Begin forwarded message:
From: Joe Baptista <baptista@publicroot.org>
Date: December 31, 2009 4:27:25 PM EST
To: Bob Poortinga <nnsquad@k9sql.us>
Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org
Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: [BarryDGold@ca.rr.com: Re: AT&T Asks FCC to Kill Conventional (POTS) Phone Service]
POTS is more secure then IP. Getting rid of POTS puts the government of the United States in a very vulnerable position with respect to national security. POTS is the only reliable service for national emergencies.
This scenario makes a perfect movie script. FCC and USG give in to AT&T pressure. United States goes from POTS to IP. Then China cripples the IP infrastructure in a cyberwar attack and invades the US of A and builds condos to solve overpopulation problem in China.
People - the Internet was an interesting experiment - but we should not have to be dependent on Internet infrastructure which governments barely understand nor are any of those same governments in a position to protect IP infrastructure. This would be a security nightmare if it every happened. I'm sure some expert inside or outside government will figure this out and take appropriate action to make sure it does not happen.
cheers
joe baptistaOn Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Bob Poortinga <nnsquad@k9sql.us> wrote:I would just like to point that there are millions of devices out
there which depend on POTS service to work properly. Items such as
security systems, postage meters, remote sensors, and, yes, even FAX
machines either work poorly or do no work at all on VOIP (even G.711)
systems. Replacing all these devices with VOIP compatible workalikes
(if they are even available) would be costly and time consuming.
My employer uses an unregulated VOIP service from AT&T (IP Flexible
Reach which uses G.729) in some of our offices, but we still have to
maintain POTS lines for our FAX machines, security systems, and
STU-III phones <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STU-III>.
[ Converter boxes to handle the basic interface issues would likely
be available, but how cost effective these would be for most
consumer POTS equipment (vs. buying all new phones, etc.) is
another matter. As the underlying backbone voice networks move
toward VoIP (whether on the public Internet or private telco
intranets), issues like FAX compatibility may get more complex --
even if you have an analog access line. I frequently hear
complaints about FAX being unusable over some existng VoIP
systems. I can certainly imagine that STU-III in its current
form might also have similar issues. I can't test that though,
since I don't have an STU-III handy -- I'm still stuck with
(FO-F-I-P) AUTOVON. That's a joke, son, a joke!
-- Lauren Weinstein
NNSquad Moderator ]
--
Bob Poortinga K9SQL
Bloomington, IN US
--
Joe Baptista
www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative & Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052)
Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084
Personal: http://baptista.cynikal.net/