Some of you may recall that Snap Communications tried to break into the VRS business last year, but was stymied by the FCC order in May 2006 which implemented an interoperability rule requiring each VRS provider to allow the equipment of other VRS providers to be able to work on its service before it can be recompensed from the Interstate Relay Fund for its costs related to operating the relay service. SnapVRS's videophone, the Motorola OJO, uses the SIP signalling protocol, whereas the VP-100/200 and D-link videophones use the H.323 standard. Unfortunately, the SIP protocol and H.323 standard are not compatible. This means SnapVRS has not been able to enter into the market until it finds a way to make the Ojo compatible with H.323-enabled videophones.
Although I understand why the FCC made the decision to require interoperability with other VRS services for a variety of reasons, it had the undesireable effect of preventing incompatible alternative technologies from being used by anyone. One major reason why the FCC required interoperability was because one could not put a VP-100 on the same home network as a D-link 1000 unless the consumer had the ability to obtain a 2nd IP address.
However, you could put an OJO on the same network as your VP-100 or D-link 1000 since they do not use the same internet ports to function. What I wish the FCC did with their interoperability rule was to condition it such that if a consumer could have two different types of videophones on the same network, that would be acceptable. The OJO's video advantages (H.264 standard), built-in video mail, SIP-based direct calling capability (meaning no IP addresses to mess with), etc, all are advantages that would have been nice to use.
I believe that Snap Communications is working to set up gateways to make H.323-enabled videophones compatible with their service. It would be nice if all the VRS providers would instead move to videophones that use the SIP signalling protocol and thus make it a lot easier for everyone to call one another.
What are your thoughts?
Although I understand why the FCC made the decision to require interoperability with other VRS services for a variety of reasons, it had the undesireable effect of preventing incompatible alternative technologies from being used by anyone. One major reason why the FCC required interoperability was because one could not put a VP-100 on the same home network as a D-link 1000 unless the consumer had the ability to obtain a 2nd IP address.
However, you could put an OJO on the same network as your VP-100 or D-link 1000 since they do not use the same internet ports to function. What I wish the FCC did with their interoperability rule was to condition it such that if a consumer could have two different types of videophones on the same network, that would be acceptable. The OJO's video advantages (H.264 standard), built-in video mail, SIP-based direct calling capability (meaning no IP addresses to mess with), etc, all are advantages that would have been nice to use.
I believe that Snap Communications is working to set up gateways to make H.323-enabled videophones compatible with their service. It would be nice if all the VRS providers would instead move to videophones that use the SIP signalling protocol and thus make it a lot easier for everyone to call one another.
What are your thoughts?