Thread Subject: Re: VoIP enabled cell phones

Note

This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.

From: Jim Tobias
Date: Thu, Dec 21 2006 11:45 AM

Why would we want to create separate accessibility rules for VoIP and
non-VoIP? Just because the FCC has purely historical difficulties
regulating VoIP doesn't mean that we have to. Frankly, we've been waiting 6
years for an answer to the VoIP question -- why wait longer when we have the
opportunity and are in fact being asked to press forward?

It seems better for everyone if we bite the bullet and create a single voice
telephony accessibility framework. It may be that manufacturers and service
providers will actually benefit from this simplicity and clarity.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2006 11:53 AM
> To: 'TEITAC Telecommunications Subcommittee'
> Cc: 'TEITAC General Interface Accessibility Subcommittee'
> Subject: Re: [teitac-telecom] VoIP enabled cell phones
>
> You might treat PSTN and VoIP products as separate, with a
> separate set of
> rules for each (which may be mostly - but not all- the same).
> You can then
> say what rules apply to each (for 508 which covers both) yet
> make it easy to
> separate the requirements for 255 (for as long as it only
> covers one). In
> the future if congress says that VoIP should be under the
> same or separate rules we would be all set.
>
>
> Gregg
> -- ------------------------------
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Pam
> > Ransom
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 2:47 PM
> > To: TEITAC Telecommunications Subcommittee
> > Subject: Re: [teitac-telecom] VoIP enabled cell phones
> >
> > David - There is always a challenge of working on two completely
> > different laws in one "refresh', and keeping the parameters
> of the two
> > different laws separate.
> >
> > Speaking only about Section 255 of the Telecom Act - VoIP is not
> > covered. In fact the FCC's 255 Report and Order included a Further
> > Notice of Inquiry asking whether VoIP should be covered by
> 255 - and
> > since that time (1999) the FCC hasn't taken any action on
> that Further
> > Notice of Inquiry.
> >
> > Our subcommittee can certainly discuss and make suggestions
> about VoIP
> > in the 255 context, however the Advisory Subcommittee
> doesn't have the
> > authority to determine that VoIP is covered by 255, only
> the FCC has
> > that authority.
> >
> > Pam Ransom
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Baquis David " < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > To: < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > Sent: Friday, December 15, 2006 3:42 PM
> > Subject: [teitac-telecom] VoIP enabled cell phones
> >
> >
> > > I received a technical assistance inquiry today from
> > someone who asked
> > > if there are TTY-accessible VoIP (Voice of Internet
> > Protocol) enabled
> > > cell phones.
> > >
> > > Beyond my days in the TTY Forum, I was uncertain if there are new
> > > wireless VoIP accessibility barriers that I might not be aware of.
> > > Perhaps the wireless industry can offer expert input on
> > this. I would
> > > need a basic primer as to how a regular digital cell
> phone differs
> > > from a VoIP cell phone.
> > >
> > > Related to that, I wonder if the subcommittee has considered
> > > recommending whether VoIP should be addressed *explicitly* in the
> > > refresh. We get that yes/no question about whether VoIP
> > products are
> > > covered. We have people who specifically look for the
> > term, VoIP, in
> > > the standards.
> > >
> > > Perhaps you can address this point specifically, in your upcoming
> > > status report to the plenary about your subcommittee
> > discussions. Some
> > > people are of the opinion that the standards apply to telecom
> > > functionality and that it should not matter whether a phone
> > is analog,
> > > digital or VoIP - that they are all covered. On the other
> > hand, others
> > > are uneasy about appearing to preempt the FCC by saying
> > VoIP products
> > > are telecom covered by accessibility regulations, before
> > they say so.
> > > We cut VoIP out of the current published telecom technical
> > assistance
> > > for that reason. The flip side of this question is how
> > would you feel
> > > about refreshed standards that said absolutely nothing
> > about VoIP. I
> > > can tell you that it would not serve the needs of federal
> customers
> > > who want clarity on that subject of how to know with
> > confidence that
> > > the new VoIP system they want to buy is fully accessible.
> > >
> > > David Baquis
> > > Accessibility Specialist
> > > U.S. Access Board
> > > 1331 F Street, NW, #1000
> > > Washington, DC 20004
> > > 800-USA-ABLE; (202) 272-0013 (voice) www.access-board.gov;
> > > = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> > >
> > >

WebAIM is an initiative of:
Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD) Utah State University