Comments on: Q&A with Rod Ullens of Voxbone http://thereallymobileproject.com/2009/10/qa-with-rod-ullens-of-voxbone/ Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:51:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 By: Aswath Raohttp://thereallymobileproject.com/2009/10/qa-with-rod-ullens-of-voxbone/comment-page-1/#comment-1483 Aswath Rao Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:33:24 +0000 http://thereallymobileproject.com/?p=1826#comment-1483 So the incumbents agree to interconnect with iNum, but with the current tariff model. Then they have to charge at the highest rate; otherwise iNum will arbitrage traffic for that country carrying the highest rate. But then those in the rest of the world will see no reason to use iNum. So what gives?<br><br>There is downside in using iNum even for on-Net calls. iNum requires an intermediary to resolve the number. But if SIP URIs are used then calling party (not the service provider) can directly reach the called party's Proxy. Isn't that the objective of VoIP, reduce the intermediaries as much as possible? So the incumbents agree to interconnect with iNum, but with the current tariff model. Then they have to charge at the highest rate; otherwise iNum will arbitrage traffic for that country carrying the highest rate. But then those in the rest of the world will see no reason to use iNum. So what gives?

There is downside in using iNum even for on-Net calls. iNum requires an intermediary to resolve the number. But if SIP URIs are used then calling party (not the service provider) can directly reach the called party's Proxy. Isn't that the objective of VoIP, reduce the intermediaries as much as possible?

]]> By: Aswath Raohttp://thereallymobileproject.com/2009/10/qa-with-rod-ullens-of-voxbone/comment-page-1/#comment-7054 Aswath Rao Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:33:00 +0000 http://thereallymobileproject.com/?p=1826#comment-7054 So the incumbents agree to interconnect with iNum, but with the current tariff model. Then they have to charge at the highest rate; otherwise iNum will arbitrage traffic for that country carrying the highest rate. But then those in the rest of the world will see no reason to use iNum. So what gives?There is downside in using iNum even for on-Net calls. iNum requires an intermediary to resolve the number. But if SIP URIs are used then calling party (not the service provider) can directly reach the called party's Proxy. Isn't that the objective of VoIP, reduce the intermediaries as much as possible? So the incumbents agree to interconnect with iNum, but with the current tariff model. Then they have to charge at the highest rate; otherwise iNum will arbitrage traffic for that country carrying the highest rate. But then those in the rest of the world will see no reason to use iNum. So what gives?There is downside in using iNum even for on-Net calls. iNum requires an intermediary to resolve the number. But if SIP URIs are used then calling party (not the service provider) can directly reach the called party's Proxy. Isn't that the objective of VoIP, reduce the intermediaries as much as possible?

]]> By: Aswath Raohttp://thereallymobileproject.com/2009/10/qa-with-rod-ullens-of-voxbone/comment-page-1/#comment-2810 Aswath Rao Sat, 03 Oct 2009 10:33:00 +0000 http://thereallymobileproject.com/?p=1826#comment-2810 So the incumbents agree to interconnect with iNum, but with the current tariff model. Then they have to charge at the highest rate; otherwise iNum will arbitrage traffic for that country carrying the highest rate. But then those in the rest of the world will see no reason to use iNum. So what gives?There is downside in using iNum even for on-Net calls. iNum requires an intermediary to resolve the number. But if SIP URIs are used then calling party (not the service provider) can directly reach the called party's Proxy. Isn't that the objective of VoIP, reduce the intermediaries as much as possible? So the incumbents agree to interconnect with iNum, but with the current tariff model. Then they have to charge at the highest rate; otherwise iNum will arbitrage traffic for that country carrying the highest rate. But then those in the rest of the world will see no reason to use iNum. So what gives?

There is downside in using iNum even for on-Net calls. iNum requires an intermediary to resolve the number. But if SIP URIs are used then calling party (not the service provider) can directly reach the called party’s Proxy. Isn’t that the objective of VoIP, reduce the intermediaries as much as possible?

]]> By: The Really Mobile Project » Blog Archive » Q&A with Rod Ullens of … | shoretel1.comhttp://thereallymobileproject.com/2009/10/qa-with-rod-ullens-of-voxbone/comment-page-1/#comment-1482 The Really Mobile Project » Blog Archive » Q&A with Rod Ullens of … | shoretel1.com Fri, 02 Oct 2009 17:41:24 +0000 http://thereallymobileproject.com/?p=1826#comment-1482 [...] Read more: The Really Mobile Project » Blog Archive » Q&A with Rod Ullens of … [...] [...] Read more: The Really Mobile Project » Blog Archive » Q&A with Rod Ullens of … [...]

]]> By: Voxeo Talks » Blog Archive » The Really Mobile Project: Interview with Rod Ullens of Voxbone about iNumhttp://thereallymobileproject.com/2009/10/qa-with-rod-ullens-of-voxbone/comment-page-1/#comment-1481 Voxeo Talks » Blog Archive » The Really Mobile Project: Interview with Rod Ullens of Voxbone about iNum Fri, 02 Oct 2009 15:34:46 +0000 http://thereallymobileproject.com/?p=1826#comment-1481 [...] on The Really Mobile Project blog, Martyn Davies has posted an interview with Rod Ullens, CEO of Voxbone, primarily about the iNum initiative that Voxbone leads. We’re partners with Voxbone in the [...] [...] on The Really Mobile Project blog, Martyn Davies has posted an interview with Rod Ullens, CEO of Voxbone, primarily about the iNum initiative that Voxbone leads. We’re partners with Voxbone in the [...]

]]>