[Asterisk-Users] Who would use Asterisk SS7?

[Mike M]

On Friday 23 May 2003 21:35, Steve Underwood wrote:
> Mike M wrote:
> >What about clear channel T1?  The higher price on T1 with robbed-bit
> >signaling is the phone company's way of disincentivizing their use.  The
> >phone company wants you to use SS7+IMT (clear channel T1) to connect to
> > the trunk side of the network. It's more efficient and safer for them.
>
> What is the relevance of the last sentance? Cost of provision seldom has
> much to do with telecom pricing, even when there is major competition.

Is it any wonder why telcos are at the bottom of the business barrel?    I 
think it's a true statement but you're prabably right that it has little to 
do with pricing for related services.  Maybe we should call a cost-price 
anomoly a "Fastow" after Andy Fastow, financial wizard of Enron.

> Have you noticed how many people on this list, from a variety of
> countries, ask about MFC/R2 support? That is the slowest, clunkiest
> signaling of all, requiring more hardware resources than any other
> option. In many places it is either the cheapest or the only option
> users have.

No, I'm new here, but that's precisely what I am trying to learn.  How does 
the * user view the PSTN connection options available to them?  If SS7 were 
available as a connection option on *, would * users choose SS7, or would 
they stick with RBS or ISDN.  My interest lies with * users that regard SS7 
as a reasonable choice if that choice were available.
>
> ISDN and SS7 have always been the cheapest and most efficient for the
> telco. In most places SS7 is only available if the user has some kind of
> official telephone operator status. No such restrictions generally apply
> to ISDN, although lots of places attach other strings to it, to suppress
> its use. 

ISDN pricing has always been just plain wierd.  Maybe after it was deployed 
the incumbent provider realized that extending a cheap and easy digital 
interface from the unregulated line side of their network was inviting 
competition. 

My question is targeted to * users that have, or are considering getting, the 
competitive operator status.  Would more facilities based competitors exist 
in the market if the cost of equipment were drastisically reduced?  Would SS7 
on * be useful from a commercial standpoint to a user?

> However, there are still few places around the world were ISDN
> or SS7 are priced on par or lower than the slow clunky protocols. It is
> changing, but soooooo sllllooowwwllllyyyy.

Maybe that's a Good Thing (tm).  Time is on the side of open source projects. 
(OS is deflationary too - which is a worry to the major news outlets - but I 
digress.)

I have reasonably accurate knowlege of markets in the US where SS7 is a 
cheaper option than RBS when using more than a couple T1 for voice.   I know 
there are some competitive operators that have cocktail napkins showing * 
with SS7 connections to the incumbent telco.  If SS7 were available on * 
would there be more such cocktail napkins?  

SS7 on * is technically feasable on the white board.  One way is to add an 
SS7 adapter to the * PRI interface.  Another is to embed SS7 into *.  * has 
the capacity and robustness to consider adding SS7 to its list of signaling 
options.   But is this something * users want?  A more difficult question 
that requires a crystal ball is, "Would SS7 on * bring new CLEC type users?"  
The final question is, "Is putting SS7 on * a worthy effort?"
-- 
Mike M.