[Asterisk-Dev] OT - Regulatory hurdles for Zaptel and Japanese PRI

[Fernando Romo]

Benjamin:

Is not  OT, in Mexico have the same problem, The domain phone company 
(TELMEX) use a signaling protocol called R2MF (R2 Modify), than obstruct 
any intent to put to work hardware like the Digium E100p, fortunaly 
TELMEX bring the ISDN Balanced Lines, but is very dificult to negotiate 
with this company the use of other signal protocols.

Maybe the solution to this is make the libpri or Zaptel drivers (I 
confese my ignorance about this issue) to handle a "modular" type of 
protocol definitions, i mean put in one piece of software the signaling 
protocol (VG R1, R2, J1, etc) and "plug-in" in the adecuate driver.

each person only define the desire signal protocol without affect the 
main driver. just a funny idea...

Best Regards... Fernando Romo
                         pop at cofradia.org

Benjamin on Asterisk Mailing Lists wrote:

>Hi
>
>in a private email exchange, John Todd said I should post this to the
>Dev list. He thought it would at least have some curiosity value even
>for those who are not interested in Japanese PRI. Anyway ...
>
>Japanese PRI is derived from US PRI but the Japanese have the tendency
>to protect their turf by changing specs they borrow just enough to be
>incompatible so as to put up hurdles for foreign vendors to sell their
>gear unmodified in Japan. This allows the Japanese vendors to
>overcharge for most of the stuff they sell domestically and thereby
>subsidise dumping prices on the stuff they sell overseas.
>
>Japanese PRI, aka J1 is one of those areas where they do this rather
>successfully and seemingly with impunity.
>
>To put this into perspective ...
>
>The cheapest Japanese J1/VoIP gateway costs about 40.000 USD for a
>single span J1. The cheapest foreign manufactured J1/VoIP gateway used
>to be a box from Multitech. The T1 version of this box is available in
>the US for about 4000 USD. The J1 version is about 24.000 USD.
>Compared to Japanese products this was still to be considered cheap
>until a few months ago, when a Mainland Chinese company entered the
>market with a J1/VoIP gateway that "only" costs about 10.000 USD. By
>comparison, Dialogic J1 boards are roughly in that same price range.
>
>
>You can imagine what kind of tsunami effect a Zaptel card would have
>in this environment if it supported J1. However, the technical side of
>making this happen doesn't seem to be the biggest obstacle.
>Apparently, the differences between T1 and J1 are such that it looks
>as if it was possible to adjust for it in the driver software alone.
>The trouble is that nobody wants to sponsor this work to be carried
>out due to the regulatory situation.
>
>The Japanese type approval authority wants applicants to submit to
>their process and not do anything that puts it into jeopardy. Yet it
>looks as if the way in which the drivers are released via anonymous
>CVS is incompatible with the way the approvals process works.
>
>Strictly speaking, if Japanese type approval is to be granted, no
>driver updates should be made via anonymous CVS until the updated
>drivers have been submitted to, tested and approved by the approval
>authority. Every such release cycle will cost around 3500 USD in
>application fees plus the fees charged by an accredited testing lab
>for carrying out the compliance testing. If updates or patches to
>drivers are released into the public without going through this
>process, then - going by the book - it could invalidate the type
>approval.
>
>The trouble is that a foreign product that looks like it is going to
>whack the Japanese establishment is more likely to be checked for any
>possible ways to turn down the application than a Japanese product
>from one of the big name vendors where the authority may not be always
>as strict as their rules may imply. They don't even have to give you
>reasons why they turn down an application. They can just turn you down
>and tell you to submit another application in order to delay your
>market entry or to make it more expensive for you so you have to sell
>your product at a hefty premium, too.
>
>I have asked Digium for their opinion on this and suggested that the
>solution may lie in a forked driver which is only for J1, then somehow
>control the release process for that driver more tightly so as to not
>raise any objections. The J1 driver could initially be taken closed
>source to get things going, then gradually open it up later on once
>the initial type approval has been granted and the product is
>established in the market. I haven't had any feedback from Digium yet,
>I suppose they are still busy trying to fill domestic demand on their
>various new products they have released this year, so J1 isn't on
>their radar yet. Can't really blame them for that.
>
>Anyway, that's the story on J1 support and JATE type approval. All I
>can say at this point is that we are still hopeful that we can get
>something going sooner or later. If anybody has any questions,
>comments or suggestions, they're welcome to drop me an email.
>
>rgds
>benjk
>  
>