May 13, 2007

E911 In The Spotlight: Comcast

Duncan Riley

22 comments »

Come Monday morning Comcast is going to wake to a big public relations nightmare, one that although directed at Comcast’s Digital Voice service may well throw the spotlight on VOIP providers supporting the E911 service.

The publisher of It Can Happen To You writes that 911 on Comcast Digital Voice failed when he tried to use it to contact emergency services after his son started having a seizure. Several attempts were made and each one failed to connect. He was then forced to use his cell phone to contact 911, losing even more time by having to then explain his location to the operator.

Despite numerous attempts to contact some one in authority at Comcast to complain and highlight the issue, the writer failed.

The story is already huge on Digg, and is bound to get further airplay Monday.

The failure of 911 to work on a closed system such as Comcast Digital Voice raises questions about the effectiveness of all non-traditional users of the E911 system, VOIP providers included. We know that 911 calls work on a regular land line, but with a history of issues in the past, and now this story, consumers may well feel hesitant in subscribing to VOIP and similar systems in the future. After all, who in the United States doesn’t want 911 on hand in an emergency?

Sphere It

This entry was posted on Sunday, May 13th, 2007 at 11:35 pm and is filed under Web 2.0 News & Ideas. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

Things That ... Make You Go Hmm

May 14th, 2007 at 8:35 am

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

tomthree

May 14th, 2007 at 12:09 am

If this is true, heads are going to roll at Comcast.

Let’s not even mention how thats going ot affect the FCC’s position on TQOS issues with VOIP.
Debbie Davies

May 14th, 2007 at 12:13 am

Come Monday morning Comcast is going to wake to a big public relations nightmare…..

News is reporting what’s happened, not guessing what’s about to happen, especially when the news you’re speculating about happened on 14th March.
Duncan Riley

May 14th, 2007 at 12:19 am

SEOMash
noticed the date but it was top of Digg when I wrote the post. True or not it’s still bad publicity, and the 911 over VOIP issue pre-dates this site
Duncan Riley

May 14th, 2007 at 12:21 am

Debbie, thousands of Diggs on a story now = news. But the mob could be wrong I guess.
RBA

May 14th, 2007 at 12:23 am

EVen if it happened on March 14th, it seems that public awareness is happening now. If you didn’t know about it, it’s news to you. If most of the world didn’t know, it’s news.

As for Comcast, don’t get me started….
Kewtr

May 14th, 2007 at 12:36 am

I don’t care how you call them, they always ask for your address. I don’t know abot him, but I can speak mine. He didn’t ‘lose even more time’ explaining where he was, and if he did then why isn’t the cell phone operator in the spotlight? My cell phone claims to send location info, but I’m not relying on it as the first option.

You know, totally diaper-needing-dependent-people are going to keep the rest of us from enjoying newer, cheaper services unburdened by the garbage of the past. The whole E911 was mandated on VoiP, which came along as a great way to save money on long-distance. A combination of attempts by old phone companies trying to regulate them into impracticality and a bunch of tools that just couldn’t conceive of a voice service that didn’t necesssarily include emergency extras, and now we’ve got stupid stuff like this.

It happens with car safety so we never get better mileage, it happens with medicine so new medicines are delayed for those that need them, and it happens in technology because so many are just morons. There should be some sort of availability of a waiver that says ‘I am not an infant, I can handle this’ before people sign up for half of this stuff, or we won’t get any of it.

BTW, if he didn’t connect the first time, and he tried ’several’ times before even trying his cell phone, heaven help his son in the future. Your Dad’s a tool, kiddo.
Kewtr

May 14th, 2007 at 12:42 am

And by the way, I have Comcast, and surprise of surprises, it’s down sometimes. What kind of idiot takes the chance of that on a 911 call? And how does he know that wasn’t the case then? The reason it doesn’t cost hundreds and hundreds per month is that it’s not up 100% of the time. If you need that, spend the $1500 a month on a T1 and set up some VoiP over that. But no, he buys the cheapest service out there and is shocked it’s not perfect. Some of us don’t want perfect, we want cheap, available most of the time. This type of moron makes that harder to get.
Debbie Davies

May 14th, 2007 at 1:36 am

I would treat Digg as one source and before writing a story based on something I’d seen on Digg I would speak to a second source (I know, I’m dead boring). Also, I wouldn’t write about this without speaking to Comcast. If you don’t research what you write you’re just reporting what you’ve seen on Digg which isn’t telling anyone anything they can’t see for themselves.
patricia

May 14th, 2007 at 2:01 am

I heard that something like this was on a message board about Vonage, also. I don’t know if it’s true.

I’m a little rusty on VoIP but generally the reason why calls drop, jitter or fail to connect is because the voice packet needs to be given provision over the data packet or the network won’t recognize it. It isn’t always the carriers fault that it happens - my ISP at the office doesn’t provision, so between 12-2 my VoIP phone almost never works. I don’t know Comcast’s network (I believe it’s new?) or if that’s the cause, but it’s just one of the many things (including the 911 issue, CALEA, etc) that have been problems from the start with VoIP and essentially are still being worked out.

Anybody who has been on VoIP for a while knows it’s not reliable. Consumers should be told also.
Josh

May 14th, 2007 at 4:33 am

A lot of the comments on Digg were in support of Comcast. It’s awful that this guys son had a seizure, but I don’t see howComcast was at fault. It was a single occurence on a technology that is known for its unreliability.

From the sound of it the support person was as helpful as they could be in their position. Any phone ooperator is well within their rights to terminate a call if the customer swears at them. The customer support rep hanging up didn’t cause any further danger to the child.
Allen Stern

May 14th, 2007 at 5:50 am

Maybe we all need those “I’ve fallen and I can’t get up” buttons?

Duncan - you are in the AU right? What’s 911 service like there?
pr0xy k1ll3r

May 14th, 2007 at 6:22 am

The DAD put his kid at risk and NOT comcast. What kind of an idiot relies on VoIP to call 911?? Don’t most of them like skype say it is not a substitute for a real phone es. during emergencies.
Any yea.. saying Fuck You at 2 am to someone who is asleep in Texas is not going to help the case either!
pallet jack

May 14th, 2007 at 7:16 am

rather it gets news or not - it needs to be fixed …. cause it a life. at stake not just corporate stock ..
patricia

May 14th, 2007 at 9:38 am

Well, and 911 really isn’t perfect everywhere as it is - the average wait times to get on L.A.’s 911 system and also to get response to your call/emergency can take up to several hours. Just to get the actual operator can take a while even if you are having a dire emergency. They triage calls based on most critical and in a city this big, it’s always a huge hassle. If somebody breaks the law and nobody’s injured, it can take two hours before the cops get there.
brian

May 14th, 2007 at 11:12 am

I’m somewhat amazed that you guys picked up on this non-event from an unconfigured blog with only a single post 2 months ago. There’s no backing to the story and no follow-up. Good example of how to get something on the front page of Digg (and apparently techcrunch).

C’mon, back to real news.
Supercrackmonkey

May 14th, 2007 at 12:01 pm

Maybe the dude should be pissed at his for having the sezure
Supercrackmonkey

May 14th, 2007 at 12:34 pm

OR MAYBE HIS OWN DUMB ASS FOR DIALING 411 NOT 911
Sylvan Learning Center

May 14th, 2007 at 12:54 pm

Let me break this down slowly as we being to follow the path to elightenment. First of all every single poster in here has claimed that Digital Voice is a VOIP when technically it is not. VOIP use public servers that any internet mungrel has his fingers on while the Comcast Digital Voice (CDV) uses its own personal servers to make phone calls. Now at no point in time is this information ever broadcasted over the Internet Protocal. This service simplifies several attempts at trying to fix all the issues found within phone. Now with this particular situation there are many facts that are missing.

Did the subscriber get a dial tone?
Did the subscriber recieve an error message and if yes what was it?
Was this the 1st or 2nd line on the EMTA box? (IE modem for the service)
Was the subscriber home or was he using his modem in another residence like most VOIPers pathetically choose to do?

Now this is all stated as if this particual article as being true. Being that i read the newspaper on a daily basis, I have not seen this article. Now being that i am a father, i can tell you now this would not go unnoticed so i am sure it would be printed somewhere. These questions i have listed above can explain every single issue. No dail tone means the box is either unplugged or not getting signal. Signal issues can be as simple as the line outside his home being down or the cable line behind his box is loose. Now comcast has a system that every 30-45 minutes will ping the box to confirm its connection. They use this system to determine outages as well to make sure their phone works at all times. So moving on to the next question of thumb. If the sub recieved an error message it could explain the whole ordeal. It could be as simple as dialing the wrong number or reaching an error message on 911’s boards.
If it was the 2nd line on the box then it is possible that not all the features were turned on. This is an option that comcast gives to save the subscriber money if they choose to have a fax line. Now the cream of the crop, If the sub was using his EMTA at a different location then the CDV is not going to work nor would the Enhanced 911. VOIP is crap because it has no dependablity and therefor easy to use everywhere due to its low connection standards. *begins to mimic the robotic underwater voice of all VOIP* Now being that comcast never allows its connections to touch the scummy world of the net, its able to confirm signal quality strength and to make sure its connected at all times. So many companies are not switching to fiber when comcast has been for over 10 years.

If this had been any other call there would not be a stink. But because you made this garbage up about the need for the call and then you lathered this fat ass of a story up by putting some kid into the mix you are trying to stir others in your distain of this product.

Did someone not get a discount when they called last? Boo whoo Everyone says that cable raises their rates when the FCC forces every single communication service to hike their rates and change their programs. Cable has gotten crap for the longest time and i am sick of uninformed tards like yourself trying to pull your nuts on your keyboard and hope it touches back.

TAKE A LOOK IN A BOOK READING RAINBOW!!!!
patricia

May 14th, 2007 at 1:23 pm

Hmm… I thought at least part of the network had some kind of IP part to it. Anyway, Vonage service sucks a lot of the time because of the issue I mentioned.
Supercrackmonkey

May 14th, 2007 at 1:39 pm

ANYONE WHO TAKES VONAGE FOR PHONE SERVICE SHOULD BE DRUG OUT IN THE STREET AND SHOT IN THE BALLS FOR BEING A MORON TO PAY THAT MUCH FOR A SERVIE THAT DOES NOT WORK. SURE VONAGE MAY BE 24.99 BUT THEN YOU HAVE TO ALSO PAY FOR A HIGH SPEED CONNECTION ON TOP OF IT. FREAKING MORONS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Neil

June 2nd, 2007 at 4:53 pm

“ANYONE WHO TAKES VONAGE FOR PHONE SERVICE SHOULD BE DRUG OUT IN THE STREET AND SHOT”

I know I’m not the grammar police, but I had to get this one off my chest. DRUG is NOT the past tense of drag. Dragged is the past tense of drag. DRUG is something that people take to alter there body chemistry, either based on a doctor’s prescription, or their own need to self medicate.