Ed’s Telecom Alert

Hey Folks,

This is what we’ve been waiting for.   Strongly suggest you read these links.  Good and valuable information there!  Very critical you send comments to this Rule and Order as well as the Public Notice.

FCC Rule and Order Emergency and Numbering

This one is about the FCC adopting emergency call handling requirements for Internet-based TRS providers.  What is "Internet-based TRS"?   It is Video Relay Service, IP Relay Service, and IP Captioned Telephone Relay Service.  It means that the FCC expects these Internet-based Relay Services be able to access 9-1-1 and be automatically recognized who and where the Internet-based relay user is.    Automatic Number Identification (ANI) and Automatic Location Identification (ALI) are part of regular telephone network, and the rule and order wants to see same thing for Internet Relay Services. 

The next part of Rule and Order is - ready for this? - about adopting a ten-digit numbering plan as soon as possible.   FCC wants to adopt a plan by Summer, and the ten-digit number be ready to be assigned to Internet-based relay users by December 2008.   Hurrrah!   The FCC plans to have a stakeholder workshop (mainly vendors as this will be focused on technological issues) that will focus on which and what kind of emergency plan should be adopted and implemented (I’ve send previous vlog on three proposals on this very thing). 

What does the ten-digit phone numbering system mean?  It means that any Internet-based relay users can have its own "real" phone number; not proxy phone numbers like Sorenson, SnapVRS, or CSDVRS or any others who assign proxy phone numbers.    The "real" numbers means emergency dispatchers will be able to recognize the numbers.  Also, a SorensonVRS user can call SnapVRS user with phone number instead of Internet Protocol address.    One can give the phone number to EITHER hearing persons or deaf person.  Hearing will dial the number and automatically redirect to preferred VRS provider.   VRS user can call direct to another VRS with same number. Nice! Very nice, indeed.  

 Public Notice On Numbering Issue

This is a Public Notice on establishing a global, uniform ten-digit telephone numbering system for VRS industry.  The FCC wants to address issues such as application of the "slamming", consumer protection (Consumer Proprietary Network Information - CPNI), local number portability, and number resource conservation - or for that matter any other issues you all feel may impact numbering issues.   The whole issue is to make Interned-based Relay Service a "true" interoperability. 

This is an important Public Notice that both vendors and consumers should respond.  I got one comment to other vlog about possibly applying the "universal" numbering system NOT just for VRS users, but for ALL who have video phones including hearing persons who have video phones.    This is looks like a great idea and this person who suggested that should submit that comment to this Public Notice.  

Again, strongly suggest you all submit comments to both of this Rule and Order and Public Notice.   On Rule and Order, if u have a preference of a plan to access e9-1-1 (see old vlog), express away.  Personally, I would vote for either Neustar or HOVRS/ATT proposals.   On Public Notice, you can emphasize the importance of having information of registrants be kept confidential and not use for political purpose, or share with other 3rd party, or whatever you feel should be done.   

It is a great opportunity to let the FCC know how u feel about this very very important issues that the FCC presents to the public.  

eyes open & thumbs up,

Ed B

All..

Hawk Relay is petitioning the FCC for reconsideration of Speed Answer (SA) for Video Relay Service. 

Check this link and read its rationale why SA needs to be further reduced  Hawk Relay Petition

Basically Hawk Relay is saying that it is time for the FCC to reduce the required time for SA for VRS.   Hawk Relay felt that the circumstances for a long SA is now over.    

I was surprised at this petition from a VRS provider.   Why am I surprised?  It is because if the FCC reduces FCC down to 85/10 (85% of calls answered within 10 seconds), it would mean that VRS providers would need to hire more video interpreters.   Right now interpreters are scarce, and VRS providers are scraping the bottom of barrell to find them.   Education and community interpreting services are suffering as result.   (Now, gentle VLOG readers, do you agree?)

Popular VRS providers that get lot of VRS calls would suffer as result; other smaller VRS providers would not suffer as they do not have lot of traffic.    I wonder if this is correct statement?  Let us hear your thots.    

Hawk Relay recognizes that consumers want faster response and I fully understand that.   My concern is do we have enough interpreters to satisfy 14 VRS providers?   Is my concern justified or not?   

Check an old Reply Comments by National Video Relay Service Coalition  NVRSC Comments  This Coalition back in 2005 insists that 85/10 is achievable by VRS Industry and that lack of interpreters is not a good reason to justify long SA.   

Let me know what you all think of all this folks…

eyes open & thumbs up,

Ed B

All..

Verizon had a meeting with the FCC staff and expressed their thoughts that:

"..ensuring that any VRS numbering solution is cost effective and efficient. Verizon believes any VRS numbering solution should be developed from the end user’s perspective, should be based on industry standards (not proprietary systems), should not advantage or disadvantage any TRS provider or other company, and should be based on forward-looking, IP-based technology"

Check out this link  Verizon Ex Parte for further info.

eyes open & thumbs up,

Ed B.

PS: Remember that the business side of Verizon on relay service have been sold to GoAmerica