3 ms·

the chronological billing model borne of the economics of circuit-switched telecoms is kept alive as a facade Frankly I prefer it that way. I don't want to hav

the chronological billing model borne of the economics of circuit-switched telecoms is kept alive as a facade Frankly I prefer it that way. I don't want to have to feel guilty every time I use my phone. The cost of my typical monthly usage could drop to five dollars and it would still force me to constantly think about whether what I'm doing is "worth it". Maybe I'm just a weirdo but I don't need that stress in my life.

tenebrisalietum 5y ago
When you make a phone call, on a circuit-switched network, you are tying up a circuit for the duration of that call. No one else can use that circuit, or slots on the T1/T3 etc. until you hang up. Resources need to exist in case you ever make a call that no one else can use. With packet-switched, your call isn't typing a circuit, just a small portion of speed, and once your call ends, someone else can use it. You need more lines to support circuit-switched networks than packet-switched networks. So you should feel more guilty using circuit-switched technology than packet-switched technology. Fortunately I think a lot of providers once you are out of the "last mile" to your house or business are using SIP even if internally. Where I work I'm seeing things like SIP over T1 instead of PRI.
- toast0 5y ago
  You can only make more calls over packet switched than circuit switches if the packet switched network is cheating: silence elimination is common, compression is also common. If you're comparing PRI to SIP over T1 without silence elimination and using uLaw, results are going to be pretty similar. Maybe you get a benefit with SIP because you eliminated the control channel of PRI, but you also increased latency and jitter and lost clear overload behavior (all circuits busy) in favor of degraded calls on overload. Of course, it's a lot easier to multiplex SIP with other IP traffic, I don't think you can split a T1 as a couple PRIs and the rest IP, and even if you could, you probably couldn't do it dynamically. Having a system where data can use the bandwidth when you're not making calls, and calls can use it when you are is pretty valuable.
- Causality1 5y ago
  That's all true but it's completely unrelated to what I was saying. My point was that I would rather pay a flat rate for unlimited data than pay per unit of data used. I like the freedom of using it however I want. I like not having to think about whether, for example, watching a video in 1080p is worth the extra ten cents over watching it in 360p. I just don't want to feel bad for treating myself to the best experience.

tenebrisalietum 5y ago

When you make a phone call, on a circuit-switched network, you are tying up a circuit for the duration of that call. No one else can use that circuit, or slots on the T1/T3 etc. until you hang up. Resources need to exist in case you ever make a call that no one else can use. With packet-switched, your call isn't typing a circuit, just a small portion of speed, and once your call ends, someone else can use it. You need more lines to support circuit-switched networks than packet-switched networks. So you should feel more guilty using circuit-switched technology than packet-switched technology. Fortunately I think a lot of providers once you are out of the "last mile" to your house or business are using SIP even if internally. Where I work I'm seeing things like SIP over T1 instead of PRI.

toast0 5y ago
You can only make more calls over packet switched than circuit switches if the packet switched network is cheating: silence elimination is common, compression is also common. If you're comparing PRI to SIP over T1 without silence elimination and using uLaw, results are going to be pretty similar. Maybe you get a benefit with SIP because you eliminated the control channel of PRI, but you also increased latency and jitter and lost clear overload behavior (all circuits busy) in favor of degraded calls on overload. Of course, it's a lot easier to multiplex SIP with other IP traffic, I don't think you can split a T1 as a couple PRIs and the rest IP, and even if you could, you probably couldn't do it dynamically. Having a system where data can use the bandwidth when you're not making calls, and calls can use it when you are is pretty valuable.
Causality1 5y ago
That's all true but it's completely unrelated to what I was saying. My point was that I would rather pay a flat rate for unlimited data than pay per unit of data used. I like the freedom of using it however I want. I like not having to think about whether, for example, watching a video in 1080p is worth the extra ten cents over watching it in 360p. I just don't want to feel bad for treating myself to the best experience.