 Good afternoon. My name is Sugmoni. We're going to talk a little bit about HD voice, high definition voice of the overdue revolution. Specifically, we're going to talk about what HD voice is. How would you make HD voice happen on today's networks? Who is doing HD voice? Get into some very interesting questions here. And where you can find HD voice, high definition voice. I don't need that. Okay. Back in 2009, there were a bunch of events that took place that were kind of like a wake up call for me and some other folks about delivering high quality voice. First of all, France Telecom started beating its drum. They have over 5,000 G722 wideband endpoints deployed. In addition to that, they turned up HD voice in Moldova. And why would you pick Moldova to demonstrate a bleeding edge technology? Well, okay. Maybe that's a self answering question. Global crossing. It very quietly built a conferencing bridge for HD for its customers. Excuse me, for a customer. And it's working on a product for an open HD voice conferencing bridge where anybody can just call in and do conference call on HD. Verizon Business has close to 5,000 HD voice phones, specifically Polycom phones, if there are any Polycom fans in the audience. Install their headquarters in Basking Ridge. Verizon expects their early adopters to come by later half of this year and have general availability of HD on Verizon's business network, not to be confused with Fios or the wireless network in 2011. And then Cable Vision deployed a hosted HD voice service in the second half of 2009. So we're left with this quandary. Either, A, once again the United States of America is being outclassed by the rest of the world in telecommunications technology. How many of you think that? Or the other half, US carriers are going to wait until the smoke clears and then get a deal done because somebody else has done the hard R and D. Hard to say with some of these carriers. First, what is narrow band voice or what does it mean? Narrow band voice is basically what you get on nearly every POTS, plain old telephone system, wired or wireless call today around the world. And I'm going to ignore ISDN and the mobile HD voice deployments for a moment. A PSTN grade call captures voice in about a 3.4 kHz range, 300 Hz to about 3400 Hz. So what happens is you're hearing of a human. Basically you get about a third delivered on an average phone of what you can actually hear. Now that acoustical standard was set back in 1937. And since then we've had FM radio, television, CDs, DVDs, HDTV, HD radio, we've had all these audio advances, but the fundamental phone system around the world has not changed since 1937 from an acoustical standpoint. There are a couple of exceptions I'm going to ignore them right now. Now the voice over IP equivalent of narrow band is G711 and it delivers that 3.4 kHz of sound in about 64 kHz of bandwidth. Now if you think about it and you stop for a minute, landline phone has otherwise, every other technology in landline phone has changed since 1937. The user interface has changed, the way you connect calls has changed, the network has all changed. You know, if you just pick up your phone, back in 1937 they had a dial on it. You had pole styling, you had a cord in the wall that was wired in the wall. You walked into any home today and it's like, unless you're a member of the professionally paranoid, you don't have a corded phone in your house. You have cordless phone and it's got buttons on it and it plugs into an RJ11 jack in the wall. So what is HD voice? I've set that up. HD voice is also called wide band voice. Now what that means is that it delivers voice in a range of at least 7 kHz, in other words twice that of a narrow band call. If I do my Tom Cruise imitation, this is you on, narrow band, this is you on HD. Narrow band, HD. If we turn to how that's delivered in voice over IP, the G722 codec is basically the standard or baseline when people start talking about HD voice and it captures a sound in a range of 30 Hz to 7000 Hz. But interestingly enough, you still only need that 64 kilobits per second of bandwidth just due to the rather mellow amount of compression that G722 does. Other HD voice codecs that we'll get to a little bit later include something called AMR wide band. Silk is pretty popular among the Skype crowd and then there's another codec called ISAC that's made by a GIPT. One of the key takeaways here is HD voice is only delivered on a digital network or an IP network. The current phone system, POTS phone system just can't handle it because it's all analog and all the handsets are legacy and they don't know, you know, you can't talk codecs to an RJ11 phone. The sidebar, there's a lot of hype coming out about super wide band or codecs that sample nearly to the full range of human speech. Now, I know I'm mixing and matching some of my terms here, but typically the sampling is 8 kHz sampling for narrow band, 16 for wide band, 24 for super wide band. Beyond that, you're sampling for your dog to hear it. Super wide band in some cases is basically marketing speak for or better than G722 in a lot of cases. But on the other hand as we'll hear in the demo, super wide band comes as close as you can get for delivering true voice just like you and I sitting across and talking to each other. Looking at the stuff from a different perspective when you start talking about Hertz, this is probably the best visual representation. First column is your voice basically more or less what it looks like in Hertz. Human hearing more or less of the amount that you can hear in terms of Hertz. Narrow band call, that is a little dinky bar right there in the middle. Then you go to HD voice, the bar next to it, and then super wide band next to it. So there's a gradual progression as to how much more information that you deliver the better the codecs get. Now since we talked about HD, we're going to try delivering it. To be married to a voice geek is not that bad. I have all my Friday evenings to myself. I can go out, have a drink, see my girlfriends. Then I come home, I cook a nice dinner, and I wait until the conference is over just hoping my dinner won't be totally burnt. Now what you actually heard, the first third of that audio clip was narrow band. The second third was G722 HD voice. And then the finishing part was super wide band in G722.1C one of the Polycom siren codecs. Now as you could tell from a subjective viewpoint the biggest jump in clarity is from when you go from G711 up to G722, and then you got a further improvement once you went from G722 all the way up to G7221C. The other thing that this clip, and the other clip that I'm going to play illustrates quite clearly is that one of the benefits of HD voice is that if you're trying to interpret or listen to somebody who doesn't speak your own language you get a much more clearer understanding when you've got that extra audio information to play with in your head. So I'm going to play another contrast example. The other thing that happens in this contrast example is that as you're going from left to right there's a screen graph that's giving you the amount of information being captured in Hertz as it rolls across. My name is Michael Edema from the Oscosia PBX project. We're currently developing an asterisk base firmware for low resource or embedded systems, and currently importing from FreeBSD to Linux onto two different CPU architectures. So I'm unfortunately unable to attend this year. We're just a little bit backed up. I also have a cold which you might be able to hear an exceptional quality right now. Have a great time at AstroCon. We're going to be there next year. Bye bye. So you kind of hear the difference between the two or the three different samples, but the benefits are there's two major benefits from moving from narrowband to HD voice that a lot of people have been hyping about. The first benefit is there's better compensation and better clarity. When you compress something down into narrowband that two point, that chunk of narrowband similar sounding words like sale and fail start to garble. If you get into a situation where you're rattling off a lot of acronyms like FCC, FTC, things like that those are notorious for getting garbled. You have to either spell them out or you have to repeat them. In addition to that, as you kind of got the impression from the clips, narrowband is a big headache when you're in a multilingual setting, when you're trying to talk to somebody else that doesn't speak your own language and vice-versa. The second thing with narrowband is reduction of fatigue and this is also called why conference calls suck. Is anybody like conference call here? Anybody would know. Nobody likes conference call. Well there's a reason for that and there's actually a physiological reason for that. That narrowband clipping that we've all taken for granted means that in the background your brain is playing fill in the blank as a background task in your head to fill in the information between what you're hearing in narrowband and what it should sound like in wideband and how it's sitting right next to you. The net net of this is the more audio data that you can deliver to the ear, the less your brain has to compensate and figure out what somebody else is saying. So this is the reason why you don't look forward to conference calls even though you don't realize it. Your brain has to actually do some work other than sit there or you can ignore the conference call and sit there anyways. But if you're trying to listen in on a conference call trying to interpret what somebody else is saying, it's a pain in the ass. Delivering HD voice is more than just a codec. You need to have a codec that can capture the sound and you have to be able to have a software that moves that from point A to point B in terms of quality of service. You have to have the hardware that can actually capture that range of sound. A solid network. And then if you're also trying to do this on a large scale you have to have IP or SIP interoperability in order to move call from point A to point B. So in most cases doing HD voice is an all IP or SIP application for the networks of the future or anything when we're talking about broadband. Number one. Number two is that you do need more capable speakers and microphones on your phones because the audio PS can, you know, you just can't back fit that because again those parts are engineered to capture a narrow band. They're not engineered to capture a wide band sound. Again you need good quality of service. You need low latency in the network. Basically if you can't do all of VoIP in terms of quality you're not going to be able to do HD voice. And then finally for scaling I'm going to get a little bit more into this further down in the presentation. You need to have agreements to interact via SIP for seamless HD calling and then you also have a mechanism for transcoding. So I'm going to walk through this one by one. HD voice codecs. There are four codecs kicking around that what I call the codecs that really matter. The first codec that is the gold standard depending on how you feel is called G722. Basically it was developed in the 80s. The patents have expired on it. Now anybody can use it. Now everybody does use it if they're building IP phones these days. The next codec is called AMR Wideband or also G722.2. Now the cellular industry over in Europe wanted a codec based on their original AMR codec standards. Now the reason why they wanted AMR Wideband is that it was designed to conserve use as your radio frequency so you could basically put an HD call into about 24 kilobits a second versus the 64 kilobits a second you need with G722. The downside to AMR Wideband is that you need to pay voice age for Motorola and for Instaulcom and Ericsson for patent use if you actually put it into a handset. Right now AMR Wideband is currently exclusively in a cellular domain but some of the pat holders of AMR Wideband want to see that codec move into wire line. There's a big push on it. The third codec of note is called ISAC. ISAC was a codec that's been developed by Global IP Solutions or Gips. Now Google turned around and paid $68 million for Gips back in May. ISAC is licensed for practically nearly every software client on the planet to deliver voice including AOL, Yahoo, Nimbus, WebEx, Citrix Online, IBM's Lotus. The big question right now is if Google will take that ISAC codec and open source it or and or open source other codecs within the Gips family like Google has done with the video codecs that it's bought and as open sourced. Now finally kind of like the dark horse in this racist silk Skype wanted a super Wideband codec, something to brag about which had variable bit rate adoptability based upon the CPU you had and the network that you have. It's got a royalty free license and then it samples anywhere between 8 and 24 kilohertz and uses anywhere from 6 to 40 kilobits a second for bandwidth to deliver a call. Skype wanted something that could run on older computers as well as run on the latest and greatest computers and to run in a wide range of bandwidth availability. So to handle anything from dial up all the way up to the latest and greatest fiber connections. But everybody wants to do codecs so there's more codecs. Polycom has a whole host of codecs like the one that we heard G7 22.1, the Polycom Siren codec that's royalty free. You've got Frauthenheimer Audio Communications Engine or ACE the people who gave us MP3 are also pushing the AAC codec for delivering HD voice. But of course if you get it and implement it you have to pay royalties on it. SpeechX is an open source codec that's been floating around and people give lip service to that. And finally Broadcom has released a bunch of codecs for its chip set. This is significant because a lot of phones use the Broadcom parts. So why do people fight over codecs? Well, number one, developers, all programmers think they can write something better. If you look at it from a hardware perspective simpler is better. From a hardware perspective if you're building a phone or you're trying to do an implementation, the fewer codecs are better because you have less expense to test and verify and support codecs. So hardware guys, they want as few as codecs as possible. And on the device side, especially more with mobile devices, the less processing you do in the phone, the longer battery life that you get. The wireless crowd, they have a different view. The wireless crowd likes to lean on the device CPU in order to do data compression. So that includes things like MRI bin and so that's because the old Gordon, the wireless crowd believes that every little RF bandwidth is sacred. And you need to conserve bandwidth within licensed bands. The problem is that that statement goes out the door when you start talking about 3G networks and 4G networks where a 64K set up for a voice call is nothing. And still carriers say a straight...carriers and people pushing MRI bin say with a straight face that we need to conserve bandwidth all the while they're rolling out streaming video services and 2-way video services. It's like, give me a break. Finally, when you get to network core, the guys that are switching phone calls back and forth on the service providers you have more codecs, you have to do more transcoding. Again, it becomes a support issue. It's pain in the ass to do. In addition to that, service providers want to avoid transcoding because it does cost them money because either they have to buy bigger boxes to do to support more codecs for transcoding. And then the other concern is that you lose some HD voice goodness when you translate...you may lose some HD voice goodness when you translate between one HD voice codec into another HD voice codec. As a side note, the cable companies in France Telecom are embracing a standard called CatIQ, which doesn't have to do transcoding at all. There's some standards floating around that allow you to do an end-to-end call in G722 where both sides can even be on a wireless handset. So that's pretty cool. Several clients in hardware you know, again, if you have a soft client you download, there's plenty of them floating around that support G722 or they already have ISAC already built in. And then of course there's one big one, Skype, that already supports silk. Hardware-wise, if you buy an IP desktop handset today from any of the name manufacturers, and even from a lot of the no-name manufacturers from China and things like that, they've all got G722 built in as a support. For them it's a relatively cheap thing to throw in in terms of throwing the Kodak in. But the flip side of that is some of these guys advertising that they support HD voice may not have the good acoustics, that is the higher quality microphones and speakers in order to deliver that full experience of sound. Now on the mobile device side it's a little bit more interesting. You do need good acoustics. So you need a little bit better microphone or you need to but one of the other things that's happening is phone manufacturers are starting to stick in dual microphones into handsets so you can do things like echo cancellation or noise cancellation to get a clearer voice. So how do you get HD voice users to talk to other HD voice users? How do you get these guys to talk to the PSTN? After all the PSTN is not going away tomorrow. The simplest case is if you have the same Kodak type when you're trying to make a phone call. And if you're on the same LAN or network as many of you may find if you're at a higher if you're at a college or university or your business uses it if you're all on the same network you're all using the same Kodak you're all behind the same firewall. You can just call John over in the next office or you can call Bob upstairs and it just happens. The problem is when you start to move beyond the D mark in your firewall or the D mark where the security barrier is at a service provider and then after that things get to be a lot trickier because there has to be a more formalized negotiation for security reasons. Now for different Kodak types we also have to get into things like transcoding where you go from either HD voice to the PSTN and it's kind of accepted everybody realizes again the normal phone system isn't going to go away any time in the next decade so you need to be able to downshift from wide band down to narrow band that's easy enough to do. The thing that gets upset is that if you do have to touch the PSTN you lose all that goodness of the HD call in the first place because you're basically cutting out all that sound. Not really a net game there. Secondly and the thing that it's getting people to gnash their teeth a little bit more is when you have to translate between G722 to AMR wide band service providers get a little bit annoyed but not really because they accept the need to translate between HD codecs i.e. like G722 which is already there and AMR wide band on the mobile side. Now HD voice in the island problem if you want to scale up you need to be able to interconnect at the IP level via SIP to have a seamless end to end SIP call anywhere on the internet or anywhere on a broadband network. Now the thing is that service providers don't do SIP hearing, IP interconnection, federations, whatever you want to call it out of the box. Now why don't they do that? Well there are a hell of a lot of security considerations when you start talking about VoIP you've got spit you've got DDoS you know. Go back through DEF CON for the last five years and dig out everything that you know all the security headaches that you can find with VoIP and there's the argument. The second headache is an enum that is translating between the normal 10 digit phone system on the PSTN and mapping that to a phone call that gets to be a little bit of a headache. There's a quality of service issue because service provider A wants to make sure if they make a phone call service provider B. It goes through with high quality of service that has to be negotiated at a higher level and then finally there's an argument as well if I place a call this way who gets the money. Now as a result of that, of all the security issues involved, there are a lot of HD voice islands running around within enterprises as well as service providers. So the task of the day for HD voice to move forward is building HD voice bridges, building all these interconnects between everybody doing HD voice. There's three ways to do this. You can peer, you can have a direct relationship between a service provider and each service provider and build a trusted relationship where service provider A and service provider B can do that. Number two is you can interconnect or federate with a third party in a spoken network fashion with whoever your hub service is handling all that overhead of enum, SIP, the technical issues, some of the business issues and legal issues involved in terms of exchanging SIP. And then finally, the third solution that's just come out recently is you can buy a box from Cisco if you haven't had a Cisco product and you can interconnect automatically with the Cisco IME box. SIP federations, there are like two major players in the SIP federation club right now. Number one is a company called X Connect based over in London. They've been running an HD voice trial for IP interconnect basically since the April of this year. A trial is still going on. The problem that they seem to have is they haven't made a big value statement or a value proposition to a lot of folks as to why people should pay money to subscribe to their service. The problem right now is that there are a lot of little guys that can do HD calls but if I have to pay a couple thousand bucks a month for that service, that's a lot of money when I'm only going to have a low probability for an HD voice call to go from point A to point B cleanly. So there's a little bit of a chicken and egg problem there. The second guy, the second people that could do SIP interconnect if they woke up and do it is Sprint. Sprint's got the PIN network and that's not no Candice Bergen dropping a PIN that's the partner inter-exchange network. They built an architecture that can handle a full range of rich media SIP stuff. But right now the only service they're running over is Vinal Voip and part of the problem is right now they're in the mindset that they're treating us just like a regular voice call when they terminate calls so they want a price per minute on the call and they want termination fees and that doesn't really work in a Voip world where you know all you do is you plug in the gigi Ethernet and it just happens. Now the third thing the third way to do is Cisco's got a product out called the inter-company media engine. Has anybody heard of that? No? Okay. Cisco basically built this magic box to get around the issue of having to have service providers or large enterprises directly peer with each other. Basically there's an appliance that you plug in, you load into this appliance all your SIP devices that have phone numbers and that can be HD voice phones, regular IP phones, that could be the video, the QtC video phones, that can even be telepresence rooms, you load all the phone numbers into their magical box and you turn it on. And what the magical box does is talk to all the other IME box, well it talks to a, first of all it talks to a dynamic hash table and publishes all those phone numbers that have been entered into it into a large dynamic hash table that's capable of handling up to 10 billion entries, a lot of phone numbers. And then what happens is these boxes just sit there until somebody from another also that owns another Cisco IME box that you call each other and then with a regular phone call and after that first regular phone call they take the information from that regular PSTN based phone call and they, you know, like length of call you know, when it started, when it stopped and they treat that as a shared secret and then the two Cisco IMEs wake up and go why you have HD and yes I have HD and then they exchange security information and then subsequent calls after they exchange security information then the IMEs know that if this phone number is called I can just throw out that straight over to the internet and then subsequent calls after that get routed on a virtual SIP trunk that gets set up each time a phone call is made. And again, any calls made in that fashion can be anything from then I'll avoid HD voice, video or anything else that you can do that's SIP based. Now the IME engine is also interesting because if you look at all the standards that Cisco's proposed, some of those standards were written by a former Skype employee so you can see where that whole peer to peer architecture comes into play and why it comes into play. Realistically though the biggest headaches for HD bridges are layers eight and nine. Layer eight is money, layer nine is politics. In layer eight we need to start talking about money. You know, voice providers are used to terminating calls on a, they're used to getting paid for termination and on a permanent basis for long distance calls and whenever you start talking flat rate to your phone company they start to tilt a little bit. They've reluctant, you know, a lot of phone companies reluctantly, you know, they will do flat rate plans but, you know, you dig a little bit harder in their certain services where they still do termination calls and permanent charges. Now service providers are reluctant to pay the upgrade for infrastructure that is pay for a Cisco IME box or pay for the overhead to negotiate peer to peer exchanges with other service providers because it's currently a very small universe of phones that make HD calls but that number is growing every day. And then interesting though Verizon Business has decided to pride free subcalling and it's viper service to its customers. Now layer nine politics, there's a lot of jockeying going on by smaller players that want to get together in peer and so they can build up their own big universes to exchange avoid calls directly bypassing the PSTN and yes directly bypassing the old style termination permanent charges. The larger players are moving slower to IP interconnect. It's on their radar but you know it's not on their list of things to do because once they implement that regime then that starts cutting into the bottom line that they're making from settlement and termination. You'll probably will see the cable company start to do IP interconnections next year so they can exchange avoid calls. Applications that love HD voice conferencing is a killer app. Again there's clarity, there's less stress, you'll get enough voices, accents are much less a barrier. When you get into multinational conversations it's a bonus dollars because again with non-native speakers of different languages you can better understand what somebody's saying and you can better understand what's being said when you start to throw accents in. And third the other application that loves HD voice is transcriptions when you go for things from like voice to email. If you're using computer based or human based things to do transcription HD voice gives you it's easier process, there's less errors so HD is a big win there. Applications that should love HD voice is anything to do with processing voice like IVR services and stuff like that. The young and old, if you've ever made a phone call to anybody under the age of three and you just hear the squeaky little voice on the other end and you go let me talk to your mommy and then okay what did she say again? The problem is that narrowband you can't understand what kids stand narrowband because they have that higher pitched voice and then you know if they're speaking and all their energy is up here I mean narrowband is down here you don't understand what they're saying. And again if you're older HD voice adds in that extra information so you can understand what they're saying better. Public Security National Defense there's been an argument that if HD voice is implemented you get better 911 calling rather than trying to figure out what somebody's saying in a panicked voice a high pitched voice and there's also been some suggestion that if you put in HD there's better translation and understanding of intercepts yes this is one area where we do want the enemy to have the latest and greatest technology so we can understand them better. Who is doing HD voice? Well there's a lot of people and a lot of players on the service provider side you have major telecom carriers, the mobile carriers, cables and MSOs are doing some work, hosted VoIP guys and even smaller consumer plays and then we'll get into by region. Major telecom carriers for broadband HD voice solutions in broadband France telecom is the loudest guy they've got half a million points turned up as HD voice right now. Verizon's got about 5,000 end points internally and then Verizon business is going to start supporting HD voice through their VoIP enterprise exchange service by the end of this year. Basically they're testing it out now they probably have some guinea pigs and a couple of their favorite customers already. BT, the BT Hub service is a G722 service. Does anybody have a BT Hub? No. BT Hub is HD voice service it's just the Brits don't know what the hell to call it so they call it high definition voice something weird but it's not, they don't call it HD voice like everybody else does. Telstra has a hosted HD voice service for businesses down under. In addition to that, Telstra has up to 11,000 end points using HD voice internally. They're probably at one point they were the biggest single carrier using HD voice that's probably starting to shift a little bit as Verizon and other folks get traction. Global Crossing as I mentioned before they're doing some stuff in HD voice for their high end customers. Now there are other carriers that have been rumored to do HD voice on the broadband side Telecom Italia, some of the Nordic telecoms. In addition to that there's been a rumor that I haven't been able to confirm that AT&T is running HD voice trials down in San Antonio in their home headquarters but AT&T isn't commenting and I can't find anybody who's got a phone in their house down there. Can't find a friend down in San Antonio basically. Mobile Cellular for HD voice what's happening is the positioning is if you're running a 3G plus service or running Volga voice over LTE or 4G these are all going to be drivers for HD voice higher quality voice services. There's kind of a recognition among the cellular carriers that voice quality among the cellular carriers suck. France Telecom in their orange brand has been very aggressive in pushing HD voice. They've already rolled out service in Moldova and Armenia France is supposed to be done by the end of July that is now they've been doing trials in the UK for HD voice and the rollout is expected later this summer and in addition to that FT has also said that they're going to turn up HD voice mobile service in Belgium, Luxembourg and Spain by the end of this year and then you can throw in Tunisia on that as well. Why Tunisia? Well the pattern is that France Telecom spends a lot of money deploying what they call these 3G networks or advanced mobile networks out there and basically again Moldova, Armenia Tunisia they're all Greenfield builds. There's no legacy equipment in there France Telecom just rolls out the latest and greatest equipment in there the most modern switches. Once they turn up all that stuff all you need to do is have an HD phone and have a mobile handset that supports HD in that network and you've got HD basically for the cost of turning up the network. So in Tunisia they've, Orange, France Telecom has invested up to half a billion euros to build out this 3G plus network so if you're going to build a network with that expensive it goes to assume that they're going to stick HD on it. SFR is testing in France now and they expect to shoot HP shortly. 3UK has demoed HD voice and then DeWish Telecom has trialed HD voice on LTE they did it sometime in the past two years. They haven't put their cards on the table yet but it's pretty sure that when the time comes probably when they're more phone mobile handsets in the pipeline they'll probably turn up HD voice somewhere or other. Cables at MSO as you know I hate to quote Battlestar to go to Platica while the Cylons have a plan. Well Cable has a plan and Cable's plan is basically they've issued multiple standards relating to HD voice to implement it. They've issued both an IP interconnect standard and a decad IQ standard where you can do end to end calls between point A and point B for HD voice. In addition to that Cable vision kind of like the bleeding edge guys in Cable they've got a hosted HD voice service turned up now. Cox all they'll say is they're looking at turning up HD voice in 2011. Comcast their CTO has basically dropped that said that as the company moves to HD voice when they start moving phone calls off the regular phone system they're going to turn up HD but then when any follow-ups Comcast are like well we're not going to comment at this time. So they were doing real assables about it. I mean basically their CTO's talked about it but they're not going to put a timetable there. And then Time Warner Cable is tested HD voice in their labs and then every time they try to pin them down on deployment date they go well you know within five years but they want they just don't want to put their cards on the table. And for all the Cable companies they want all of them to see money out of the enterprise. It's kind of like maxed out residential or they milk the residential. So they see HD and also just businesses making money out of businesses so they want to do so as they deploy SIP trunking and more hosted services for businesses you're going to see HD roll out as a part of that package. Business voice providers. There's a lot of independent hosted providers in North America they've been doing HD voice for a couple of years just to differentiate themselves against the the Verizon's and the AT&T's of the world. 8x8 you'll find them in Staples. You can walk into Staples and buy an 8x8 phone and service. They're the biggest guys in North America doing HD right now. They've got extra phones, IP phones. Right now they've got between 130,000 and 140,000 endpoints deployed you know by the end of June. They're numerous little guys with anywhere from 2,500 to 7,500 endpoints doing HD around the country and then there's also been a lot of talk and I think some of it's just smack talk among the smaller guys for basically getting together and curing all their IP phone numbers to deliver HD voice and other services. There was last fall there was an IP peering alliance press release about how a group of bold and brave you know independent voice providers would all get together and the one press release came and they haven't done DIC. And then this later, earlier this spring then there was an announcement from a cloud communications alliance which seems to be a more formal group of the IP peering people. They've said well we're all going to get together and we're going to do all these wonderful things and then we're going to build this whole huge HD voice, you know, Inter-Tect and you haven't heard anything out of them since. So digging through a little bit more half the guys that are in the X-Connect trial belong to the IP peering alliance and they've also tried to do some interconnections with Brotsoft. Independent consumer plays there's a couple people that are doing HD voice in the consumer world. UMA you've probably heard the UMA commercials. The UMA second generation tele-hardware both supports G722 as well as the cat IQ wireless HD voice standard. In the fourth quarter of 2009 UMA shipped 25,000 units. You do the math conservatively. UMA could ship up to have deployed up to 125,000 units doing HD voice by the end of 2010. But it was very, very raw HD voice initially this year. Earlier in the spring they took a left turn and they started talking about great voice quality, you know, narrow band and it's just like guys. Now the guys that did the Ojo phone world gate they also come out with a second generation video phone and they've got this two year 300,000 unit deal to ship video phones to ACN and it supports both HD voice, you know, video but it also supports G722. HD voice by region. As noted Europe led by France Telecom. You're starting to see a lot of movement there. Asia, Austria, Australia and Telstra are offering hosted service right now. Korea and Japan are offering HD voice services but it's hard to tell what once you translate stuff through Google. And then again in North America you've got a lot of stuff going on under the radar. And then finally, Africa and South America, if you're talking about Greenfield rollouts of 3G, 4G networks, they're going to have good potential to have HD voice just tag along. Drivers for the HD voice today, I'll flip through this real quick. Service providers like HD because there's an attraction there. France Telecom, their orange service is like experience and motion and it also allows them to showcase the latest and greatest technology that they've got. They're also thinking that they've got a better quality product that keeps people from switching to another service. France Telecom is not charging extra for broadband HD. Now the big question for service providers, well how do we make money on HD? Nobody knows. There's one possibility is that in a prepaid versus postpaid world, in a prepaid world, you might just get a PSTN quality voice. In a postpaid world, that is where you hand larger checks to the phone company on a regular basis, HD voice might be the quality of service. HD voice is something you might have to pay for and sign up for on a regular contract, but nobody knows. Again, conferencing HD voice is killer app because you get clear information. It's less stressful. Multinational, again, I'll flip through this. Don't care about UC. There are a lot of people on higher ed like to play with cool toys, so you're starting to see large deployments of HD in places like Penn State and Texas Tech. Who accompanies in the HD ecosystem? Again, you've got people like, yeah, I'm pleading. You've got BT Cablevision, France Telecom, Verizon Business CPA. All the IP desks at handset manufacturers do HD voice today. With mobile handset manufacturers like Nokia and Sony Ericsson are supporting HD voice on a France Telecom's network today. All the other phone manufacturers are in the pipeline to support HD voice. LG is probably one of them. Basically, if you went to France Telecom's website and looked at all the vendors supplying them phones today, they're probably going to be supporting HD voice by the end of 2011 because France Telecom, they want HD and all their phones by the end of 2011. You have people like Cisco, Dialogic Ericsson supporting HD at the network core as well. Okay, so how does this all roll out around the world? Macro picture of HD voice today. There's a lot of technology. Technology is out there in abundance. We don't have to reinvent the wheel. It's already out there. And as I noted before, there's a lot of HD islands out there at enterprises and smaller service providers and soon larger service providers are going to get turned on to HD like Verizon Business is turning on their service. There's a lot of HD islands out there. So in the near term, IP interconnect is coming. The hurdle is getting passed again. Layers 8 and 9, the money into the politics issues, people need to figure out how they're going to make money or how they're going to save money doing HD. Number one, number two, they need to get past the politics of, well, how do I screw Bob or, you know, I can connect to Bob and it's not going to hurt me if they have to get through that mindset. Longer term, you'll hear about Super Wideband coming along as a Kodak or CP upgrade. And the reason why is, well, the question in my mind is are people going to push for Super Wideband or not? And the answer is who the hell knows. We've sat around since 1937 with narrowband voice and we're just getting around to upgrading to HD. Super Wideband may take this another 20 years. It may not. Because upgrading to Super Wideband is just a Kodak and an end user hardware. So you look overseas, mobile HD voice is going to happen faster. The reason why is the typical handset life cycle is about, you know, three years plus minus. Japan's slightly faster in the US a little bit more. But it's an arms race. These guys make money off of selling handsets. So plug in an HD, plug it into mics that's the latest and greatest stuff. So the more features that they can add and the more that faster processors help them, the more they can do HD. Broadband, the most interesting part about talking about Broadband is that for Ryzen it basically is going to boil down to Ryzen versus AT&T who blinks first. Cable companies are on their little path to have HD voice generally available both for businesses and probably residences in the 2011-2012 time frame. And the general consensus is that once one large carrier is a Comcast or Time Warner does it, everybody else is going to have to have it because they have to be like the Joneses. Okay, so for more HD voice information you can visit the website, find the presentation on there on WWHD voice news, and then there's some other resources as well floating around. But contact me but anybody got any questions? Yeah. You know the USO companies are just so hard to figure out. I would say that as soon as they figure out how to do VoIP over LTE HD will come shortly after because then it's just a codec thing. There's all this gnashing about Volga doing voice over LTE and they just establish those standards. I'd say probably no earlier than 2011, it will be 2011-2012 but basically if you're going to do VoIP from a purist standpoint, from a supported standpoint if you're going to do VoIP, then you might as well do HD. Now I can turn that on its head and I can go over the top. If I've got a 3G or 4G phone, like an Android phone, then I can load in something like CipDroid or CipClient and then you and I could just talk. But from a GA perspective, generally available perspective, it's probably like late 2011-2012. Well everybody wants to move to do Cip peering. Well it's complicated. The cable industry in general is starting to move to more federated model and using all Cip. Right now they just exchange calls and they do settlements. But that gets to even more and more problematic because everybody's got a flat rate plan these days. Unless you're doing on a prepay basis. Other questions? Well have a good one. I'm getting off the stage. Thank you very much.