The obstacles and challenges AT&T may face.
I want to say at the outset that it's purely a coincidence that the last two posts went up the same morning; I was working on the AT&T FCC filing piece and had it posted before I saw Sorell's item. So the timing wasn't deliberate, but Sorell's post certainly points up the complications and push-back that AT&T is likely to get with its PSTN sunsetting proposal.Also, as Allan Sulkin noted in a Comment to my post, AT&T's proposed PSTN phase-out isn't based on altruism, but a desire to shed a burdensome legacy infrastructure. Of course, AT&T's argument is that, if they were any other (i.e., unregulated) company, they wouldn't even need to ask anyone's permission before shedding that burden.
Apart from the issues Sorell raises about voice network capacity, and the persistence of voice as a primary communications medium (which yesterday seems to have demonstrated), there are more issues, such as lifeline power. Today, cutting the cord and going all-mobile, or opting for cable or other VOIP, is a choice, and it's a choice that the informed consumer makes with the realization that they will not have landline service during a power outage--and if the power outage is due to some larger emergency, the cellular network may experience call blocking. Phasing out the PSTN means lifeline power is no longer available even to those who want it.
As Allan suggests in his Comment, phasing out a major technology platform is tough to do quickly. Presumably AT&T knows this as well as anyone, and is simply trying to light a fire under a regulatory process that can drag on.The obstacles and challenges AT&T may face.
