Simon;
> >> Voice over IP is paradoxically both internet and telephony at the same
> >> time. This article presents the paradox, and associated arguments.
> >
> > There is no paradox. The internet carries information.
> >
> > You should, at least, distinguish VoIP as a telephone network
> > and the Internet telephony.
>
> There is no "internet telephony"...
See my paper "Simple Internet Phone" presented at INET2000.
http://www.isoc.org/inet2000/cdproceedings/4a/4a_3.htm
It, for example, says:
However, it is obvious that the telephone network will be
replaced by the Internet, and will eventually disappear.
> there is "IP telephony" which is
> There is no "internet telephony"... there is "IP telephony" which is
> not running on the public internet. There is also VoIP on the public
> internet which I like to call "Voice Chat".
Apparently, you don't recognize the current situation, which I
foresaw several years ago.
Voice chat, of course, is no internet telephony.
> > Paradoxical reguration on voice in US is a US local issue.
>
> Please cite a document, I don't find any japanese regulation that makes
> it any different there...
Japanese telecommunication laws (available at
http://law.e-gov.go.jp/cgi-bin/idxsearch.cgi) does not distinguish
telephony or voice something special and the requirement on
providers is same, though detailed requirements varies.
> > In Japan, TAs to connect the Internet and POTS telephone devices
> > are rapidly replacing the telephone network including VoIP ones.
>
> ... do they provide PSTN-level availability?
In theory, yes.
In practice, there is no such thing as PSTN-level availability.
> in an emergency / power
> failure?
In emergency, best effort network works better than circuit
swithced one, of course.
As for power, have you ever used ISDN with TAs?
Masataka Ohta
