[LINK] FTTN notes

[Andy Farkas]

On 20/03/2016 13:41, Paul Brooks wrote:
> On 18/03/2016 5:48 PM, Andy Farkas wrote:
>
>> Also #5 - It's not "If a user subscribes to a VoIP voice service" but rather "When a
>> user is forced to subscribe to a VoIP voice service".
> Pedantic - its a "voice service", not a "VoIP voice service". It might use VoIP
> technology from the modem or NTU into the network to the ISP, but if the service
> interface is a standard 4-pin analogue socket then its a conventional voice service,

Yes, that is being pedantic; I was only correcting what David wrote, using
the words he used.

And I should also add that you aren't *forced* to subscribe to a VoIP
service, you can go without if you so choose.

> Its only a "VoIP service" if the provider tells you all the SIP  or H.323 signalling
> details and requires you to provide your own VoIP gateway, possibly built into a VoIP
> handset.

The NBN will transition most of the population to a VoIP service. I'm
not sure what you're trying to say here.

> For those that care about such things - its still the PSTN, but its no longer POTS.
> Many people use the two terms interchangeably, but they aren't.

We will always need a Public Switched Telephone Network. I guess it's
the O in POTS that makes the difference.

> My personal opinion is that this is a good thing, and the transition to digital
> telephony can't happen fast enough. Audio quality can finally improve over the awful
> 'toll quality' rubbish benchmark we've been limited to for the past 100 years while
> we've been tied to analogue POTS.
>
> Paul.
>

I've been using VoIP for about 10 years now so I'm fairly familiar with it.
(Asterisk, FreePBX, 3cX, etc. Personally, I use FreeSwitch.)

Yes, it is a good thing. Though it does take a bit of getting used to when
you have your first high-quality audio phone conversation :)

-andyf