema...you need a person willing to attach their name to their quote (because that is the accepted tradition in articles) and you need a quick response time because you want to post the info while it is still fresh, and you'd like to quote different sources. OK, I can see that getting all 3 is a lot harder than it first seemed.

Maybe you could ping the more reputable posters on these boards that have shown expertise and level headed views on topics you write articles about, for their comments, to include as quotes in articles...or would it be taboo to quote someone that goes by an alias?

Alias names are highly recommended by company legal departments for employees that participate in public forums. It has little connection to lack of integrity in many/most cases.
sauron5 12/4/2012 | 10:09:50 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice No, the bottomline is her title is Director, VoIP Solutions because the Portfolio of products offers customers those capabilities. You simply made an incorrect assumption because Verizon has specific
customer needs.

Sauron
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 10:09:50 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Hi Sauron,
The bottomline is that Verizon is doing Voice over ATM in this application so does Sprint Local services..
sauron5 12/4/2012 | 10:09:51 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice The two switching centers use:
Succession Communication Server 2000 softswitches Succession Multiservice Gateway 4000
Passport 15000 Multiservice Switches for ATM transport.

Passport 7000/15000 provide VoIP capabilities in different network configurations.

Sauron
Scott Raynovich 12/4/2012 | 10:09:52 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Lband,

We quote Frank because he returns our calls and has been in the industry a long time, speaks his opinion, and isn't afraid to be quoted.

You'd be surprised at how hard this is to find. If you believe you know somebody that fits these criteria, or want to be heard, please send me a note at [email protected]

--Scott
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 10:09:52 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Hi sauron5,
Thanks for providing the joke of the day..
Ha! Ha! Ha!
LightGaugeGuitarString 12/4/2012 | 10:09:53 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Sauron,

Are you saying that the MG4000 suports VoIP?

LGGS
edgecore 12/4/2012 | 10:09:53 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice What kind of performance are we talking about with the Nortel gear?

Doea anyone know how many BHCA the newest Succession boxes can handle?

What other parameters are important here?

EC
digerato 12/4/2012 | 10:09:54 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Light Reading playing favorites? I'm totally shocked -- that never happens.
strands555 12/4/2012 | 10:09:54 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice re: ""Why is Frank Dzubeck so frequently quoted in LightReading? He shows up in 20 LightReading news analysis stories since May."

I agree. Frank Dzubeck is a master of creating
a good soundbite without making it obvious that
he knows almost nothing about the industry."

======
Same goes for Alan Bezoza, who is quoted in 30 LR articles, according to the LR search I just did.
dietaryfiber 12/4/2012 | 10:09:54 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice BBboy,

Actually all of this fancy voice compression stuff only adds cost to the implementation. Remember this is not an area of great network congestion at the moment.

AAL2 was wonderful for CLECs who needed to optimize the number of voice calls per wire pair. AAL2 is now an interesting technology without a problem to solve in the wireline telco space.

Unfortunately, the silicon vendors in this area are still building these massively complex machines to massively compress and echo cancel voice. At the end of the day, this means that VoP actually ends up costing more than it needs to.

dietary fiber
sauron5 12/4/2012 | 10:09:55 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice You are stupid to say that VoIP is not supported.
It simply is not implemented, but is supported.

Sauron
Lichtverbindung 12/4/2012 | 10:09:55 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Be careful, a friend of mine said bad things about Mr Dzubeck on this message board and got his message removed and himself banned.

I personally had several interactions with Mr and Mrs Dzubeck and he is no more, no less knowledgeable about the telecom market than any other analyst in the space. His knowledge of optics is fairly limited, he is more comfortable talking about carrier and services.
His comments are usually very abrasive but that helps him stand-out in the free-lance analysts crowd.

The incestous relationship with Lightreading still puzzles me though.
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 10:09:55 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Do not be stupid..
It is ATM AAL1..
There is no IP in this...
It is not VoIP over ATM...
lightsmith 12/4/2012 | 10:09:56 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice AAL2 needs a lots of CODEC/DSP power to compress voice, therefore is a trade off between bandwidth and hardware. Besides, CES is a smooth path from the old TDM switching to packet switching. CES is generally implemented with AAL1. Remember, as a class 5 switch, you are not only supporting voice, also modem, fax, Nx64K etc.
broadbandboy 12/4/2012 | 10:09:57 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Sauron: "Well, I guess you have never heard of IP over ATM?"

---------------------

I doubt it's VoIPoATM. That would add an incredible amount of overhead (the 100% IP tax) for no purpose.

VoIP is usually encapsulated using AAL5. In this case, Verizon says they are doing AAL1.

BBboy
broadbandboy 12/4/2012 | 10:09:57 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice The politically correct way is to build a voice over ATM network, call it VoIP, and then shut up.

That is what everybody has been doing for years. Anyone who says they are doing VoATM is in for waves of derisive criticism from the know-it-all analysts (except Tom Nolle) and trade press.

IMHO

broadbandboy 12/4/2012 | 10:09:57 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice TTT: "The technology actually is AAL1"

------------------------

Why do you guys think they stuck with AAL1 when AAL2 is so much more efficient?

BBboy
hitechguy 12/4/2012 | 10:09:58 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Lband asks:

"Why is Frank Dzubeck so frequently quoted in LightReading? He shows up in 20 LightReading news analysis stories since May."

I agree. Frank Dzubeck is a master of creating
a good soundbite without making it obvious that
he knows almost nothing about the industry.

hitechguy
TTT 12/4/2012 | 10:09:58 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice The technology actually is AAL1
Lband 12/4/2012 | 10:09:59 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Why is Frank Dzubeck so frequently quoted in LightReading? He shows up in 20 LightReading news analysis stories since May.
sauron5 12/4/2012 | 10:10:00 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice Well, I guess you have never heard of
IP over ATM?

Sauron
sgan201 12/4/2012 | 10:10:01 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice <<it appears="" finally="" getting="" into="" is="" mainstream="" more="" services="" that="" voice="" voip="">>

Hi Folks,
DO not be stupid. Her job title include VoIP but what is being deployed here is Voice over ATM Media Gateway. MG 4000 do not support VoIP...
</it>
Roy_Bynum 12/4/2012 | 10:10:02 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice netskeptic: "It seems like ATM will rule carrier side indeed."
_______________________________________________

As one of the indivduals quoated here stated: "Jenna Stanley, the director of Voice-over-IP Solutions Marketing at Nortel, says the announcement demonstrates that packet switching is replacing voice circuit switching: GǣThis not only marks an increase in the volume of packet switching equipment being deployed... but also an increase of carrier comfort with the technology.Gǥ", it appears that VoIP is finally getting more into mainstream voice services. As more packet based broadband becomes available, we should start seeing more of this migration from circuit switched voice services to packet based services.

This is important for the tier 2/3 city and utility FTTx deployment service environments. It will mainstream smaller packet based voice service deployments, making the need for deploying expensive Class 5 switches unnecessary.



Yogi 12/4/2012 | 10:10:02 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice "It seems like ATM will rule carrier side indeed"

Good thing Lucent through away all there ATM.
netskeptic 12/4/2012 | 10:10:02 PM
re: Verizon Embraces Packet Voice It seems like ATM will rule carrier side indeed.

Thanks,

Netskeptic
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE