Viop phone - Voice Over IP

Virtual Private Networks - History

As corporate communication volumes increased, organizations realized the cost of telephone service was escalating. Originally, all long distance service was charged on a per minute basis. AT&T introduced a volume discount outbound calling plan called Wide Area Telephone Service (WATS) [1] Some people refer to the term as Wide Area Telecommunications Services. For a monthly fixed payment, the organization got 240 hours of service to one of five bands across the country. Each band was priced, based on the distance from the originator’s location. A typical company usually had a band 5 line and a band 1 or 2 to cover adjacent state calls. It took some analysis to determine the most cost−effective solution for each company’s particular calling pattern. Foreign exchange (FX) service provided a fixed rate calling plan if a company had a large call volume for in−state locations. This is essentially subscribing to telephone service at the foreign central office location and leasing an extension cord from the telephone company to the home location. Originally, there were no usage charges on this line so the more you used it, the less expensive it was. Of course, long distance calls made from the foreign exchange were billed at the long−distance rate. An FX line is needed to each high volume calling location. Alternatively, a company could use a leased telephone line between locations. These lines went by several names: Terminal Interface Equipment (TIE) line, dedicated line, and a data line, when used for data. These are essentially point−to−point telephone lines that are available in two−wire or four−wire configurations. Because the difference in cost between two− and four−wire connections was small (relative to the cost of the line), the four−wire option was preferred unless the company needed many lines. The next logical step was to use these TIE lines to connect private branch exchanges (PBXs) at the various locations. Here again, there were no usage charges on these dedicated lines. A company with locations in Seattle, Phoenix, Atlanta, and headquarters in Chicago might have a “hub and spoke” arrangement of TIE lines from their headquarters to each regional office. Each location then might have FX lines to adjacent cities; for example, a company based in Seattle might have an FX
line to Tacoma, Kent, and Everett. There were corresponding inbound services where the called party paid. For example, the original Zenith operator provided toll−free calling in the days of manual switchboards. The inbound WATS service, now known as 800 service, was originally also structured in bands. Finally, for local toll service, remote call forwarding (RCF) allowed people to sign up for telephone service in a foreign exchange and have them make a long distance call from Tacoma, for example, back to Seattle at your expense. Although this was more expensive (depending on the number of calls) than FX, an advantage of RCF is that you can receive multiple calls at a time. It soon became apparent to people working in the Phoenix location that they could call their uncle in Kent by first asking the company operator (later by dialing) for the TIE line to Chicago. They would then choose the TIE line to Seattle and finally dial across the FX line to Kent. The PBX, although not smart, did allow a person to dial up the TIE and FX lines. The important fly in this otherwise ingenious solution (ointment) to high−cost long distance telephone service is that each TIE or FX line could only handle one call at a time. The challenge for the telecommunications manager was therefore to figure out the optimum number of TIE lines between locations to minimize cost and waiting time for the TIE line, while maximizing savings across the commercial long distance circuits. About this time, AT&T noticed a small drop in its long distance revenue from such business and a sharp increase in the number of leased lines it was providing. Now, clearly it is much more profitable to rent a telephone channel out at $0.25 per minute than to lease that capacity to a corporation for 1,000 per month. One should also be aware that the average corporation will not pay these prices, but smaller companies and independent contractors may! On average, 75 percent of the paying public is overpaying the cost of long distance because of the complexity and the various changes that take place. Recently, the three top providers of long distance service raised their rates by 7 percent (12/2001). The impact was primarily in the area of basic long distance service. This means that many small companies have subscribed to a plan with the carrier. The carrier selects the plan that best fits the customer’s dialing habits and number of circuits used (lines). However, the plan is current at the time of the deal and may change several times in the next year. Better pricing or packaging may become available the very next day. The consuming public may not realize that the new package is available and continue to pay the agreed to rates for the next x years, costing them hundreds to thousands of dollars extra per year. To rectify the problem, many organizations periodically call the carrier and ask for the best plan to meet their dialing habits. Once again, the best plan is selected at the time of the call, not forever adjusted automaticall.