|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: [Fwd: [IP] Feds: VoIP a potential haven for terrorists]
Thus spake "Niels Bakker" <[email protected]> > * [email protected] (Jeff Shultz) [Fri 18 Jun 2004, 21:42 CEST]: > > Pay for it? If I remember from CALEA, the providers pay for it > > (and eventually their customers), and as for "broadband Internet > > providers"... I'm guessing anyone who offers end user customers > > a circuit bigger than 53.333k. > > Pet peeve: broadband isn't a synonym for "faster than a modem." > Cable and DSL are broadband due to those technologies using a wide range > of frequencies. Ethernet is not broadband (but baseband). Congress can define a word (in the US legal context) to mean anything they want; whether such has any relation to its technical definition is irrelevant. I doubt they care about the technology used to deliver IP service, only the capabilities and typical users; defining "broadband" as any circuit 56kbps or above would likely suffice for their intent, regardless of how incorrect it is. However, I fail to see how "broadband" or link speeds in general even matter in this context; what matters is whether the link is of sufficient speed for VoIP to be feasible, in which case anything from 9.6kbps cellular to WiFi, from ARCnet to OC192/10GE might qualify -- or might not, if IP isn't running over it. S Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do." K5SSS --Isaac Asimov
|