RE: [3-Standard] Europe & North American Standard

["EXT Byoung-Jo \"J\" Kim" <macsbug@research.att.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ext-ip-location@research.nokia.com
> [mailto:owner-ext-ip-location@research.nokia.com]On Behalf Of EXT Teddy
> A Purwadi
> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2000 8:53 AM
> To: ext-ip-location@research.nokia.com
> Subject: [3-Standard] Europe & North American Standard
>
>
> According to the limited BW, Why the industries not jump directly
> to 3G Standard, instead of PCN Development.

I don't know what PCN means, but the progress to 3G is not as easy as one would
think for various technical and non-technical reasons. It'd require too much
space here, and is largely irrelevant to the interest of this group.

>
> The Internet Technology on IETF Drafts are also very important.

What are these?

>
> IMHO, then Wireless community has to be considered to study
> and release public need of Cellular Internet Phone/Telephony
> Packect Based instead of Circuit Switch Based.
>

In fact, this has been going on for a while in various places, including some
standard groups and consortiums.
Again, commercial, carrier-grade voice over packet is not as easy as one would
think as seen in wired network, not to mention in wireless.
Also, wireless systems are highly optimized for voice so far, mainly to conserve
spectrum usage. Going packet over the air does not exactly save you spectrum.

 > Please apologized if the above messages are out of topic.
>

Yes, I think these are not quite related to the location issues discussed here.
Just wanted to clear a few points.

J.