With E911 deadline past, what's next for VoIP firms?

(continued from previous page)

The current E911 system works by associating a given phone number with a geographic area. But calls are rejected from numbers that don't match a particular region. For example, if a Vonage customer with a 212 area code, which indicates New York City, moves to Los Angeles and calls 911, the existing E911 system rejects the call because it doesn't match the 310 area code used in Los Angeles.

To circumvent this problem, VoIP providers access local phone numbers that can be temporarily assigned to dial into the E911 networks' local routers. This fools the router into thinking the call has been made locally.

But to ensure 911 callers get an operator instead of a busy signal, a VoIP service provider needs to make sure the local phone number it has selected is not already in use. Since the Bell phone companies have access to the largest pool of these numbers, it's important for them to cooperate with VoIP operators, say Vonage officials.

In his letter to the FCC, Citron commended Verizon Communications for being the only local phone company to fully cooperate with its efforts. He singled out Qwest as a company that has dragged its feet.

Qwest disputes the claim.

"Qwest doesn't own these numbers, so it's not appropriate for us to hand these out to other providers," said Claire Mylott, a spokeswoman for the company. Qwest executives say the company has been working with local authorities that assign the numbers. Qwest also says it's working with Congress to draft a proposal the FCC can use in appointing a third party to administer and manage the numbers.

Traditional E911 vs. alternatives
Another Net phone provider, 8x8, says about 14 percent of its customers are connected to the traditional E911 system. But the company claims all its customers can be connected indirectly to an E911 operator through a national call center it has set up. When an 8x8 customer who's not connected to the traditional E911 network dials 911, the call goes to 8x8's national call center. The caller's address and phone number pops up on an operator's screen, and that operator then contacts others in the appropriate Public Safety Answering Point, or PSAP.

Even though this solution doesn't officially comply with the FCC's mandate, 8x8's CEO hopes it will suffice until the company is able to finish testing links into every local PSAP.

"Right now we're trying to educate the FCC on what we're doing," said Martin. "We hope to get some clarification on whether or not they view us as being compliant."

But some Net telephony providers, such as VoicePulse, have not complied at all with the FCC mandate. VoicePulse said in its report to the FCC that it's still negotiating a deal with Intrado, a third-party provider of 911 services. VoicePulse expects to have the necessary testing completed and a deal finalized in January 2006.

Focus on the VoIP 911 issue increased in late 2004, following a string of incidents in which VoIP subscribers couldn't get through to emergency services. But some VoIP supporters believe the Net telephony industry has been unfairly singled out, especially considering the number of wireless and wireline telephone customers who still don't have access to E911 services.

The wireless industry has been working on this problem since 1994, but it still can provide only about half the United States with E911 service, according to Jim Kohlenberger, executive director of The VON Coalition, a VoIP industry group. And on the traditional, wireline side of the business, out of 138 million wireline phone customers in the U.S., 1.5 million still don't have access to E911 service. In total, only about 2.5 million to 3 million households even subscribe to VoIP.

"The VoIP players have quickly stepped up to the plate on this issue," Kohlenberger said. "But if the FCC strictly enforces this mandate and doesn't allow companies to continue marketing their service, it could create a new barrier to accelerating E911 deployment."

[gsm-profile]

E911 and effeteness of the real world

The main reason for doing this 911 registering is incase of emergency response a government official can react quickly and efficiently. But stop for a moment that call might route thru multiple stations. By the time it get to the right place that knows how long its take to the proper authority to be on the seen. So we all can see there is a big IF! If the right officials can show up in case of emergency, in the right time only for that this is a nice feature

<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.gsmprofile.com" target="_newWindow">http://www.gsmprofile.com</a>
we are all about your GSM phone

[Sir Geek]

What about the fact that the phone lines are STILL alive ?

Isn't it true that even if these people were to switch to VOIP that their phone lines are still ( By federal law ) required to be able to contact emergency services ?

Why couldn't Vonage ( and the other VOIP providers ) redesign their "modem/router" so that it is connected to the land line for 911 services ?

[MaggieReardon]

E911 and the old network

I think the problem is that when people get VoIP they get rid of their existing phone line. That's what I did when I switched to VoIP. The physical wire that used to connect to the phone in my apartment is still there, but there's nothing in my apartment that is connected to that old infrastructure anymore. So I'm not sure how the the VoIP provider could use that line. In my opinion, it seems like the main problem is that we are trying to retrofit new technology into an old system. What would makes more sense to me is if we started upgrading the old 911 network to be IP-enabled, which would solve a lot of these issues. Everything else is going IP, so it makes sense that the emergency system would migrate in that direction. I'd love to hear other people's thoughts on this. I'm thinking of doing a follow up story that addresses this issue and explains how a new emergency network based on IP could be built.

[stanman0125]

They aren't....

Federal law only mandates that the line remain alive for a certain period of time (usually 14 days) when a customer is disconnected for nonpayment of service. Generally, that gets applied to disconnections that the customer requests (as when switching to VoIP service). After that time, the line is completely dead.

[SolariPIcasso]

Charge Too Much...

I ditched Vonage when I moved, that was the worst thing I could have done. I signed up with SBC here in Dallas Metroplex, $300 and 2 months later I am back with Vonage. If the phone companies would offer cheap, easy to order and manage phone lines they could wipe VOIP all over the floor. Why don't the traditional carriers get with it and start competing? They don't have to, with the push to ban VOIP through the Spanish Civil War Tax, and now E911, they are doing all they can to stifle competition. Where are the "People" who often accuse MicroSoft of being a monopoly, where is the outrage over charging people $80/month and 10 cents a minute for long distance. If VOIP is banned I will chose to have NO PHONE, rather than pay the man! I will NEVER go back.