SIP Faces Two Things for Certain

SIP Faces Two Things for Certain

Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) along with Interoperability Testing (IOT) represent the two things that require the most vigilance in the world of SIP Trunking. FUD is an old sales technique designed to slow the decision-making process while a competitor positions itself to win. Gene Amdahl initially labeled it after he left IBM to start a competing company. IBM was renowned for developing a story line that went somewhat like, “That new company, product, capability, etc. sounds interesting but you know you will be much better off buying from us. We are the safe choice and bad things can happen if you purchase unproven technologies from unknown companies.”

The tactic not only protected IBM from intrusions into their customer base but it often delayed decisions long enough for them to develop additional product features to beat back the interlopers. Therefore, what is the FUD associated with IP communications? In a simple phrase, voice quality and broadband connectivity.

Prior to ILECs announcing their business VoIP/SIP Trunking offerings, they continually downplayed the quality and performance of VoIP. Early offerings struggled to meet customer expectations. These failures were due to weak network platforms, engineering and customer service.

Today ITSPs have addressed these issues and the networks perform much better. Fewer than 1% of customer complaints received by Broadvox are related to voice quality issues,. We must constantly explain to prospects, network engineers and VARs that the issue is overblown, but the FUD associated with voice quality over an IP network has been tenacious and unstoppable. Even as ILECs begin to offer IP-related business services, the new message is that quality cannot be guaranteed unless delivered over broadband provided by the service provider. Technically, this is true. The service quality cannot be guaranteed. However, is a guaranteed level of service required for most end users? Obviously not, but it is a nice way to increase the value of the average sale. With that as the objective, the ILECs have been joined by several CLECs and ITSPs in requiring the purchase of broadband in order to get SIP Trunking service.

Broadvox continues to maintain that if existing broadband connectivity has the necessary capacity and quality (determined through additional testing) then it will suffice as the medium for carrying the service. We refer to this as Bring Your Own Broadband (BYOB). Will we be successful in terminating the FUD leveled at SIP Trunking? No, but vigilance will have an impact.

It is clear that many examples of poor voice quality are remnants of the past. Too many in the telecom industry described VoIP for residential users in the same fashion as SIP Trunking for business. In actuality, the only similarity is that both use IP. Oddly enough, the broadband-associated FUD merely delays market penetration as many prospects balk at the cost of acquiring new broadband or are faced with stiff early termination charges. In spite of the state of the economy or because of it, the adoption of SIP Trunking solutions has increased and as a result businesses have improved cash flow and obtained new communication features.

The other villain is IOT. Broadvox is not a stranger to conducting IOT, and has now certified more than 30 IP-PBX and IAD products. However, as with other ITSPs, the reason for IOT still exists, doesn’t appear to be diminishing and there is an unacceptable reason why.

There are hundreds of OEMs busily designing and manufacturing devices that will be used for IP communication. Unfortunately it is the openness and lack of firmness in the standard that allows for too much interpretation and flexibility. The responsible standards body, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), is an open community built on a consensus model, allowing freedom of thought but also acceptable disagreement about the SIP standard. Members are a diverse group of network engineers, vendors, researchers and service providers, all with their own unique opinions about what the overall culture of the Internet should be. As a result there is an effort to accept most good ideas as no one wants to quell another’s thoughts. Therefore, the SIP standard allows for incompatible choices with too many uses of “may” and not enough of “shall,” and so Broadvox and other ITSPs must continually perform IOT to insure interoperability with all IP-enabled devices. With a loose standard and limited control, it will remain an ongoing problem. Every member of the IETF has valid reasons for his desired choices, but if it remains a consensus-driven group then easy, repeatable SIP deployments along the lines of PRIs or T1s are unlikely.

The telecommunications industry is focused on providing reliable feature-rich IP communication throughout the globe. We have supported SIP and promoted its use because of tremendous cost-saving, and the features and functionality enable a new generation of applications. We continue to believe that eventually SIP Trunking will evolve into a solid, widely-accepted communications connectivity type like PRI or T1. The ongoing work of the IETF is critical to our industry’s success as it focuses on the evolution of the Internet. If the focus could shift to include tighter standardization, the entire IP community would benefit.