<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <title>On Rad&apos;s Radar? - compliance Archives</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/" />
    <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/compliance/atom.xml" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2011-06-13:/on-rads-radar//51</id>
    <updated>2012-07-11T18:14:06Z</updated>
    <subtitle>Peter Radizeski of RAD-INFO, Inc. talking telecom, Cloud, VoIP, CLEC, and The Channel.</subtitle>

<entry>
    <title>Various Tidbits </title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2012/07/various-tidbits.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2012:/on-rads-radar//51.49652</id>

    <published>2012-07-11T16:40:49Z</published>
    <updated>2012-07-11T18:14:06Z</updated>

    <summary>Two of my pals work at Counterpath. It went on NASDAQ today. Congrats! &quot;CounterPath Corporation (OTCBB: CPAH) (TSX-V: CCV), an award-winning provider of desktop and mobile VoIP software products and solutions, today announced that its common stock will commence trading...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="broadband" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="channel" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="data center" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="managed services" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="technology" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="voip" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="xo" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="broadband" label="broadband" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="byod" label="byod" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="centurylink" label="centurylink" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cloudcomputing" label="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="datacenter" label="data center" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="hipaa" label="hipaa" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="managedit" label="managed it" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="wispa" label="wispa" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="xo" label="xo" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Two of my pals work at Counterpath. It went on NASDAQ today. Congrats!  "CounterPath Corporation (OTCBB: CPAH) (TSX-V: CCV), an award-winning provider of desktop and mobile VoIP software products and solutions, today announced that its common stock will commence trading on the NASDAQ Capital Market on July 11, 2012. The stock will continue to trade under the symbol "CPAH" on the NASDAQ Capital Market and under the symbol "CCV" on the TSX Venture Exchange." Counterpath is a Vancouver, BC, Canada, company. Big VoIP/tech hub there.</p><p><a href="http://radinfo.blogspot.com/2012/07/centurylink-wants-government-funds-to.html">CenturyLink wants more than the 30% </a>of the $300M USF reform fund called Connect America. In fact, they want to overbuild on existing WISP's with that money. <a href="http://www.wispa.org">WISPA</a> <a href="http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/-1678478.htm">Opposes the new federal Subsidies for CenturyLink</a>. Personally, I don't think that any LEC or MSO should receive federal funds. If we had the best broadband in the world, I would say okay - that's worth the money. We don't. They spend more than $300M in lobbbying per year!! Spend that money on broadband. Plus there are small businesses called Wireless ISP's already in that market that C-Link is going to spend tax dollars to put out of business! That's the Corporate Way!</p><p><a href="http://radinfo.blogspot.com/2012/07/megapath-in-nutshell.html">MegaPath has the largest Ethernet over Copper footprint </a>in the US. There are 600 Central Offices with ADTRAN Total Access 5000 gear to provide facilities-based EoC up to 20 MB.</p><p>Data Centers are growing. That was actually a headline yesterday. No kidding!</p><p>Health Care: <a href="http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2012/06/29/hipaa-compliant-data-centers/">What HIPAA Means for Data Centers</a>. My understanding is that transport isn't a worry - and there is no such thing as HIPAA compliant transport! It is all about the storage, security and handling of the medical records - physical or electronic. That also means data centers have to be secure and tracking visitors, in case one gets access to a storage device.  BTW, it is HIPAA, not HIPPA. How can you even say you are compliant if you get the acronymn wrong?!</p><p>Dell Voice is offered in Canada as a competitor to Vonage Mobile. <a href="http://mobilesyrup.com/2012/07/03/dell-voice-voip-app-released-for-blackberry-with-free-calling-to-many-canadian-cities/">Dell Voice is now on Blackberry</a>, just in time for their corporate jet auction.</p><p>XO introduces a purple logo and a new <a href="http://blog.xo.com/xo-news/1057/">XO Partner Program</a>.</p><p>I remember all the WinTel articles about the Intel-Microsoft alliance dominating tech in the 90s. <a href="from WinTel to Cloud:  http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/cloud-leaves-some-tech-giants-seeking-a-silver-lining/">Today, not so much</a>.</p><p><u>Voice Carrier </u>wasn't thinking when it named itself. Branding rule number 1: if they can't find you in search, you don't exist. Didn't you learn anything from Xerox or Kleenex?</p><p>"Today services like Dropbox give people access to their work anywhere, any time, on any device, and users love it. (52% of our survey respondents said Dropbox is used in their organizations. Only 12% of IT departments are supporting it.)"  <a href="http://blog.infotech.com/news-analysis/how-mobile-consumer-devices-drive-cloud-applications-in-enterprise-it/">How Mobile Consumer Devices Drive Cloud Applications in Enterprise IT</a>.</p><p>Are you like a dog with a bone about anything?</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>VoIP Termination Squabble</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2012/05/voip-termination-squabble.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2012:/on-rads-radar//51.49327</id>

    <published>2012-05-07T19:05:35Z</published>
    <updated>2012-05-07T19:06:42Z</updated>

    <summary>On April 5, 2012, Sprint filed a petition for declaratory ruling raising a number of issues concerning the applicability of tariffed access rates to Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)-originated calls. (Issues that the FCC should have already put to bed!)...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="politics" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="voip" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="centurylink" label="centurylink" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="fcc" label="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="intercarriercompensation" label="inter-carrier compensation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="lawsuit" label="lawsuit" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="sprint" label="sprint" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="voip" label="voip" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>On April 5, 2012, <a href="http://www.fcc.gov/document/bureau-seeks-comment-sprint-petition-declaratory-ruling">Sprint filed a petition for declaratory ruling</a> raising a number of issues concerning the applicability of tariffed access rates to Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP)-originated calls. (Issues that the FCC should have already put to bed!) Basically, "Sprint is asking the FCC to decide whether it should pay CenturyLink for VoIP long-distance traffic. The question stems from a long-running federal lawsuit - filed in Nov. 2009 - CenturyLink filed against Sprint to enforce access tariffs on VoIP-originated calls." [<a href="http://www.fierceenterprisecommunications.com/story/sprint-centurylink-squabble-hits-fcc/2012-05-02" target="_blank">fiercetelecom</a>]</p><p>One of Sprint's points is: 
"because the VoIP originated traffic is jurisdictionally interstate, intrastate access tariffs cannot impose compensation obligations with respect to that traffic, even if those calls originate and terminate in the same state."</p><p>This issue was sort of addressed in 2010.</p><p><a href="http://www.kelleydrye.com/publications/client_advisories/0532" target="_blank">Kelley Drye explains</a> it: "On February 18, 2010, a federal district court stepped in to fill the gap left by the FCC's silence on the issue of whether transmission of Voice over Internet Protocol ("VoIP")-originated calls is an information service exempt from access charges or a telecommunications service subject to access charges. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia in PAETEC Communications, Inc. v. CommPartners, LLC held that the transmission and net protocol conversion of VoIP-originated calls is an information service not subject to access charges and that a tariff imposing such charges is ultra vires and lacks legal force."</p><p><a href="http://www.voiplogic.com/content418">VoIP Logic points</a> out that "the Court supported application of the FCC's $0.0007 reciprocal compensation cap, an amount to be paid for local traffic exchange between networks."</p><p>Other rulings have conflicted including <a href="http://www.dwt.com/advisories/Conflicting_Rulings_Fail_to_Clarify_VoIP_Compensation_Issue_02_19_2010/">the Pennsylvania PUC ruling</a>. More importantly, "U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York reached an opposite conclusion in a suit pitting VoIP provider GlobalNAPs, Inc." against MetTel on March 31, 2010. "While acknowledging the findings in the CommPartners case, the court found that an inability to apply the tariff regime as did not preclude MetTel's entitlement to recover in equity for costs it assumed in terminating Global's traffic, and concluded that GlobalNAPs was not entitled to "unjust enrichment," e.g. was required to compensate MetTel for access." [<a href="http://www.voiplogic.com/content418">VoIP Logic</a>] GlobalNAPs petitioned the FCC for a ruling in 2010. The FCC has waffled as per usual.</p><p>They even waffled within months of each order. In October of 2011, <a href="http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0206/FCC-11-161A1.pdf">this order</a> was released with the Connect America Fund order. Then on April 25, 2012, the FCC released a <a href="http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0425/FCC-12-47A1.pdf">revised Connect America Fund Order</a> that revised the ICC/USF Reform. This order "permits local exchange carriers (LECs) to impose higher charges for originating intra-state toll calls that begin or end in VoIP format. Previously, in its USF/ICC Transformation Order the FCC determined that effective Dec. 29, 2011, originating access charges for such intrastate toll calls would be capped at the level of the LEC's normally lower interstate charges." <a href="http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentViewer.aspx?fid=a8c5c623-934c-420f-b51f-f7859ae06a71">JDSupra</a> continues to explain, "The FCC's new decision establishes a transitional rate rule, under which intrastate VoIP toll traffic will be subject to intrastate rates for approximately two years."  It all comes down to tariff rates, which, contrary to popular belief, can be updated at any time by the carrier and just need to be filed to be effective. (So when they hide behind the tariff, they are just saying they don't want to.)</p><p>If you are confused, you are not alone. Hence, why <a href="http://www.fcc.gov/document/bureau-seeks-comment-sprint-petition-declaratory-ruling">Sprint is petitioning the FCC</a>. Maybe some day it will finally be settled.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>USTelecom Wants Forbearance for all ILECs</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2012/04/ustelecom-wants-forbearance-for-all-ilecs.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2012:/on-rads-radar//51.49201</id>

    <published>2012-04-09T18:36:04Z</published>
    <updated>2012-04-09T19:40:45Z</updated>

    <summary>We once fancifully debated if the ILEC&apos;s would LET the cablecos get ahead just so they could get out from under regulations. This was 2006. Apparently, that was the plan.USTelecom is an organization made up of ILEC&apos;s. The org has...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="CLEC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="broadband" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cableco" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cellular" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="telco" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="wireline" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="att" label="att" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="broadband" label="broadband" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cableco" label="cableco" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cellular" label="cellular" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="comptel" label="comptel" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="fcc" label="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="forbearance" label="forbearance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ilec" label="ilec" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="pstn" label="PSTN" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="telecomisbroken" label="telecom is broken" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="vz" label="vz" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="wireline" label="wireline" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>We once fancifully debated if the ILEC's would LET the cablecos get ahead just so they could get out from under regulations. This was 2006. Apparently, that was the plan.</p><p>USTelecom is an <a href="http://www.ustelecom.org/who-we-are/leadership/board-directors">organization made up of ILEC's</a>. <a href="http://www.ustelecom.org/news/filings/ustelecom-petition-forbearance-legacy-telecom-regulations">The org has filed for forbearance</a> at the FCC on behalf of its members. Not certain <em>THAT</em> is legal.</p><p><a href="https://prodnet.www.neca.org/publicationsdocs/wwpdf/21612ustelecom.pdf">The petition [pdf]</a> comes from the ILEC executives "essentially telling the FCC that it's time to wake up and smell the coffee--"many rules were adopted in a different era, long before the advent of broadband networks or the creation of the public Internet."," as <a href="http://www.jsicapitaladvisors.com/monitors/2012/2/26/ustelecom-fcc-should-purge-regulatory-vestiges-of-a-bygone-e.html">JSI describes</a> it. JSI continues with, "it might be time for a new regulatory regime as even the 96 Act is becoming less and less relevant with each new cord cutter and cross-platform conglomerate. The petition is also in line with the White House and Congress' push to get the FCC to clean house, and "the Commission's commitment to eliminate unnecessary regulatory requirements.""</p><p>The petition states, "Forbearance is warranted because the rules have been rendered obsolete by technological and market changes. From a technological standpoint, the Commission's legacy telecommunications regulations are ill-suited to facilitating, and in fact hamper, broadband deployment." I'm not sure that's true. It hasn't hampered DSL; the LEC's have by not deploying, switching to fiber and, quite frankly, arrogantly thinking that they were still a Monopoly. In every respect, the trouble with ILEC's is NOT the federal (or dwindling state) regulations. The trouble with the ILEC's is a Monopoly Mindset.</p><p>They don't choose the best technology nor do the deploy technology well. Mismanaged spectrum just being a symptom.</p><p>FiOS failed because the numbers forecast was wrong. Basing it on 50% penetration was a mistake. Not considering that it would take 2 techs all day (or longer) to install triple-play FiOS. Thinking that the CPE - all 4 pieces of equipment - would be cheap to install.</p><p>Let's also look at three bigger problems for ILEC's  Pensions, Unions, and USF. By shifting to a cellular and entertainment companies, the RBOCs - AT&T and Verizon - are moving toward a non-union shop. AT&T is dealing with CWA union contracts right now - and VZ had to deal with them last year (along with a strike). They want to eliminate the union. Cellular, entertainment, cloud and outsourced services mean less Union liability - and less pension liability. The ILEC's - Embarq, VZ, ATT, Qwest - are sitting on a chunk of pension payments. It's just another example of bad planning by the executives running these corporations. I know in my life time I will see one of these companies file BK papers. With all the debt they have - $109B just for the Big 2 - mixed with declining revenues, pension payments, probably healthcare costs, union troubles and hyper-competition, the C-Suites at the ILEC's - all of them - are as ill-suited to run them as Hesse is to turn Sprint around.</p><img alt="einstein.jpg" src="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/einstein.jpg" width="320" height="224" class="mt-image-center" style="text-align: center; display: block; margin: 0 auto 20px;" /><p>A Forbearance petition is nice, but it won't solve any of their problems.</p><p>With USF Reform, the RLEC's - and even some ILEC's (FFW+C) - will be in even more trouble. Not just competition and dwindling access lines, but decreasing government subsidies for those access lines PLUS a requirement to build out broadband, which means CAPEX! It is not a pretty horizon.</p><p>As I read this paragraph all I can think is: Monopoly MIndset is the problem, not FCC regulations. And claiming that it is regs that have created the current quagmire is sticking your head in the sand.</p><p>"Indeed, the most recent survey by the Center for Disease Control (which has been relied upon previously by the Commission) has found that more than 32 percent of households have completely "cut the cord" and have abandoned their wireline phone altogether.  ....  At the same time, incumbent carriers compete against a host of providers, including cable companies that offer service to at least 93 percent of American households, already serve approximately 20 percent of the residential voice market, and are the primary provider of residential broadband. Under these competitive circumstances, the current outdated regulatory regime imposes unnecessary costs on a limited subset of competitors to the detriment of these competitors and consumers alike." Plus it's a Duopoly. There isn't much competition in the Broadband space. It's DSL, cable or 3G.</p><p><a href="http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0308/DA-12-352A1.pdf">Comments or Oppositions Due: April 9, 2012</a> TODAY></p><p>And of course <a href="http://comptel.org//Files/filings/2012/04-09-12_COMPTEL_Opposition_To_US_Telecom_Petition.pdf">COMPTEL has filed opposition</a>.</p><p>Category 10 (Service Discontinuance Approval Requirements); Category 9 (Rules Governing Notices of Network Changes); and Category 2: (Open Network Architecture and Comparably Efficient Interconnection Requirements, All-Carrier Computer Inquiry Rules and the Structural Separation Rule) would really make CLEC life miserable.</p><p>Think <a href="http://www.broadvox.com/Blogs/sweeeet">about this</a> when thinking about regulations being the issue:  "According to the Telecommunications Industry Association, wireless has become the preferred voice-services option. Wireless revenue in 2012 is forecast at $335 billion, while all other forms of fixed network voice revenue will only total $176 billion ($132 billion for wireline, $38 billion for broadband access and $6 billion in cable/television revenue)."  Is it regulations doing this or our mobile culture? De-regulating ILECs will mostly hurt SMB who are the profit center of ITSP and CLEC businesses.</p><p>One last point: voice is being replaced by Skype, G+, Facebook, IM, chat, SMS, and other types of communications. These innovations were NOT brought to you by the telcos NOR will any innovation because they have a Monopoly Mindset. And that mindset screams: "We want to make more money off our old plumbing without having to morph, change or innovate!"</p><p>There's no fixing that.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Are Telcos Outside Their Delivery Zone?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2012/03/notice-who-the-house-is.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2012:/on-rads-radar//51.48979</id>

    <published>2012-03-12T13:52:44Z</published>
    <updated>2012-03-12T21:32:16Z</updated>

    <summary>The ILEC&apos;s were really good at delivering a monopoly TDM-based dial-tone product. And later got very good at T1 and T3. Was that the extent of the research that the old AT&amp;T Labs could provide? DSL, while slower than cable...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="CLEC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="bellsouth agent" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="data center" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="security" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="telco" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="wireline" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="att" label="att" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cloudcomputing" label="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="fcc" label="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="managedservices" label="managed services" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="telco" label="telco" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>The ILEC's were really good at delivering a monopoly TDM-based dial-tone product. And later got very good at T1 and T3. Was that the extent of the research that the old AT&T Labs could provide? DSL, while slower than cable modem service, does provide for good, cheap broadband, despite its limitations in distance and speed.</p><p>Now the ILEC's are going Cloud with Terremark, Savvis, and roll your own. This is shocking to me, since I was there in 2001 when BellSouth (and other ILEC's) first attempted data center and e-Commerce. At the time, BellSouth had partners like EMC to deliver the managed servcies and IBM for the data center. But this isn't something they knew how to sell or how to market. Certainly, the market has changed to make it easier to sell, but are the ILEC's the right partner for Cloud?</p><p>I look at how they are struggling with declining wireline revenue (and mounting debt). They have been grasping at TV for consumer triple-play; tech support for broadband customers; and managed services. A managed router from AT&T is configured and managed in Singapore! The slight time difference affects support. Plus it is by email mainly.</p><p>Is that what Enterprise customers want?</p><p>Then I look at the Telecom Subpanel talks on Cybersecurity, in which reps from AT&T, Comcast, Century Link and MetroPCS were featured speakers in front of The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology  <a href="http://execbrief.cq.com/technology/#cq-schedules&eventId=296572">hearing Wednesday morning</a> on the cybersecurity threat to the nation's communications networks. The hearings are about regulation of security of the communications infrastructure - who will have oversight, what will be required, and the like, to be added to a bill. Like that will help. Sheesh!</p><p>And, of course,<a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/214767-internet-providers-warn-against-cybersecurity-regulation"> the carriers do NOT want to be regulated</a>. In fact, <a href="http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/db0307/DA-12-346A1.pdf">CenturyLink is petitioning the FCC to forbear </a>from "dominant carrier regulation and the Computer Inquiry tariffing requirement with respect to its packet-switched and optical transmission services" for those services subject to the regulations. "CenturyLink states that, because of recent mergers, its enterprise
broadband services are subject to different regulations depending on which CenturyLink affiliate - Qwest, Embarq, or CenturyTel - previously provided (or didn't provide) those services." Whatever. They do what they want anyway. There isn't any FCC enforcement (of merger conditions or forbearance conditions).</p><p>That sentiment brings me back to cybersecurity and regulations. It would be kind of joke really. The FCC took over 10 years to come to grips with VoIP, how would it ever regulate something as fluid as security? And what would enforcement look like? Would it be something like CPNI?</p><p>There are over 1000 VoIP providers in the US plus the numerous LEC's, cablecos and cellcos. Does anyone really think that enforcement is a priority at the FCC?</p><p>So back to telco cloud services.</p><p>On the one hand, I like that Savvis is still Savvis and Terremark is still Terremark (without any telco infection, no offense). In fact, "Savvis is poised to lead in Gartner's Magic Quadrant for Public Cloud Infrastructure as a Service in addition to Gartner's Magic Quadrant for Cloud Infrastructure as a Service and Web Hosting," <a href="http://seekingalpha.com/article/413841-centurylink-s-broadband-strategy-big-news-for-2012">according to Seeking Alpha</a>. Given that every data center company from TELX to QTS have launched Cloud services, not to mention every CLEC, TWC (via Navisite) and most VAR's, would you rather sell IT services from an IT company or IT services from a telco?</p><p>The whole "I don't want to be regulated, I don't want to be a common carrier" is fine if you understand that to stop being a monopoly, you have to stop acting like one! You HAVE to provide customer service. You can't finger point when handling Managed Services or Cloud Services. You have to ANSWERS to solve problems for your customers.</p><p>I think that Cloud is going to be a bust for telcos, in general. They have been the pipe, the plumbers, for so long -- and even if you want to reach up to Layer 7 (to grab the money) doesn't mean you have the ability or will be able to deliver on it. Going into cellular was just another Layer 1 project.</p><p>Let me point out a few things. Many fiber companies (or divisions) can't find or price out their fiber. A cellco has mismanaged its network to the point of disrupting users and its 4G future. An ILEC has done such a poor job planning Metro Ethernet that it has run out of VLAN's in two major metros!</p><p>Cloud may turn out like FTTH and Telco TV: an investment that didn't work out. Or it may work out despite what I think will be glaring holes.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>FCC is Busy!</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2012/02/fcc-is-busy.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2012:/on-rads-radar//51.48750</id>

    <published>2012-02-07T20:54:35Z</published>
    <updated>2012-02-07T22:13:14Z</updated>

    <summary>.The FCC is really busy!The FCC is still working on Inter-Carrier Compensation. It ordered Rural Call Completion.It approved TWC&apos;s $3B bid for Insight. &quot;Time Warner Cable last August agreed to buy Insight for $3 billion in cash. The nation&apos;s No....</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="CLEC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="broadband" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cableco" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="politics" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="spectrum" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="fcc" label="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="fcc" label="fcc" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="forbearance" label="forbearance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="intercarriercompensation" label="inter-carrier compensation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="spectrum" label="spectrum" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="usf" label="usf" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="whitespaces" label="white spaces" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[.<img alt="FCC" src="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/images/fcc.gif" width="165" height="56" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /><p>The FCC is really busy!</p><p>The FCC is still working on Inter-Carrier Compensation. It <a href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2012/02/fcc-rules-on-rural.html">ordered Rural Call Completion</a>.</p><p>It approved TWC's $3B bid for Insight. "Time Warner Cable last August agreed to buy Insight for $3 billion in cash. The nation's No. 2 cable operator will acquire control of Insight by merging Insight into Derby Merger Sub Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of TWC, with Insight as the surviving entity, according to the FCC. Insight will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of TWC," according to <a href="http://www.multichannel.com/article/480049-FCC_Clears_Time_Warner_Cable_Takeover_of_Insight.php" target="_blank">Multi-Channel</a>.</p><p>The FCC is looking for <a href="http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/fcc-seeks-comment-nfl-blackout-rule-137803">comments on NFL Black out</a>. (So is the Florida Legislature, since the stadiums are publicly supported.) 16 games blacked out this year included 7 by my Bucs. That's not any way to treat fans or build up a fan base.</p><p><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/30/north-carolina-launches-fcc-approved-tv-white-space-network-in-w/">Engadget reports</a>, "Back in December, the FCC approved the first white space device and database for the lucky city of Wilmington, North Carolina....Spectrum Bridge finally launched its TV White Space (TVWS) network in Carolina, as part of Wilmington's ongoing "Smart City" initiative."</p><p>The Lifeline program for low-income households has also been re-vamped by this Commission. There is a $25 million pilot program for Lifeline for broadband to see if there are cost savings. [<a href="http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/249062/fcc_overhauls_telephone_subsidy_for_the_poor_adding_broadband.html">PCworld</a>]</p><p>Clearly, the FCC is working on a lot of business. Here are some other topics:</p>
<ul>
	<li>USF Reform</li>
<li>Inter-Carrier Comp rules</li>
<li>VZW-SpectrumCo spectrum deal</li>
<li><a href="http://www.lightsquared.com/press-room/press-releases/lightsquared-files-petition-for-declaratory-ruling-asks-fcc-to-confirm-its-rights-as-spectrum-licensee/">LightSquared spectrum usage </a>and GPS interference</li>
<li><a href="http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db1110/DA-11-1879A1.pdf">Reversal of Verizon's forbearance in 2006</a>>/li>
<li><a href="http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db0926/FCC-11-134A1.pdf">Next Gen 911 framework</a>.</li>
<li><a href="http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db1227/DA-11-2074A1.pdf">NANPA Numbering resources </a>(access to DID numbers)</li>
</ul>
<p>A lot to keep track of.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>A Fun Chat with VAR Dynamics</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2012/02/a-fun-chat-with-var-dynamics.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2012:/on-rads-radar//51.48630</id>

    <published>2012-02-01T05:51:08Z</published>
    <updated>2012-02-01T06:29:31Z</updated>

    <summary>It started out coincidentally as VAR Dynamics CEO, Tony Francisco, was on my plane this morning. And he just recently moved from Silicon Valley to Tampa Bay, where I live. He is working with Gazelle Labs and spoke at BarCamp...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="VAR" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="apps" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="backup" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="channel" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="msp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="saas" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="agents" label="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="apps" label="apps" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="channelpartners" label="channel partners" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cloudcomputing" label="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="msp" label="msp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="mspe" label="mspe" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="saas" label="SAAS" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="var" label="VAR" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<img alt="var-dynamics.png" src="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/var-dynamics.png" width="270" height="58" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /><p>It started out coincidentally as <span class="caps">VAR</span> Dynamics <span class="caps">CEO,</span> Tony Francisco, was on my plane this morning. And he just recently moved from Silicon Valley to Tampa Bay, where I live. He is working with Gazelle Labs and spoke at <a href="http://barcamptampabay.org">BarCamp Tampa Bay</a>, which is an un-conference I co-organize for the last 4 years. I had to go to Miami Beach to talk to him though. Go figure!</p><p><span class="caps">VAR</span> Dynamics is the geeks in the cloud that run the servers that run the software that <span class="caps">VAR'</span>s and service providers then re-label and sell to end-users. Back in the day, they would be labeled Master <span class="caps">MSP </span>as they enable <span class="caps">MSP </span>businesses. I called then an <span class="caps">MSPE </span>- a managed service provider enabler. Tony disliked that immediately. They are like the <span class="caps">VAR</span> Viagra - get them up and running on the Cloud in a day, fully turn key and automated through the magic of open <span class="caps">API'</span>s. Tony didn't like that either, but his VP of Marketing, Darrek Porter, a man who was in politics once upon a time, did. This system allows <span class="caps">VAR'</span>s to consume and re-purpose cloud apps in a self-service atmosphere.</p><p>I like it when the discussion is lively, more like buddies chatting over coffee than telling me your talking points. <span class="caps">VAR</span> Dynamics has almost 200 partners, which include telcos, <span class="caps">VAR'</span>s and <span class="caps">MSP'</span>s. What's the difference between <span class="caps">VAR </span>and <span class="caps">MSP</span>? Mainly mindset. Break/fix versus <span class="caps">MRR </span>(monthly recurring revenue).</p><p><span class="caps">VAR</span> Dynamics white labels a lot of Microsoft products like Exchange, Sharepoint, <span class="caps">CRM </span>and soon Lync Lite. They also white label Blackberry Enterprise Server and Zimbra. Why Zimbra? "For those that don't like Microsoft." They have add-ons like archiving and "Compliancy", which means help complying with the myriad federal regs like <span class="caps">PCI, HIPAA, GLBA, SOX, </span>etc.</p><p>Francisco did name drop Autotask, ConnectWise, Jamcracker and Reflection as current or future partners -- again through the magic of well coded open <span class="caps">API'</span>s.</p><p>Are you a company with a base of customers looking for <span class="caps">MRR </span>- "and control of their future"? Then <a href="http://www.vardynamics.com/"><span class="caps">VAR</span> Dynamics</a> wants to talk to you.</p><p>How do you control your own future? By selling white-label services, you are the provider - no carrier deciding that the bottom looks better when they stop paying commissions - so the monthly commission isn't going to get cut off, unless the customer leaves you.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Data Centers Make the Big Time</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2011/09/data-centers-make-the-big-time.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2011:/on-rads-radar//51.47570</id>

    <published>2011-09-27T16:12:31Z</published>
    <updated>2011-10-06T17:11:38Z</updated>

    <summary>When USA Today starts talking about data centers, the sector has hit the big time. The USA today ran a piece about the secret rooms that run the Internet. You&apos;d think they were talking about the NSA rooms that read...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="colocation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="data center" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="security" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="cloudcomputing" label="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="collocation" label="collocation" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="datacenter" label="data center" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="pcicompliance" label="pci compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="security" label="security" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>When <span class="caps">USA</span> Today starts talking about data centers, the sector has hit the big time. The <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2011-09-22/secret-internet-servers-data-centers/50498816/1?loc=interstitialskip" target="_blank"><span class="caps">USA </span>today ran a piece </a>about the secret rooms that run the Internet. You'd think they were talking about the <span class="caps">NSA </span>rooms that read every single piece of email.</p>
<p><span class="caps">QTS</span> Atlanta Metro Data Center is the second largest data center in the world with 990,000 square feet of total space (of which 300k sf is raised floor space) and its own on-site Georgia Power substation.</p>
<p>There is a lot of talk about green when it comes to data centers. (See this article about dirty data centers in InfoTech mag.) As data center space grows, so too does power consumption. I got to speak with Tom Burns of <a href="http://www.greenhousedata.com/">Greenhouse Data</a> in Cheyenne, Wyoming, "the planet's greenest data center". Greenhouse offers managed hosting, vCloud, virtualization,and collocation, utilizing "40% less energy than its traditional data center competitors -- all while being powered 100% through renewable wind energy." Burns explained that the data center space will soon have a larger carbon footprint than airlines. That might be true but the two industries are inversely growing - data centers are increasing due to the unlimited hunger for data and apps while airlines are cutting routes and flights to stay as close to profitable as they can get.</p>
<p>Data centers consume power twice: once for all the hardware housed in racks throughout the space and again to power the air conditioning to cool that same space that is heated by the hardware housed there. See that cycle? Power is the limiting factor for most data centers (not space). Greenhouse Data does a few things here differently. One, they re-use the heat to warm up office space. Two, some utlity equipment is outside the building; thus not adding to the heat inside the building. Lastly, they design the hot and cold racks more efficiently to contain the heat and send it above the drop ceiling for re-use.</p>
<p>When we talk about data centers, it's location, location, location. Most colo customers want to be within 4 hours drive of their colo space. There are about 7000 data centers in America. How do you differentiate? Greenhouse Data uses its green initiative as its brand. What do you use?</p>
<p>PS Energy efficiency means more margin, too.</p>
<p><span class="caps">BTW, </span><a href="http://www.colotraq.com"><span class="caps">COLOTRAQ</span></a>, the foremost global sourcing advisory firm and master agency for colocation, managed services and cloud computing, proudly announces successfully completing its one thousandth project. This milestone brings the total value of business that <span class="caps">COLOTRAQ </span>has brought to the industry to more than 45 million dollars in annually recurring revenue. Congrats!</p>
<p>From <a href="http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2011/09/stillsecure-announces-cloud-security-solution-and-partnership-with-softlayer.html" target="_blank">Brad Feld</a>: "StillSecure has been nailing it in the service provider segment with deals with <span class="caps">XO,</span> ViaWest, CoreSite, and others recently. StillSecure fundamentally believes that service providers - telcos, datacenter, cloud providers - will be the channel to market for security solutions and I agree. They have built an amazing set of solutions for colocation and dedicated server environments and have solutions that can apply to some higher-end cloud users. Today they are announcing a new host-based firewall management solution in conjunction with SoftLayer - a leader in the cloud market. Aimed at all cloud users, StillSecure's new solution is the start of a major initiative for the company and is also a new category of solutions."</p>
<p>One last tidbit: <a href="http://www.datapipe.com/news_press/press_releases_2011/datapipe_announces_industrys_first_pci_certified_cloud" target="_blank">Datapipe launched <span class="caps">PCI</span> Certified Cloud</a>.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>VZW and the Open Spectrum</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2011/06/vzw-and-the-open-spectrum.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2011:/on-rads-radar//51.46868</id>

    <published>2011-06-07T18:03:07Z</published>
    <updated>2011-06-07T20:52:16Z</updated>

    <summary><![CDATA[In&nbsp;the 700 MHz FCC spectrum auction 73, Google 's involvement insured that the spectrum would be Open Access. ATT ducked out of that auction to buy 700 MHz spectrum from Aloha Networks instead. VZW won $9B worth of Googlized spectrum....]]></summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cellular" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="spectrum" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="wimax" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="wireless" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="4g" label="4g" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="att" label="att" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cellular" label="cellular" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="clearwire" label="clearwire" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="fcc" label="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="spectrum" label="spectrum" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="sprint" label="sprint" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="vzw" label="vzw" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>In&nbsp;the <a href="http://wireless.fcc.gov/auctions/default.htm?job=auction_summary&amp;id=73" target="_blank">700 MHz FCC spectrum auction 73</a>, Google 's involvement insured that the spectrum would be Open Access. ATT ducked out of that auction to buy 700 MHz spectrum from Aloha Networks instead. VZW won $9B worth of Googlized spectrum. That is, that the spectrum was supposed to be used for open access. Supposed to be.<br /><br />So VZW's LTE utilizes that 700 MHz spectrum. Having Android disable tethering is not an Open Access attribute, according to <a href="http://www.freepress.net/press-release/2011/6/6/complaint-shows-verizon%E2%80%99s-failure-comply-terms-spectrum-licenses" target="_blank">Free Press who filed a complaint with the FCC&nbsp;</a>&nbsp;against Verizon. "Licensees of the C Block of the upper 700 MHz block, over which Verizon runs its LTE network, may not &ldquo;deny, limit, or restrict&rdquo; the ability of their customers to use the applications or devices of the customers&rsquo; choosing." This is like a <a href="http://www.historyofcomputercommunications.info/Book/1/1.2CarterfoneATT_FCC48-67.html" target="_blank">Carterphone moment</a> for the FCC. We'll see how it plays out. [BTW, it's been over&nbsp;<a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/06/carterfone-40-years.ars">40 years since the Carterphone decision</a>.]<br /><br />In <a href="http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/att-faces-1b-settlement-mobile-internet-access-fee-lawsuit/2011-06-07" target="_blank">other cellular&nbsp;news</a>,&nbsp;Ma Bell has to pay back $1 Billion "as part of a class-action settlement stemming from allegations that the carrier improperly levied taxes against customers on mobile Internet access fees, according to attorneys for the plaintiffs in the case."<br /><br />In cellular rumor, <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-buying-nokias-phone-business-for-19-billion-report-2011-6" target="_blank">BusinessInsider is saying </a>that Microsoft is buying Nokia's phone business for $19B.<br /><br />And finally, <a href="http://www.mobiledia.com/news/92063.html" target="_blank">Sprint lodged a formal complaint </a>with the FCC against the AT&amp;T/T-Mobile merger. Meanwhile, Sprint is trying to ink a deal with Lightsquared and clean up the Clearwire mess.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>VoIP Security Best Practices </title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2011/04/voip-security-best-practices.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2011:/on-rads-radar//51.46593</id>

    <published>2011-04-21T17:49:31Z</published>
    <updated>2011-04-21T18:10:36Z</updated>

    <summary>There has been much talk lately about VoIP security.The FCC has a page to warn consumers and businesses alike about Voicemail hacks. (The FCC calls it Voice Mail Fraud but it&apos;s really about hacking the voicemail system to enable toll...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="PBX" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="security" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="training" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="voip" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="itsp" label="itsp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="security" label="security" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="voip" label="voip" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<img alt="itspa.gif" src="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/itspa.gif" width="177" height="122" class="mt-image-left" style="float: left; margin: 0 20px 20px 0;" /><p>There has been much talk lately about VoIP security.</p><p>The <a href="http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/voicemailfraud.html" target="_blank"><span class="caps"><span class="caps">FCC </span></span>has a page</a> to warn consumers and businesses alike about Voicemail hacks. (The <span class="caps"><span class="caps">FCC </span></span>calls it Voice Mail Fraud but it's really about hacking the voicemail system to enable toll fraud.) This actually happened to me a few weeks ago. I never go into my vmail system because I get all my vmail as email. Remind your users. Or change it yourselves.</p><p>This article about the <a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/5duzQH/truvoipbuzz.com/2011/03/7-ways-voip-provider-cheating-you/" target="_blank">7 Types of VoIP Fraud </a>is pretty interesting.</p><p>The <a href="http://www.itspa.org.uk/downloads/1104_ITSPApress_VoIPsecurity.doc" target="_blank">Internet Telephony Service Providers' Association has developed some guidelines </a>for secure deployment of IP-PBX. [<a href="http://www.itspa.org.uk/downloads/ITSPA%20BCP_%20Recommendations%20to%20End%20Users%20for%20secure%20deployment%20of%20an%20IP-PBX.pdf"><span class="caps"><span class="caps">PDF</span></span></a>].</p>
<p>I know that you think you know it all and that you have <strong><em>the</em></strong> master genius in your <span class="caps"><span class="caps">NOC.</span></span> However, everyone can use a reminder. Furthermore, most companies do not have documented processes and procedures or things like a checklist (which would include demonstrating voicemail and making them change the password on Day 2). This results in practices that have holes. Holes get exploited. Exploits cost you customers and money.</p><p>Another reason to develop procedure documents: it helps with scale. As you grow, you will have the processes written by the personnel that were most familiar with the procedure. McDonald's isn't successful because they have great fries. McDonalds is successful because they have systems and procedures in place that any $7 per hour person can perform. They don't need a chef or a cook. They just need someone who can follow directions off a laminated card. That is the secret to the success of McD's.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>A Little Anti-Trust Rant</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2011/03/a-little-anti-trust-rant.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2011:/on-rads-radar//51.46423</id>

    <published>2011-03-30T15:35:02Z</published>
    <updated>2011-03-30T16:08:17Z</updated>

    <summary>A CLEC filed suit against VZ for anti-trust this week. For those of you unfamiliar with operating a CLEC, ISP or OTT VoIP company, let me explain what I have seen over 11 years of servicing this industry.Ma Bell has...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="CLEC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="ISP" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cableco" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="duopoly" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="politics" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="wireline" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="antitrust" label="antitrust" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="clec" label="clec" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cpni" label="cpni" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="fcc" label="fcc" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="isp" label="isp" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="rant" label="rant" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="vz" label="vz" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[A CLEC filed suit against VZ for anti-trust this week. For those of you unfamiliar with operating a CLEC, ISP or OTT VoIP company, let me explain what I have seen over 11 years of servicing this industry.<br /><br />Ma Bell has long standing promotions to compete against any quote from TWT. So long standing that by now they should be tariff rates.<br /><br />Tariff is what the employees of the ILEC's consistently blame everything on. Tariffs are written by the ILEC and can be changed at will. Most of the ILEC services today are unregulated. Let me say that again: in most states even dial-tone is unregulated. <br /><br />The ILEC's have systematically lobbied (read&nbsp;financially supported state and federal legislators) for de-regulation since 2004. <br /><br />The ILEC's bill incorrectly in so many cases. Most CLEC bankruptcies result from billing controversy with the ILEC. In one case, a CLEC is routinely billed 10% wrong every month and the account exec doesn't even want to be bothered with fixing it. (It would be too difficult.)<br /><br />I had a customer who had bought a frame circuit. It was in repair for a week. The ILEC tech told the end user that this would not have happened if he was a direct customer of the telco. How can that be? The line was down and the ILEC was having trouble fixing it. It was the ILEC's fault! (Unless the repair was caused by the ILEC.)&nbsp; <br /><br />Often the repair tech would tell the end user to move back to the ILEC. Apparently, the CWA doesn't understand that the ILEC receives more revenue from Wholesale than from Retail. <br /><br />Take the case of DSL. ILEC's only have to offer it to ISP's and CLEC's if they want to through a commercial agreement. The price that an ISP pays for a DSL loop in much of the 22-state footprint of one ILEC is the same as the retail price. The ISP also has to pay for an Aggregation circuit for DSL plus the Internet bandwidth, the router, etc. Yet the ILEC can offer all that for less than the wholesale rate.<br /><br />Metro Ethernet at the 10MB speed is priced at $720 as a Layer 2 service offering. With Internet, it is less than $900.<br /><br />DSL loop qualification is funny as well. At Ma Bell there is the wholesale LQ system and the internal LOOPY2 for account reps. They give different results. <br /><br />When VZ turns up a customer to FiOS, they cut the copper. This is because VZ doesn't want to maintain two outside plant facilities, but it also eliminates that customer from getting CLEC services. It is similar when a customer gets U-Verse; they are removed from the DSL database.<br /><br />At least one MSO sells metro ethernet to CLEC's and ISP's, then goes to the end user and undercuts them to go direct. Why? I have no idea. They just lost revenue!<br /><br />Over and over again, there are true stories about ILEC anti-competitive tactics over billing, repair, and CPNI violations.&nbsp; <a href="http://comptel.org/" target="_blank">COMPTEL</a> should have been collecting these violations over their 30 year history. Imagine how much data they would have for Anti-Trust? In 2004, when I and others founded II4A and worked with the WBIA, we were trying to establish that database. Many of the independent ISP's didn't want to contribute to the database because they didn't think it would go any where. We used to file CPNI complaints with the FCC but they were ignored. (The FCC does not understand the word enforcement unless it's to fine someone for not filling out the right form on time. Again why do we spend the money for this Agency?)<br /><br />Agents have had their own stories of woe with the carriers. Direct reps get better pricing. Dorect reps see the quote coming in and call the customer. Commission cuts. Yadda yadda.<br /><br />AstroTel's anti-trust will be an uphill battle that will take years, sweat, stress and much, much money. The 3 cases that I have read about where an agent won a battle against a carrier took at least 6 years and close to $1M in legal fees, so good luck, AstroTel!]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>Local CLEC Sues Verizon for Anti-Trust</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2011/03/local-clec-sues-verizon-for-anti-trust.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2011:/on-rads-radar//51.46421</id>

    <published>2011-03-30T15:13:57Z</published>
    <updated>2011-03-30T15:30:46Z</updated>

    <summary><![CDATA[AstroTel, a local CLEC in Sarasota, FL, filed the&nbsp;complaint in federal court in the Middle District of Florida against Verizon Communications, Inc. and Verizon Florida, LLC for repeated violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the Lanham Act, and the RICO...]]></summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="CLEC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="duopoly" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="politics" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="telco" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="wireline" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="antitrust" label="antitrust" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="clec" label="clec" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cpni" label="cpni" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="duopoly" label="duopoly" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="lawsuit" label="lawsuit" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="vz" label="vz" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>AstroTel, a local CLEC in Sarasota, FL, filed <a href="http://www.sellecom.net/antitrust/AstroTel-VZ-AntiTrust-Complaint.pdf" target="_blank">the&nbsp;complaint in federal court </a>in the Middle District of Florida against Verizon Communications, Inc. and Verizon Florida, LLC for repeated violations of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, the Lanham Act, and the RICO Act.&nbsp; The complaint was filed in the context of AstroTel&rsquo;s Chapter 11 Reorganization which began four months earlier.&nbsp; The reorganization itself is the result of ongoing contract disputes between AstroTel and Verizon Florida, LLC.<br /><br />As I understand it, VZ repeatedly used <a href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2010/07/cpni-training.html" target="_blank">CPNI information</a> that by <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode47/usc_sec_47_00000222----000-.html" target="_blank">Federal law </a>they are required to protect to market to AstroTel customers. The Duopoly as a whole does it. One MSO laughs about it and says, "If you don't like it build your own network." That may be good advice, except for Federal law and the reputation you get for being like that. Also, and its a big also, these companies make more money on wholesale but are too stupid to see it. <br /><br />Good luck, Mike! I hope you win millions - although VZ CEO&nbsp;Ivan's pay last year was just over $18M, so you need to win $100M to even make a dent. Better yet, hold out for structural separation.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>8 Questions for Cloud Providers</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2010/11/ive-done-a-couple-of.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2010:/on-rads-radar//51.45429</id>

    <published>2010-11-22T23:13:38Z</published>
    <updated>2010-11-22T23:33:09Z</updated>

    <summary>I&apos;ve done a couple of webinars lately for VAR&apos;s and Agents about the Cloud. I think that between SAAS and Cloud, vendors are forgetting that they are selling applications. I think the disconnect right now is that Agents aren&apos;t comfortable...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="Web 2.0" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="apps" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="backup" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="data center" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="disaster recovery" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="saas" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="sales and selling" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="technology" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="agents" label="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="apps" label="apps" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="channelpartners" label="channel partners" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cloudcomputing" label="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="datacenter" label="data center" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="saas" label="SAAS" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>I've done a couple of webinars lately for <span class="caps">VAR'</span>s and Agents about the Cloud. I think that between <span class="caps">SAAS </span>and Cloud, vendors are forgetting that they are selling applications.</p>
<p>I think the disconnect right now is that Agents aren't comfortable selling apps. They aren't comfortable with many of the <span class="caps">SAAS</span> Providers.</p>
<p>Here's the scenario: Agents sell telecom services for licensed companies, most of whom are public. And all agents have heard or know someone who was burned on commissions from companies they know. So now imagine we go into this nebulous thing called Cloud or <span class="caps">SAAS, </span>where some company says, "Hey, Go sell my Apps to your base!" The company is unknown, unlicensed and private. You have no idea what to look for; what to ask; what to expect; and in some cases how you are going to sell it.</p>
<p>At least the Conferencing companies (Conferencing is Software-as-a-Service and Voice-as-a-Service) like Intercall and RollCall have been around a long time. SalesForce too for that matter. But others? Not so much. Unknown entitiy.</p>
<p>So how do you choose a Cloud Provider to be a vendor?</p>
<p>Carefully.</p>
<p>Really the questions are the same for a Hosted UC company as it is for Cloud provider or <span class="caps">SAAS </span>company.</p>
<ol>
<li>You want to know something about the financials. How many paying customers do they have? Can any be used as reference accounts?</li>
<li>Do they test their software regularly? Do they use an outside audit firm?</li>
<li>What does their redundancy look like? What does the data backup system look like? What does the Disaster Recovery scenario look like?</li>
<li>Are they using <span class="caps">SAS</span> 70 data centers or are they seeking or <span class="caps">ISO</span> 27001 certification?</li>
<li>How do they fix problems? If they say there are none, that's a red flag.</li>
<li>What does the <span class="caps">SLA </span>cover? What's the procedure for <span class="caps">SLA'</span>s?</li>
<li>See if you can talk with any customers that require compliance such as <span class="caps">HIPAA </span>or <span class="caps">PCI.</span></li>
<li>Use your best judgement.</li>
</ol>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>3 Ways VARs Can Profit From Cloud</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2010/10/3-ways-vars-can-profit-from-cloud.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2010:/on-rads-radar//51.45023</id>

    <published>2010-10-11T16:54:29Z</published>
    <updated>2010-10-11T17:17:31Z</updated>

    <summary>I was speaking to an IT shop owner this morning who will be attending SMB Nation in Vegas in a couple of weeks. His worry is How Do I Make Money From The Cloud?Agents have a similar worry. One reason...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="TEM" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="VAR" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="apps" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="backup" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="bandwidth" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cellular" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="channel" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="mpls" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="saas" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="technology" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="agents" label="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="channelpartners" label="channel partners" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cloudcomputing" label="cloud computing" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="saas" label="SAAS" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="saas" label="saas" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="tem" label="TEM" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="var" label="VAR" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>I was speaking to an IT shop owner this morning who will be attending <span class="caps">SMB</span> Nation in Vegas in a couple of weeks. His worry is How Do I Make Money From The Cloud?</p><p>Agents have a similar worry. One reason agents worry is because selling Managed Services in Consultative Selling is very different than selling a <span class="caps">PRI </span>or <span class="caps">T1. </span><b>Very Different!</b></p><p>It's transition time - time to take some sales training (Call <span class="caps">RAD</span>-INFO!)</p><p>For value-added resellers who sell IT services, the Cloud is still an opportunity. Here's 3 ways <span class="caps">VAR'</span>s can profit from the Cloud:</p><p>One: partner with <span class="caps">SAAS </span>providers to get residual commissions from customers you bring to them. It isn't much money, but every stream of income counts. (I'd rather have 25 small streams of income than 1 big one).</p><p>Two: someone has to the integration and migration. Migrating databases to <span class="caps">SAAS </span>requires labor. IT shops can get paid for that. Integration with the <span class="caps">SAAS </span>provider and the client company employees is another space that needs to be filled. (VAR's could just re-bill the <span class="caps">SAAS </span>with a support or management fee).</p><p>Finally, the management piece. Remember, that not every application and certainly not all data will be moving to the cloud. Some of it will be a hybrid solution of private cloud and public cloud. You know what becomes important? Access, security and backup.</p><p>By Access, I mean ways to access the data in the cloud: Internet Access, <span class="caps">MPLS </span>or <span class="caps">VPN.</span> With Redundancy and reliability, too.</p><p>By security, I mean that private clouds coupled with lots of government regulations mean that security on the <span class="caps">WAN </span>as well as the <span class="caps">LAN </span>will be important - and likely too complicated for any in-house tech department. Access to the Access, if you will.</p><p>Lastly, data backup, email archiving and storage will be even more important as we move to the cloud. Someone has to manage that. It could be you.</p><p>In the Agent World, we have <span class="caps">TEM </span>and <span class="caps">TAM. VAR'</span>s will need something similar.</p><p><span class="caps">TEM </span>is telecom expense management (and sold as software-as-a-service, btw). Even circuits that I did not sell to the customer can be checked and inventoried on a <span class="caps">TEM </span>platform. Bill reconciliation is one piece of it, but also as offices open and close, employees leave and join, connections will need to be moved, changed, added or terminated. <span class="caps">TEM </span>helps to watch all that.</p><p>Close to that is <span class="caps">TAM, </span>telecom asset management. Laptops, <span class="caps">EVDO </span>cards, cellphones, data cards, routers, switches, IP phones - all these hardware assets that an employee or very small office may have - need inventory management. When the employee leaves, don't you want his hardware back? Don't you want to know how many data cards and data plans are in service? <span class="caps">TAM.</span></p><p><span class="caps">VAR'</span>s could do something similar. In the security realm, companies would like to know that when they fire Al, he can be locked out of all data, systems and networks. That's your job!</p><p>Seth Godin says a Linchpin manages chaos, makes the complex simple. That's the Value.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>CPNI Training</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2010/07/cpni-training.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2010:/on-rads-radar//51.44395</id>

    <published>2010-07-21T16:14:10Z</published>
    <updated>2010-07-21T17:09:24Z</updated>

    <summary><![CDATA[CPNI Training is an FCC requirement. AT&amp;T stuffs this training down the throats of its agents annually. And when their is a computer glitch, twice a year. While it is strictly applied to agents, internally CPNI is a joke for...]]></summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="CLEC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="clec" label="clec" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="cpni" label="cpni" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="fcc" label="FCC" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="ilec" label="ilec" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/phoneaboutyou.html">CPNI Training is an FCC requirement</a>. AT&amp;T stuffs this training down the throats of its agents annually. And when their is a computer glitch, twice a year.</p>
<p>While it is strictly applied to agents, internally CPNI is a joke for an ILEC. How else can they know that a customer has DSL with a wholesale ISP? Or that a contract with a wholesale client will expire soon? These are just some of the examples of CPNI infringement over the last couple of years.</p>
<p>I can't tell you how many times this has happened:</p>
<p>ILEC tech is at the customer premise to repair a CLEC or ISP transport service (DSL, frame, T1, Metro E) and tells the customer that they wouldn't have this problem if they went with the ILEC directly! Hello?! That's in violation -- and it almost admits that the ILEC messes with its wholesale customers.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

<entry>
    <title>IS MPLS HIPAA Compliant?</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/2009/11/is-mpls-hipaa-compliant.html" />
    <id>tag:blog.tmcnet.com,2009:/on-rads-radar//51.42579</id>

    <published>2009-11-09T20:44:37Z</published>
    <updated>2009-11-09T22:10:26Z</updated>

    <summary>Speaking with Peter Davis, Partner Channel Manager in the Southeast for XO, about MPLS and HIPAA. XO recently held a webinar describing how their MPLS Solution can enable healthcare organizations to be HIPAA compliant. The wording here is important. Transport...</summary>
    <author>
        <name>Peter</name>
        <uri>http://rad-info.net/</uri>
    </author>
    
        <category term="VAR" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="backup" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="compliance" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="data center" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="privacy" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
        <category term="xo" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#category" />
    
    <category term="agents" label="agents" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="channelpartners" label="channel partners" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="hipaa" label="hipaa" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="mpls" label="mpls" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="tca" label="TCA" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="vpn" label="vpn" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    <category term="xo" label="xo" scheme="http://www.sixapart.com/ns/types#tag" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.tmcnet.com/on-rads-radar/">
        <![CDATA[<p>Speaking with Peter Davis, Partner Channel Manager in the Southeast for XO, about <a href="http://www.m2mevolution.com/topics/ip-vpn/articles/34312-look-xos-ip-vpn-services.htm">MPLS</a> and <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/">HIPAA</a>. XO recently held a webinar describing how <a href="http://www.xo.com/solutions/industry/healthcare/Pages/overview.aspx">their MPLS Solution</a> can enable healthcare organizations to be HIPAA compliant.</p>
<p>The wording here is important. Transport is neither compliant or not. It is the end devices and users that must be HIPAA compliant. In other words, how the data is handled end-to-end has to be compliant, not the pieces and parts.&#160;<br />
<br />
When speaking with Hospital HIPAA Administrators it is important to remember that part of compliance is security and part is procedure. The procedure part has to do with how all medical records (physical and virtual) are handled and secured, whether on-premise, in transit, at a data center, ona&#160; server or in a file cabinet.<br />
<br />
With off-site data storage, the best solution for access&#160;is a private line, a Layer 2 VPN, or an MPLS network. Why? Segmentation of traffic. Security of data flow. Less chance for a lapse in security.&#160;<br />
<br />
The data needs to be securely stored and backed up. EMR firms have to sell a fairly expensive proposition due to all the safeguards and redundancy that goes with accessing medical records from a remote server.&#160;<br />
<br />
In many ways, the telecom agent can sell numerous pieces of the puzzle through XO (or other carriers or VAR's).&#160;</p>
<ul>
    <li>The transport - private line, metro Ethernet, Layer 2 VPN, or MPLS.</li>
    <li>The data center - collocation for servers and networking gear</li>
    <li>Data storage and backup</li>
</ul>
<p>HIPAA is more involved with procedures in place (and to be followed) on the storage, access and security&#160;of medical records&#160; than on the technology used to secure, store or transport those same medical records.<br />
<br />
If you are looking for more info on MPLS,&#160;<a href="http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=136751D3E4086AB3&amp;search_query=xo+mpls">XO has an MPLS video series on YouTube</a> and <a href="http://www.tcasite.org">TCA</a> has a stored webinar for its members on its website.</p>]]>
        
    </content>
</entry>

</feed>
