Section 1: Project Overview

Appalachian Regional Commission
Videoconferencing Survey

Final Report

December 2000

133 Front Street
Vestal, NY 13850
TEL 607 754-5037
FAX 607 754-6975
www.myersgroup.com
info@myersgroup.com

Appalachian Regional Commission Videoconferencing Survey

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section 1: Project Overview.................................................................................................. 1
A. Study Background ........................................................................................................ 1
B. The Digital Divide ......................................................................................................... 2
C. The ARC ...................................................................................................................... 3
D. Videoconferencing Basics ............................................................................................ 3

Section 2: Project Summary and Methodology ..................................................................... 7
A. Phase I: Discovery Period ............................................................................................ 7
B. Phase II: Development Period ...................................................................................... 9
1. Local Development District Surveys.......................................................................... 9
2. Public Videoconferencing Site Survey....................................................................... 9
C. Phase III: Data Collection and Mapping ..................................................................... 11
D. Phase IV: Analysis ..................................................................................................... 12
E. Phase V: Plan, Recommendations and Documentation.............................................. 13

Section 3: Findings ............................................................................................................. 14
A. Public Videoconferencing Sites .................................................................................. 14
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 14
2. Technology ............................................................................................................. 19
3. General and Facility Information ............................................................................. 42
4. Key Observations Regarding Public Site Information .............................................. 51
B. Local Development Districts ....................................................................................... 52
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 52
2. Local Development District Information................................................................... 53
3. LDDs with In-House Videoconferencing Systems ................................................... 55
4. LDDs that use Videoconferencing Elsewhere ......................................................... 57
5. LDDs that do not use Videoconferencing ................................................................ 58
6. Key Observations.................................................................................................... 60

Section 4 - Analysis ............................................................................................................ 62
A. Appalachia, Videoconferencing and the Digital Divide ................................................ 62
B. Access to Videoconferencing in Distressed Counties ................................................. 64
2. Square Mileage Analysis........................................................................................ 68
C. Access to Videoconferencing by Population............................................................... 73
D. Organization Types .................................................................................................... 75
E. Areas Where Videoconferencing Does Not Exist........................................................ 77
F. Local Development Districts ....................................................................................... 79

Section 5 - Recommendations............................................................................................ 82
A. Organization and Communication Among LDDs and the ARC ................................... 84
B. Capitalizing on Competition and New Developments ................................................. 86
C. Promotion of H.320 Equipment as a Standard for Interconnection ............................. 90
D. Targeting Videoconferencing Development................................................................ 93

© 2000 The Myers Group ▪ 607-754-5037 ▪ info@myersgroup.com


TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1 - Percentage of Total Sites in each ARC State ......................................................................15
Figure 2 - Concentration of Sites within each State..............................................................................16
Figure 3 – Map of Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by Zip Code ......................................17
Figure 4 – Map of Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by County..........................................18
Figure 5 - Public Videoconferencing Site System Types......................................................................20
Figure 6 – Map of Videoconferencing System Types by Zip Code ......................................................21
Figure 7 - Public Videoconferencing Site Equipment Manufacturers ...................................................22
Figure 8 - Switched Network Connection for Videoconferencing .........................................................23
Figure 9 - Dedicated Network Connection for Videoconferencing........................................................23
Figure 10 - Hybrid Switched/Dedicated Connection for Videoconferencing.........................................24
Figure 11 - Public Videoconferencing Site Connection Capabilities.....................................................25
Figure 12 - Technical Standards: System Interoperability ....................................................................26
Figure 13 – Map of H.320 Capability of Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by Zip Code.....27
Figure 14 - Summary of Videoconferencing Transmission Technologies ............................................28
Figure 15 - Network Capabilities of Public Videoconferencing Sites in the Appalachian Region ........29
Figure 16 - Public Videoconferencing Site Bridging Capabilities..........................................................31
Figure 17 - Public Videoconferencing Site Bridging Methods ..............................................................32
Figure 18 – Map of Videoconferencing Sites with Bridging Capabilities by Zip Code..........................33
Figure 19 - Public Videoconferencing Site Media.................................................................................34
Figure 20 - Public Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds........................................................37
Figure 21 – Map of Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds by Zip Code .................................38
Figure 22 – Map of Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds (T-1).............................................39
Figure 23 – Map of Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds (Broadband Fiber) .......................40
Figure 24 – Map of Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds (ISDN)..........................................41
Figure 25 - Public Videoconferencing Site Organization Types ...........................................................43
Figure 26 – Map of Videoconferencing Sites by Organization Type by Zip Code................................45
Figure 27 – Map of Health Videoconferencing Sites by Zip Code........................................................46
Figure 28 – Map of Government/Public/Non-Profit Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by Zip
Code .............................................................................................................................................47
Figure 29 – Map of Education Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by Zip Code ...................48
Figure 30 – Map of Business Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by Zip Code.....................49
Figure 31 - LDD Videoconferencing Capabilities..................................................................................53
Figure 32 – Map of LDD Videoconferencing Use in the ARC Region by County.................................54
Figure 33 - LDD In-House Frequency of Use .......................................................................................55
Figure 34 - LDD In-House Primary System Uses .................................................................................56
Figure 35 - LDD In-House Equipment Manufacturers ..........................................................................57
Figure 36 - LDD Use of Videoconferencing Systems Elsewhere .........................................................57
Figure 37 - LDD Frequency of Use of Videoconferencing Systems Elsewhere ...................................58
Figure 38 - LDD Reasons for Not Using Videoconferencing ................................................................59
Figure 39 - LDD (non-using) Knowledge Level of Videoconferencing..................................................59
Figure 40 - LDD (non-using) Potential of Using Videoconferencing.....................................................60
Figure 41- Comparison of Sites per County and Distressed Counties .................................................65
Figure 42 - Site Distribution Among Populations of Distressed and Non-Distressed Counties ...........68
Figure 43 - Square Mileage per Videoconferencing Site......................................................................71



Figure 44 - Percentage Increase in Distressed Counties over Non-Distressed Counties (Square
Mileage and Population)...............................................................................................................72
Figure 45 - Comparison of the average number of people per videoconferencing site based on county
population categories ...................................................................................................................73
Figure 46 - Comparison of the average square mileage per videoconferencing site based on county
population categories ...................................................................................................................74
Figure 47 - Organization Types of Videoconferencing Sites within Distressed Counties.....................76
Figure 48 - Organization Types of Videoconferencing Sites within Non-Distressed Counties.............76
Figure 49 - Percentage of Counties with No Videoconferencing Sites.................................................77
Figure 50 - Percentage of Total Counties without Videoconferencing .................................................78
Figure 51 - Percentage of Population without Videoconferencing Facilities in their County ................79
Figure 52 – Patterns of Videoconferencing Use in Among LDDs by Availability of Videoconferencing
in the LDD Territory ......................................................................................................................80
Figure 53 – Average Sites per County vs. Patterns of Use ..................................................................81



Section 1: Project Overview

A. Study Background
In August of 1998 the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) agreed to support a
proposal from the Development District Association of Appalachia (DDAA) to fund a number
of activities to assist the Association’s 71 component Local Development Districts (LDD's).
The activities were designed to help the LDDs in the development of enhanced
telecommunication applications/technologies, become more capable in the use of these
technologies and assist in the provision of technical services in telecommunications. The
DDAA proposal included the provision of comprehensive technical assistance on the use of
various types of telecommunication services, the use of the Internet and development of
individual Web sites.

The proposal also included the support of a demonstration program by some of the LDDs in
the use of their existing videoconferencing equipment to address regional information
gathering, receiving and transmitting training programs, and other collaborative efforts
between LDDs, State ARC offices, and the ARC headquarters in Washington, DC.

The purpose in conducting this study is to further the DDAA’s overall project by identifying
publicly accessible, interactive video teleconferencing sites in the region that would permit
the 71 LDDs, State ARC personnel, and the ARC headquarters facility to jointly participate
in regional videoconferencing using modern telecommunications technologies and facilitated
videoconferencing techniques.

The rationale for this survey is to identify facilities in the region that can be used by the
region's 71 LDDs, as well as citizens groups, and organizations to originate, and participate
in videoconferencing opportunities of all types. The ARC and the DDAA are cognizant of the
fact that the government, business, education, and medical sectors are all in need of using
videoconferencing that is both economically and practically feasible to use. The DDAA and
ARC are interested in answering four central research questions:

1. Are there adequate numbers of geographically dispersed videoconferencing sites in the
region to permit easy access to routine "point-to-point" videoconferencing?

2. Is there adequate "Bridging" equipment - equipment that permits more than 2 sites to be
able to participate in simultaneously in joint videoconferencing?

3. Are there significant gaps in the dispersion of videoconferencing sites?

© 2000 The Myers Group ▪ 607-754-5037 ▪ info@myersgroup.com 1


4. Are there significant issues of interoperability between systems that exist throughout the
region that will render a number of sites unusable for major regional videoconferencing
purposes?

5. Is it practical for all 71 LDDs to be able to communicate with each other on a routine
basis using videoconferencing equipment?

6. Are there significant challenges that need to be overcome in order to set up such a
network? Challenges could include problems of interoperability between existing
systems, practices, equipment standards, and lack of telecommunication infrastructure.

7. Is it economically practical to set up such a network?

B. The Digital Divide
The availability of videoconferencing in the most rural reaches of the United States has been
brought to the forefront in recent years as the deployment of technology in well-to-do urban
and suburban areas has out-paced technology growth in rural regions. This concept has
been addressed more formally as a social and economic issue in the federal government’s
recent report on the “Digital Divide”, which has brought into light inequities in regard to
access to the Internet and other information technologies that are crucial to the economic
growth and personal advancement of geographic regions.

The Clinton Administration has defined the Digital Divide in this way:

"In just about every country, a certain percentage of people has the best
information technology that society has to offer. These people have the
most powerful computers, the best telephone service and fastest Internet
service, as well as a wealth of content and training relevant to their lives.”
Another percentage of people exist who “…don't have access to the
newest or best computers, the most reliable telephone service or the
fastest or most convenient Internet services. The difference between
these two groups of people is what we call the Digital Divide."1

To live in the rural hills and mountains of Appalachia is to be on the less fortunate side of the
divide. This means that there is less opportunity to take part in the new information-based
economy, and to take part in the education, training, and communications opportunities that
are available through modern telecommunications facilities. Videoconferencing is one
technology that could help bridge this gap.

1
http://www.digitaldivide.gov. Published on the World Wide Web.



The full implications of the Digital Divide in Appalachia and other rural regions throughout
the United States is unknown. Information is spotty, at best, and difficult to collect on a wide
scale basis. The Appalachian Regional Commission Videoconferencing Survey is an effort
on the part of the ARC to examine this one component of the issue, assess the impact and
significance in Appalachia and implement a strategy for regional videoconferencing
throughout the 13-state region.

C. The ARC
The Appalachian Regional Commission is a federal/state partnership established by the
Appalachian Regional Development Act to promote economic and social development of the
Appalachian Region. The Act defines the Region as 406 counties comprising all of West
Virginia and parts of Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, New York, North
Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia - an area of 195,000
square miles and about 21 million people. To promote local planning and implementation of
ARC initiatives, the Commission supports 71 Local Development Districts (LDDs) comprised
of groups of counties within each of the 13 states. The Commission has 14 members: the 13
Governors of the 13 Appalachian states and a Federal Co-chairman, who is appointed by
the President.

For over 35 years, the Commission has assisted a wide range of programs in the Region,
including highway corridors; community water and sewer facilities and other physical
infrastructure; health, education, and human resource development; economic development
programs, local capacity building and leadership development. Recent analysis of the 406
counties within the ARC region, based on the Commission's 1998 definitions of economic
development levels, indicate that 108 counties were designated distressed because of high
rates of poverty and unemployment and low rates of per capita market income compared to
national averages; 264 counties were designated transitional, with higher than average rates
of poverty and unemployment rates and lower per capita market income; 24 counties have
nearly achieved parity with national socioeconomic norms and are now designated as
competitive, and 10 counties have reached or exceeded national norms and are now
designated as attainment counties. In keeping with changing regional conditions, the
Commission periodically alters its specific program policies to address current development
priorities. ARC also continuously evaluates its programs and policies to assure that its
constituents needs are satisfied in the most optimum way possible.

D. Videoconferencing Basics
For the purposes of this study, videoconferencing is defined as the commonly accepted
methods of communication via two-way, interactive video in which a participant at one
geographically distinct location can view a video image of, and speak with, at least one other
participant at a different geographic location (and visa versa). While the quality of video and
audio may vary widely from one type of videoconferencing session to another, when



engaged in a videoconferencing session, all participants must be experiencing an equivalent
level of communication which includes live interactive video and real-time interactive audio
communication (with no more than a few seconds of delay from the time of the origination of
the signals to the time of the receipt of the signals at the far end).

Several types of video communication were considered to be outside the scope of this
analysis. For example, some forms of satellite video communication or broadcast video, it
can be argued, can be interactive if persons viewing the program can interact via some
other means (such as a telephone or fax machine). For the purposes of this study, these
types of conferencing arrangements were not considered.

Videoconferencing, in this report, is a collection of technologies that form the foundation for
a wide variety of applications. The term videoconferencing refers to these applications and,
to a lesser degree, the technologies that support them.2 In a videoconference, the picture
and sound travel from place to place as computer data or as analog video signals.

Analog Videoconferencing

Analog videoconferencing technology is typically associated with an “older” form of
interactive video, however, many analog videoconferencing networks still exist and provide
extremely good quality video and audio. An analog video typically operates on a closed-
circuit basis among several sites. In other words, a site employing analog interactive video
technology can not “dial-up” another location unless it is one of the sites on the “closed-
circuit” network.

An analog videoconferencing network provides full-motion video signals using the standard
for broadcast television originally developed in 1948 (NTSC). This is the standard that all
standard (non-HDTV) televisions in the United States use. Because NTSC video signals
consume so much bandwidth, analog interactive video is typically provided via dedicated
coaxial or fiber optic cable. Generally these type of connections are costly. Each individual
video signal and audio signal at the point of origination is modulated onto the cable and then
demodulated at the other end to be viewed on a television monitor.

Digital Videoconferencing

In digital videoconferencing systems, captured video and audio signals are converted to
computer data, processed by computer circuits (or coded), routed through phone lines made
for computer data, and finally converted back (decoded) into video and audio. Since video
contains too much information to be sent through traditional types of dial-up telephone lines,
video signals must be converted into computer data and converted back into a video signal
again at the other end.



The flood of raw data generated by live video and audio could fill hundreds of digital phone
lines to capacity. Therefore, digital videoconferencing relies on compression to fit all that
data onto a single telecommunications circuit. The device that performs the compression
(and decompression) is called a CODEC (which is a concatenation of the words COder and
DECoder). Video, audio and data all connect into the codec, which transmits a single, digital
signal over the network to the remote location(s). The network consists of digital lines that
are similar to, but different from, regular telephone lines.

The growing worldwide network of dial-up digital phone lines provides this compressed
audio and video a way to move from place to place. The two most common kinds of dial-up
digital services are called ISDN BRI (Integrated Services Digital Network, Basic Rate
Interface) and switched-56. ISDN BRI provides two data channels, each with a capacity of
64kbps (for a total of 128Kbs). Switched-56 has a pair of 56-kpbs data channels instead.
Higher capacity is also available in a different kind of line, such as ISDN PRI (Primary Rate
Interface). This offers up to twenty-three (23) 64kbps channels (plus one 64Kbs channel for
signaling) that can be used to gain greater capacities.

Often, a single codec can accept multiple ISDN BRI lines or multiple switched 56 lines which
improves the overall bandwidth that is used (i.e. three (3) BRI lines @ 128Kbs = 384Kbs)
and thus improves the quality of the video and audio.

Many systems use a common set of standard techniques, so they can communicate with
systems made by other manufacturers. The standards include H.320, H.323, H.261, T.120
and many others.

The most common standard is H.320, which covers a suite of standards for
videoconferencing over ISDN, switched-56, and other kinds of digital phone lines. It deals
with data rates between 56 kbps and 2048 kbps. T.120 is a standard that compliments the
H.320 standard allowing for computer-based meeting tools - such as computerized slide
displays, WindowsTM application sharing, and digital whiteboards. These tools work by
sending and receiving data through the same line that carries the H.320 video and audio
signals.

Another standard gaining in significance is H.323, which covers video communication via IP
(Internet Protocol). The H.323 suite of standards allows for interactive video communication
over any variety of data network that communicates via IP and, of course, the internet.

Several proprietary standards also exist in which only devices of the same manufacturer
(and in some cases model) can communicate with one another. One example includes

2
Trowt-Bayard, Toby and Wilcox, Jim. "Videoconferencing and Interactive Multimedia: The Whole Picture," Flatiron Publishing.
1997.



Tektronix J-Series equipment that operates using a protocol called Motion JPEG. Using this
equipment, all sites must be equipped with J-Series codecs to communicate with one
another.

Multi-point videoconferences (3 or more videoconferencing systems participating together in
a session) are possible with the use of a videoconferencing bridge. A bridge works by either
switching the video and audio from one site to another or by dividing the participants’
television screens into four quadrants and placing the video image of each participant in one
of the quadrants of the screen.

Television monitors are used for viewing the distant site(s) as well as any documents or
video being exchanged. Other devices, such as a document camera, can be used to share
graphics, and other peripherals such as laptop computers can be connected to the system
as well. The local and distant participants view these simultaneously on the monitors.

Videoconferencing systems are available in a variety of formats. A set-top system allows a
camera to mount directly on top of a television monitor. A roll-about system is the same as a
set-top system, except that the television monitor is integrated with the entire system on a
moveable cart - allowing for its use in different locations. A desktop system integrated with a
personal computer relies on the hardware and software of the PC for videoconferencing.
Finally, some locations maintain dedicated videoconferencing rooms specifically for
videoconferencing and contain permanently mounted equipment. These system types are
further discussed in Section 3 of this document.

Videoconferencing systems usually have one or a combination of the following three
connection capabilities. A switched connection can dial-up any other compatible
videoconferencing system and uses the public network via ISDN, switched 56, an internet
connection, or other method. A dedicated connection can only interact with other sites on a
particular network and connects using one of a host of various connections (i.e. dedicated
56Kbs, broadband fiber, T-1, DS-3, coaxial cable, Virtual Private Network, ATM, frame relay,
or a private IP network). A broadcast-type system, such as a satellite-based, broadcast, or
cable television system only has the capability to receive (or send) video signals from the
outside and to interact requires the use of a telephone, fax machine or other device. As
stated earlier, these types of systems were excluded from this study.



Section 2: Project Summary and Methodology

This section provides a detailed summary of the work completed on this project. A five-
phase plan was developed and carried out to collect, document and analyze information
related to videoconferencing in the Appalachian Region.

Throughout the entire project, a regular reporting schedule was followed to report the study's
progress. Feedback was sought from the ARC during these interactions regarding the
quality and completeness of the information obtained. The videoconferencing facilities
located in the Myers Group offices were used to regularly communicate with the ARC and
project partners.

Written "Status Reports" were submitted to the ARC in August, September, December, and
March, and additional regular updates were provided through e-mails, faxes, phone calls,
and videoconferences. Circumstances arising during the data collection and mapping
phases pushed the project off of the original proposed schedule. However, the additional
time used to verify data and emphasize thoroughness and quality have resulted in a more
complete and accurate study.

The information presented below details the process and resulting action steps that were
taken in the videoconferencing analysis.

A. Phase I: Discovery Period
The goal of this phase was to gather the essential information that formed the platform for
the study. This research helped to define the information collected in the survey instruments
(created in the Development Phase) and helped generate important leads (pursued in the
Data Collection Phase). Finally, the information gathered helped to further define the study
and thus helped to ensure that the information collected was relevant and valuable to the
ARC.

The following steps were completed in gathering information during the Discovery Period:

• Review of Myers Group Relevant Files and Reports − The Myers Group has conducted
numerous videoconferencing and distance learning research studies in the Appalachian
Region. A review of existing archives was completed which produced some initial
investigative information.

• Review ARC Project Files − The Myers Group received information from the ARC
concerning relevant initiatives in the region.



• Key State-Level Contacts − The Myers Group was provided with listings of critical
stakeholders from the ARC that were asked to provide input into the project in the Data
Collection Phase.

• Internet Searches − Broad WWW internet searches were carried-out as an initial
secondary research step to collect background information and identify other sources of
information.

• Review of Existing Videoconferencing Directories − Another secondary research activity
included a review of existing videoconferencing directories available on-line,
commercially or through videoconferencing service providers. An attempt to verify the
accuracy of all secondary research information was completed via primary research
methods (i.e. telephone or written interviews).

• Interview ARC Officials, LDD Staff and Key Contacts − The Myers Group completed
interviews of appropriate representatives from identified project partner groups to seek
input on the type of information to be collected, methods for data collection, other
sources of information, etc.

• Identification of Potential Public Videoconferencing Facilities (Universities, Commercial
Sites, etc.) − Potential public videoconferencing sites including (but not limited to)
universities, community colleges, schools, corporate service facilities, government
entities, hospitals, technical schools, libraries, etc. were identified and contact
information collected for use in data collection.

• Survey/Interview of Industry Contacts − Contacts within the videoconferencing industry
were mined and contacted to identify potential public videoconferencing facilities and
additional leads.

This first pass "forecasted" the type of information that would be gathered during the data
collection phase. This forecasting provided a preview of the content, style, and amount of
related information already available. This information spanned a tremendous range; from a
web site simply stating that videoconferencing is available in Pittsburgh, PA to a web page
providing numerous technical details and contact information about sites all over the world.
This information was later used to create survey instruments in the Phase II: Development
Period and helped to form the platform for the study as a whole.

This phase also marked the beginning of a "snowball effect" for the Data Collection Phase
(Phase III). The Discovery Phase generated many important leads that were used during
Data Collection. As these leads were pursued, more were generated.



B. Phase II: Development Period
During this phase the critical infrastructure was established that enabled the collection of
relevant and valuable information as articulated by the project partners in the Discovery
Phase. During this phase, the survey and interview instruments were created to collect data
and database structures were established.

To capture and manage the collected information, a database was designed using Microsoft
Access. Data entry forms were developed with input masks and drop down boxes designed
to control error during the data entry process. A relational database design was selected to
provide the flexibility needed for data analysis in Phase V. Attachment A provides a sample
view of the data entry form.

Two sets of survey instruments were created: one set for the Local Development Districts
(LDDs) and one set for information collection and verification of public videoconferencing
sites. The content and the form of each survey were based on an assessment of the
information gathered during Discovery. The goal was to design survey forms that concisely
captured the information determined to be most critical to the study. The LDD surveys were
designed to assess the current needs and capabilities of each LDD. The Public Site surveys
were designed to gather very specific contact, technical, and facility information that would
populate the database.

1. Local Development District Surveys
The LDD surveys were designed as telephone surveys. Each survey was preceded by a
letter to each LDD to introduce the project, introduce The Myers Group and to inform each
of the project partners of the goals, process and anticipated results of the project.

The introductory letter and LDD Telephone Survey are included as Attachments B and C,
respectively.

The completion response target was 100% of the Local Development Districts. As with any
mass data collection effort, a challenge arose in having all LDDs complete the survey.
However, all 71 LDDs were interviewed and the results of the survey are provided in Section
3 of this document.

2. Public Videoconferencing Site Survey
Several methods were chosen to administer the Public Site Survey. The goal was to contact
as many sites as possible, as quickly as possible to verify existing information and collect
additional information as appropriate. Based on an assessment of the data compiled during
the Discovery Period, four (4) methods of executing the Public Site Survey were created:



1. Web Survey − A web site was designed with linked web pages including an online
survey form and a description of the project and players. It was determined that web
access to the survey was highly desirable for four reasons: 1) it made the survey easily
accessible via a public medium (the internet); 2) respondents could access the survey at
a time that was convenient for them; 3) it reduced the potential for data entry error (users
entered the data themselves); 4) it saved data entry time (data was imported directly into
the database). All potential respondents were encouraged to utilize the web page. The
URL of this web site was referenced on each of the other survey types described below.

2. E-mail Survey − An email survey was developed that was both text-based − to which a
respondent could reply by using the reply feature − and included a hyperlink to the web
survey URL. This survey was sent to all contacts with known e-mail addresses.

3. Written Survey − A written survey was designed and mailed to those sites without e-mail
addresses but with complete mailing addresses. Each survey referenced the web page
URL and encouraged respondents to use the Internet as the mode of response.
Separate written surveys were drafted for mass mailings to all higher education
institutions and hospitals within the Appalachian Region.

4. Telephone Survey − a survey was designed for the remaining sites which had no other
information available except for a phone number.

Each survey instrument was pre-tested on a small population of subjects to identify and
correct survey flaws and awkward/unclear questions. The instruments were also forwarded
to the ARC for review and comment. The instruments were then reworked prior to final data
collection.

The initial search for sites in the Discovery Period yielded a large amount of information.
This data was filtered for regional appropriateness (only those sites within the ARC region),
technical appropriateness (only two-way interactive video) and other factors which may have
a bearing on the accuracy and relevance of the data. After filtering numerous listings, a total
of 1,800 entries were recorded in the database. After further data cleaning throughout the
project, the number of entries was reduced further to less than 1,400.

Prior to data collection, contact lists were prepared for each survey type. This involved
assessing the available contact information, determining the most appropriate survey type to
administer, and formatting the data appropriately to distribute each survey. The design of
the existing database was altered to manage, record and track contact responses
throughout the rest of the project.



The web survey can be viewed at http://www.myersgroup.com/survey. Samples of the
written, phone, and e-mail survey are included as Attachment D. The data collected using
these surveys is detailed in Phase III: Data Collection.

C. Phase III: Data Collection and Mapping
The goal of this phase was to collect and compile all of the information specified for the
study in an efficient and effective manner. The central objective was two-fold to verify and/or
correct information compiled during Discovery and Development and to collect additional
information relevant to the project.

Many of the sites that passed the filtering processes completed during the Development
Phase proved to have outdated or incomplete information. As a result, many initial survey
attempts resulted in returned surveys or failed responses. Also, approximately 425 sites
were eliminated due to the following reasons: initial contact information was incorrect and
actual videoconferencing site fell outside of the ARC region; the site had no public
videoconferencing facility available at that location; sites that initial research reported had
videoconferencing in fact only had satellite transmission capability; no contact could be
reached to verify the initial site listing. Any surveys returned electronically or via US mail
were tracked and held for follow-up attempts. Sites that were unreachable after all available
avenues for contact (email, us mail phone calls) were exhausted were removed from the list.

Surveys were submitted with information in varying levels of completeness. Typically, most
sites provided complete contact information. Often, however, the Technical or Facility
Information sections were incomplete or questionable in their degree of accuracy. For
example, several surveys were submitted by sites mistaking their satellite downlink
capability for videoconferencing. Incomplete surveys were set aside for a follow-up phone
call or e-mail. Two attempts were made to research any missing information. Consequently,
several site listings have incomplete Technical or Facility information. However, the Contact
Information, the most crucial piece of information for this project, is complete for nearly all
1,375 remaining records.

These were the primary challenges encountered during data collection. As data was
reported, it was entered into the database. Once the bulk of the data was recorded, filters
were created to highlight remaining inaccurate, incomplete, or unclear information. Most of
the inaccuracies fell under the Technical Information Section of the survey. Some sites
contacted The Myers Group for help in completing this section. The Myers Group also
contacted many sites that submitted inaccurate information and corrected the database.

Filtering the data to eliminate errors resulted in a disappointingly low response rate. The
Myers Group was dissatisfied with the number of responses received and thought it was
necessary to distribute another round of surveys. These surveys were sent to the additional
leads and contacts that were generated from the first phase of data collection.



One additional challenge resulted from the timeliness of many responses. A December 1999
deadline was highlighted on each survey, but completed responses continue to arrive at The
Myers Group offices through July, 2000. The data that was collected was graphically
represented on maps as well as in database form.

D. Phase IV: Analysis
The goal of the Analysis Phase of the study was to process the raw information, gathered in
the Data Collection Phase, and transform it into meaningful information directly addressing
the stated goals of the study.

Significant emphasis was placed on crafting appropriate database queries and statistical
analyses to represent the data in a manner that is meaningful to the project partners and
specific to the goals of the study. Queries and analyses were carried out individually for the
LDD needs/requirements evaluation and the videoconferencing site surveys and cross-
queries were generated so that relationships between LDD needs/requirements could be
compared with videoconferencing site availability. Specifically, the following points were
examined:

• Need/Requirements/Criteria for Videoconferencing in LDD sites − This analysis was
based on the survey data collected from the LDDs. A full assessment of each LDD’s
current videoconferencing capabilities, their need for videoconferencing, and the
suitability of this technology to meet current communication requirements was made.

• Identification of Significant Gaps in Videoconferencing Service Availability in the ARC
Region − Gaps in videoconferencing services were identified and represented
graphically in maps identifying potential users and existing services.

• Determine Interoperability Between Existing Videoconferencing Systems − All
detailed technical information regarding standards (i.e. H.320 and H.323) and
technology (i.e. RF, M-JPEG, MPEG, MPEG-2, ISDN) collected throughout the study
was compared. An “Interoperability Map” that graphically demonstrates which sites
can presently communicate was prepared. This information was used to formulate a
strategy for interconnection in the Plan, Recommendations and Documentation
phase of the study.

• Determination of the Practicality of Using Existing Videoconferencing Systems for the
71 LDD's − This analysis was a culmination of many components of the study and
prepared on a regional and individual basis for the LDDs.

• Identification of Challenges for Establishing a Network − Potential barriers and
existing challenges for establishing a network were documented. This information



was critical for the Plan, Recommendations and Documentation Phase of the study
in which methods for overcoming the challenges identified were proposed. The
conclusions drawn from this phase are detailed in Section 3: Data Summary of this
report.

E. Phase V: Plan, Recommendations and Documentation
The goal of this phase was to develop an overall plan for videoconferencing in the
Appalachian Region including specific strategies for the LDD organizations.

This phase involved reviewing all previous work done on this project, devising a strategy for
improving videoconferencing access and generating detailed recommendations. Also
provided are details on videoconferencing access and costs for LDD sites and for
interconnection of other networks.

Results of Phase V are detailed in Section 5 “Recommendations" of this report.



Section 3: Findings

A. Public Videoconferencing Sites

1. Introduction

As stated earlier, one of the primary goals in conducting this study was to identify publicly
accessible, interactive video teleconferencing sites in the region that will permit the LDDs,
State ARC personnel, and the ARC headquarters facility to jointly participate in regional
videoconferencing. It is expected that videoconferencing facilities can be used by the
region's 71 LDDs, as well as citizens groups, and organizations to originate, and participate
in videoconferencing.

In this section, the information gathered about these publicly accessible is presented. The
information gathered on each site is in various levels of completeness. As much information
as possible for each site was recorded using the methods described in the previous section.
Following these best efforts, some of the sites are extremely well documented, some are
moderately documented and still others are incomplete. This resulted from several factors,
including the failure of the site to respond to the survey and the follow-up attempts, a lack of
knowledge on the part of the respondent concerning the technical aspects of the system,
recent changes in technology or services at the site, etc. All information that was available
from each site at the time of data collection was recorded and is presented included in this
section.

The comprehensive survey of public sites examined a wide variety of system types and
organizations in all 13 states to ascertain the suitability of the respective site to participate in
videoconferencing. Each site was asked to provide the following information applicable to
the site participating in regional videoconferencing:

• Location of site, to include county, city, ownership of site, and complete mailing
address. Name of contact person, with telephone number, fax, email and web page
URL

• Availability of site to accommodate different types of original signal transmission over
various types of high speed and wide band network services. Information includes
specific line speed particulars for sites, compression and standards capabilities,
access to "Bridge" facilities, network interface flexibility, and potential system
upgrade capabilities.

• An analysis of what types of videoconferencing equipment components are at each
site: including, name of equipment and model type, ancillary supporting services
such as computer access, fax, whiteboard, overhead camera, etc.



• Cost of use of site, if available and any special use conditions. The information
contains times of day equipment is available, and days of the week, scheduling
requirements, seating capacity of facility, etc.

A total of 1,375 sites are included in this report. This does not imply that there are not
additional sites within the region. The sites included in this survey were found via the
research methods described in this report, and the information included herein is based
on available survey information. With the cost of videoconferencing falling and the
increased availability of ISDN and internet access throughout the US and the ARC
region, it is not possible to capture every site that maintains interactive video capabilities.
The data represents a best effort to gain a snap shot of a period of time in the 4th quarter
of 1999 and 1st quarter of 2000. The information is dynamic as more sites implement
videoconferencing technology, some decommission it and still other upgrade existing
facilities.

2. Public Videoconferencing Site Information

The number of public videoconferencing sites within each state within the ARC region is
reflected below. As expected, Pennsylvania has the overwhelming majority of public sites –
this mostly due to the concentration of sites in the Pittsburgh area and the fact that
Pennsylvania has the greatest number of total counties in the ARC region.

Sites by State MS
SC 2%
PA 1%
NC
45% 3% MD
3%
OH
3%
VA
4%
TN
5%

WV
5%
KY
5%
NY AL
10% GA 6%
8%

Figure 1 - Percentage of Total Sites in each ARC State

Within each state in the ARC region only designated counties fall within the Appalachian
Region – this is true for all states except West Virginia. In the case of West Virginia, the
entire state (all counties) fall within Appalachia. The distribution of Appalachian counties



varies widely across the states. For example, Pennsylvania contains 52 Appalachian
counties, whereas South Carolina contains only 6.

In an attempt to gain a more complete picture and gauge the concentration of
videoconferencing sites within each state, a ratio of the number of sites vs. the number of
Appalachian counties in each state was developed. The three northern-most states (New
York, Pennsylvania and Maryland) were shown to have a significantly higher concentration
of sites (3 to 4 times the concentration), when compared with the states with the next
highest concentration (Georgia and South Carolina). The ratio of public videoconferencing
site to Appalachian county (by state) are presented in the chart below.

Concentration of sites
14
12 12
12
Ratio = sites/counties

10
10
8
6
4 3 3
2 2 2
2 1 1 1 1 1

0
SC MS WV TN KY OH VA AL SC GA NY MD PA
State

Figure 2 - Concentration of Sites within each State

The distribution of public videoconferencing sites is also plotted on Map 1:
Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region (by zip code). Due to variances in street names,
numbers, and other address features, zip codes were used to plot the sites. Each point on
the map represents a unique zip code, and each symbol depicts the number of sites within
that zip code. The videoconferencing site data is also represented in Map 2:
Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region (by County). These maps point out the
distribution and approximate geographic location of all 1,375 public videoconferencing sites
within the ARC region. Each of these sites are characterized by different system types and
manufacturers, interconnection, media, and transmission speeds, and this information is
detailed in the following sections.



Figure 3 – Map of Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by Zip Code



Figure 4 – Map of Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by County



2. Technology

2.1 System Types
Videoconferencing systems are available in a variety of formats. A set-top or roll-
about system that works with a television set allows a camera to mount directly on
top of a television monitor. The monitor may sit on a moveable cart - allowing for its
use in different locations.

A desktop system integrated with a personal computer relies on the hardware and
software of the PC for videoconferencing. A dedicated videoconferencing room is
often a custom-designed room with ancillary equipment for specific purposes
(tracking cameras for teachers in distance learning environments, document
cameras, room control systems, VCRs, etc.).

Set-top system Desktop system integrated Dedicated Videoconferencing
with a PC Room

These system types are found throughout the ARC region. Based on available
survey information, of 1,375 public sites, the majority of the sites list an "unknown"
videoconferencing type because the contact or individual completing the survey did
not know this information or the survey was not completed (or not completed in its
entirety).

Although the primary system type found was Dedicated Videoconferencing Rooms
(16%), it is suspected that the overwhelming majority of the sites listed as unknown
are in fact either set-top/roll-about systems or desk-top systems. This can be inferred
from other data included for each record – including the equipment manufacturer,
videoconferencing standards listed, the seating capacity of the facility, transmission
speeds, etc. Most of the sites that reported "Other", in fact, had multiple types of
systems, and did not specify their primary system type.



Public Videoconferencing System Types

Dedicated Room
16%

Desktop System
2%
Other
unknown
1%
78% Set-Top or Roll-
About
3%

Figure 5 - Public Videoconferencing Site System Types

The distribution of sites is plotted on Map 3: Videoconferencing System Types (by
zip code). Using the zip codes of each site proved the most accurate way of plotting
the collected data, due to variances in street names, numbers, and other address
features. Each point on the map represents a unique zip code, and each symbol
indicates that at least one videoconferencing system of that type is located within
that zip code.



Figure 6 – Map of Videoconferencing System Types by Zip Code



2.2 System Manufacturers
Many manufacturers produce videoconferencing systems. Some of the most popular
equipment manufacturers include Intel, which focuses on desktop computer
conferencing; PictureTel and VTEL, which offer a variety of products but concentrate
on roll-about and set-top type systems. Tektronix and ADC Communications
manufacture broadband fiber and DS3 (high bandwidth) codecs targeted toward
high-bandwidth networks.

Of the dozens of manufacturers of videoconferencing equipment, 7 primary
manufacturers were included in the chart below. Additional manufacturers (primarily
with fewer than 10 references) were grouped in the 'other' category of the chart.

Equipment Manufacturer

PictureTel
27%
Sony
Intel
1%
CLI 2%
2% Tektronix
ADC 4%
2%

VTEL
15%

Other
Unknown 2%
45%

Figure 7 - Public Videoconferencing Site Equipment Manufacturers

2.3 Interconnectivity
Videoconferencing systems usually have one or a combination of the following three
connection capabilities. A switched connection provides the videoconferencing
system with the capability to dial-up any other compatible system regardless of the
location and uses the public switched network via ISDN, switched 56, an internet
connection, or other method. The two systems communicating together can literally
be located anywhere in the world (Birmingham, Alabama and Sidney, Australia for
example), provided the two systems are compatible and operating according to the
same technical standards. Because the connections are typically established via the
public switched telecommunications network, video compression must be used over
narrow bandwidth lines (i.e. ISDN lines at 384Kbs or lower). This degrades the video
signal, to some extent, based on the bandwidth available.



Site A Public Site B
Telephone
Network
CODEC CODEC

Figure 8 - Switched Network Connection for Videoconferencing

Unlike a switched connection, a dedicated connection can only interact with other
sites on a particular network and connects using one of a host of different
technologies (i.e. dedicated 56Kbs, broadband fiber, T-1, DS-3, coaxial cable, Virtual
Private Networks, ATM, frame relay, or a private IP network).

Typically, these dedicated networks are dedicated to a particular function (several
school districts sharing courses via distance learning, hospitals operating a private
video network for telemedical applications). What these dedicated networks give up
in their ability to connect only a limited number of sites, they typically make up for in
video and audio quality. Generally speaking, these networks employ high bandwidth
network connections via fiber optic cable and/or circuits. These networks usually are
capable of reproducing very high quality video and audio and often allow for many
sites to participate together simultaneously.

Site B

CODEC

Site A CODEC CODEC
Site C

CODEC

Site D

Figure 9 - Dedicated Network Connection for Videoconferencing



Some videoconferencing facilities have hybrid systems that operate with both
capabilities (switched and dedicated). Often sites connected together on a closed-
circuit (dedicated) system share a codec that has dial-out capabilities – in a manner
similar to a printer being shared by a number of computers on a local area network.
In this way, the dedicated sites can reap the benefits of both types of systems.

Site B

CODEC

Site A CODEC CODEC Site C

CODEC

Gateway
CODEC

Site D Public
Telephone
Network

Remote Site

CODEC

Figure 10 - Hybrid Switched/Dedicated Connection for Videoconferencing



Broadcast-type systems, such as a satellite-based, broadcast, or cable television
systems only have the capability to receive (or send) video signals from the outside
and to interact requires the use of a telephone, fax machine or other device.
Broadcast systems such as this were not included as part of the study.

The chart below reflects the distribution of the system types that are known in the
Appalachian Region.

Connection Capabilities

Dedicated and Dial-
up Capabilities
Dial-Up Only
5%
54%

Dedicated 'Closed
Circuit Networks'
7%

Unknown
34%

Figure 11 - Public Videoconferencing Site Connection Capabilities

2.4 Videoconferencing Standards: Interoperability of Systems

Most videoconferencing systems subscribe to a common set of standard technical
specifications, so they can communicate with systems made by other manufacturers.
There are today several major standards that apply to business-quality
videoconferencing. Some of the more predominant include H.320, H.323 and H.310.

H.320 has been by far the predominant standard to-date; it is used by 90% of the
existing business videoconferencing equipment and it is the standard for component-
to-component communication in such videoconferencing equipment.

Another standard gaining in significance is H.323, which covers video
communication via IP (Internet Protocol). The H.323 suite of standards allows for
interactive video communication over a variety of data network types that
communicate via IP (including ethernet local area and wide area networks and the
internet). While widely used in private networks, this standard will more than likely
gain in significance for public use as standards for the internet evolve allowing for
guaranteed video quality.



Another standard that is beginning to make substantial inroads is H.310. This
standard dictates the way in which the MPEG encoding schemes inter-operate
together. MPEG and MPEG2 are encoding schemes often used on Asynchronous
Transfer Mode (ATM) networks and is targeted for use for distance learning,
telemedicine and other areas where high quality video is required.

Several proprietary standards also exist in which only devices of the same
manufacturer (and in some cases model) can communicate with one another. One
example includes Tektronix J-Series equipment that operates using a protocol called
Motion JPEG (M-JPEG). Using this equipment, all sites must be equipped with J-
Series codecs connected to a central J-Series switch (DCC45) via a DS-3 circuit to
communicate with one another.

Technical Standards: System Interoperability

MPEG-2
H.323 0%
1% Unknown
33%

Analog
2%

M-JPEG
4%

H.320
60%

Figure 12 - Technical Standards: System Interoperability

Although there is a large percentage of sites for which the technical standards are
not known, it can be inferred from other data that a good portion of these sites are
H.320 compliant.

While very few (8 out of 1,375 identified sites) were listed as having H.323 compliant
videoconferencing equipment (operating via the internet and data networks), this
more than likely does not provide an accurate picture of the actual distribution of this
equipment. Because much of this gear is deployed in internal corporate networks
and used in households for personal videoconferencing applications, it is not
available for public use. Information regarding these systems would therefore not
have been recorded for this study and quite difficult to obtain.



Figure 13 – Map of H.320 Capability of Videoconferencing Sites in the ARC Region by Zip
Code



Each technical standard, circuit type and technology for videoconferencing has its advantages and disadvantages as well as cost
differences. The table below describes some of the more common videoconferencing standards, applications and costs.

STANDARD TELECOM TYPICAL QUALITY COMPATABILITY ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES COST
MEDIUM APPLICATION

M-JPEG FIBER Distance Learning High Quality & Can only connect to other Extremely reliable and Connections with other Flat rate ~
MPEG 2 DS-3 Reliable sites using the same easy to use sites limited only to those $1,800 to
Analog (NTSC) Coaxial Cable Telemedicine technology on the same on the same network. 3,000/mo
Broadcast network. Can connect multiple unlimited usage
Multi-site Television Quality sites
Interactive Typically used for
Programs dedicated networks
connecting several sites in
the same geographic
region

H.320 ISDN or Videoconference Good Quality Can connect with any Universal connectivity Requires additional Usage sensitive
Switched 56 Meetings, H.320 compatible system equipment and services
Via Public Training, Virtual worldwide Uses existing public for multi-point Flat rate ~ $60 to
Switched Field Trips, Video network with familiar videoconferencing 180/mo based on
Telephone Arraignments dialing scheme bandwidth used
Network Usage costs can add up
quick with frequent, Usage
extended calls $20-75/hr

H.323 Ethernet/ Personal Quality Can connect with any Can turn almost any Requires significant Uses existing
IP Network Videoconferencin determined by H.323 user connected via desktop computer into network management Internal
g via internet bandwidth local IP network or via an a videoconferencing oversight to guarantee corporate data
available on the Internet connection system bandwidth networks or
Internal corporate network for video Internet
videoconferencin transmission Can not guarantee quality connection
g via data over Internet connections
network

Figure 14 - Summary of Videoconferencing Transmission Technologies



% of Sites with Both Dedicated (“Closed-circuit”)
and Dial-up Capabilities

% of Sites Connected to a Dedicated “Closed-circuit”
100
Network Only

% of Sites with Dial-up Capabilities
80

60

40

20

0
PA MS WV AL OH TN KY GA SC NC MD NY VA

Figure 15 - Network Capabilities of Public Videoconferencing Sites in the Appalachian Region



2.5 Bridging
Bridging allows for three or more videoconferencing sites to communicate
simultaneously in a session together. Bridging can be achieved in a variety of ways
depending on the type of technology that is being used for videoconferencing. Some
of the more popular forms of bridging are described below.

Bridging via H.320 and H.323 dial-up type systems is often achieved using a device
called a multipoint conferencing unit (MCU). In this scenario, separate
videoconferencing units typically “dial-in” to a MCU. MCUs have multiple ports – the
number of ports determines how many outside systems can dial in. They also have
varying transmission speed capabilities – some can only operate at speeds of
128Kbs, others can operate at higher speeds, such as 384Kbs.

Regardless, participants can only interact at the speed of the weakest link. For
example, if one site dials the MCU at a speed of 384Kbs (high quality video) and two
others dial at a speed of 128Kbs (low quality video), all sites will interact at the lower
quality 128Kbs rate.

How participants view one another is also a function of the capabilities of the
particular model of MCU that is being used. Some MCUs can automatically detect
which site is speaking, keying in on audio signals, and will display the video image of
that site for the other participants. This image will continue to be displayed until
another site begins to speak – at which time the video image will change to that site,
allowing that site then to “take the floor”.

Other MCUs have the capability to “quad-split” the screen (dividing the participants’
individual television screens into four quadrants) and placing the video image of each
participant in one of the quadrants of the screen.

The diagram below depicts four video conferencing units bridged in a
videoconferencing session via an MCU.

Site A Site C

MCU
CODEC CODEC

Site B Site D

CODEC CODEC

Bridging on a dedicated video conferencing network is typically achieved in a
different way – usually via the use of scheduling software that runs on the network.



Through the use of this software, a network administrator can configure the network
to establish sessions between particular sites at particular times. The software, when
programmed with this information, then communicates with the network equipment at
the appropriate time to establish the sessions as programmed. This software can be
web-based and accessible from all locations or it may reside on a controlling network
switch and accessible only through a hard-wired terminal. The diagram below
represents one way in which a dedicated network sites may be bridged and sessions
scheduled.

SITE SITE

TV
TV

TV TV TV TV

SITE
TV Network
Switch
TV TV
Scheduling
Computer
Throughout the ARC region, the various forms of bridging discussed above exist. In
the survey, respondents were asked if bridging capabilities existed for their system or
associated network. The chart below summarizes the responses.

Bridging Capabilities
Yes
22%

No Don't Know
58% 2%

No Response
18%

Figure 16 - Public Videoconferencing Site Bridging Capabilities



In addition to indicating whether or not bridging exists, respondents were asked how
bridging is achieved. For example, does the facility maintain an MCU on site or do
they use an MCU located elsewhere? Typically there are hourly usage charges
associated with the use of an MCU located at a remote location. Many telephone
companies and private telecommunications businesses maintain MCUs and make
them available to organizations that desire multi-point capabilities for scheduled
meetings, training sessions, interviews, etc. The companies that offer bridging
facilities typically require reservations to be made ahead of time and charge an
hourly rate and possibly a set-up charge.

It is important to note that unlike switched (dial-up) bridging systems, dedicated
videoconferencing networks have bridging capabilities that can not be shared with
anyone outside of their “closed-circuit” networks.

Methods in which organizations within the Appalachian Region establish bridged,
multipoint capabilities are described in the chart below. The chart below only reflects
those sites for which information existed (does not include those sites that did not
respond to the survey).

Bridging Method
Own Bridge
20%
Dialing-in
No Response
42%
2%
Network Software
1%

Don't Know
4%
Scheduling Computer
31%

Figure 17 - Public Videoconferencing Site Bridging Methods

A full listing of the bridging locations identified in Appalachia is provided in the
appendices of this document.



Figure 18 – Map of Videoconferencing Sites with Bridging Capabilities by Zip Code



2.5 Videoconferencing Carriers
The telecommunications connections that allow the videoconferencing units to
intercommunicate can be provisioned by a number of different providers. These may
be telephone companies, cable companies, internet providers or private customer
wide area or local area networks. The service providers providing interconnectivity
throughout the ARC region are listed in the chart below.

Videoconferencing Carriers

Other
0% Public Telephone
Network
22% Private computer
network
2%
Cable
1%
Internet
0%
Satellite
Unknown 0%
75% Private wireless
network
0%

Figure 19 - Public Videoconferencing Site Media

While a large percentage of this information is unknown, it can be inferred from other
data within each record that the vast majority of these sites employ the public
telephone network to establish telecommunications connectivity for
videoconferencing.

2.6 Transmission Speeds
While there are many different carriers that provide interconnectivity, there are even
more types of telecommunications lines that are provided by the service providers
that are used for videoconferencing. Some of the more common types of circuits are
discussed below.

ISDN – Perhaps the most common kind of digital telecommunication line is called
ISDN BRI (Integrated Services Digital Network, Basic Rate Interface). ISDN BRI is a
dial-up (switched) telecommunication service that can be ordered from a local
telephone company. While it is widely available in most urban and suburban areas, it
may or may not be available in rural locations. The technology provides two data
channels, each with a capacity of 64kbps (for a total of 128Kbs). Often, a single
codec can accept multiple ISDN BRI lines which improves the overall bandwidth that
is used (i.e. three (3) BRI lines @ 128Kbs = 384Kbs) and thus improves the quality



of the video and audio. Generally speaking, modern videoconferencing units that
operate on an ISDN line also operate using the H.320 standard. Appalachian
Region-wide, 26% of the total identified units employed ISDN connections. It is
suspected that the majority of those sites for which the connection type was
unknown (52%) use ISDN as well.

Switched 56 – Switched 56 is an older technology that also offers dial-up (switched)
connections similar to ISDN – but operates at the lesser transmission speed of
56Kbs, instead of 128Kbs. Like ISDN, multiple switched 56 lines can be combined to
improve quality and systems using switched 56 typically operate on the H.320
standard. This means that ISDN users can connect to videoconferencing systems
using switched 56 and visa versa. As discussed earlier, the quality of the video and
audio during a session is determined by the lowest bandwidth user.

T-1 – A T-1 line consists of 24 individual channels each of which operates at 64Kbs.
These channels can be combined together supporting data rates of roughly 1.5Mbs
(24 channels @ 64Kbs = 1536Kbs). Each 64Kbit/second channel can be configured
to carry voice or data traffic. Many telephone companies allow purchasing of just
some of these individual channels, known as fractional T-1 access. T-1 lines are
sometimes referred to as DS1 lines.

T-3 – A T-3 line (sometimes referred to as DS3) is a dedicated phone connection
supporting data rates of about 43Mbps. A T-3 line actually consists of 672 individual
channels, each of which supports 64Kbs. T-3 lines are often used for dedicated
videoconferencing and distance learning networks.

Frame Relay – Frame Relay is a technology used for connecting devices on a Wide
Area Network (WAN). Most telephone companies now provide Frame Relay service
for customers who want connections at 56Kbs to T-1 speeds. This bandwidth is
shared among many sites so the full bandwidth that the customer subscribes to may
be available all the time. In the U.S., Frame Relay is quite popular because it is
relatively inexpensive. However, it is being replaced in some areas by faster
technologies, such as ATM.

ATM – Current implementations of ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) support data
transfer rates of from 25 to 622Mbs (megabits per second). This compares to a
maximum of 100Mbps for Ethernet, the current technology used for most local area
networks (LANs). One of the advantages of ATM technology is that multiple types of
communications (voice, data and video) can be carried on an ATM network and that
bandwidth can be guaranteed for applications such as video to ensure stable and
predictable quality.



The Internet – H.323 compliant videoconferencing systems are designed to work
with Internet Protocol (IP). If connecting to the internet, users can benefit from a high
speed internet connections – the faster the connection, the better. Unfortunately, no
matter how fast a connection a site has, this bandwidth can not be guaranteed as the
signals traverse scores of switches and routers that make up the internet connection
to the remote site. As is the case with other telecommunications services, you are
only as fast as the weakest link in the connection. Depending on the location of the
remote end and all of the equipment and services in between, you may have
acceptable quality video or poor quality. Standards bodies are currently working in an
attempt to solve these problems.

Cable Modem – A cable modem is a device designed to operate over cable TV lines
and offers speeds, usually to the internet, in the range of 5 to 10Mbs. Because the
coaxial cable used by cable TV provides much greater bandwidth than telephone
lines, a cable modem can be used to achieve extremely fast access to the internet.
The same issues related to the internet apply however.

DSL – Like a cable modem, Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) technology offers high
speed connectivity, typically to the internet, at speeds in the range of 1 to 6Mbs.
Unlike cable modems, however, DSL modems work on standard copper telephone
lines. The service is typically offered by internet service providers (ISPs) and
telephone companies and often competes with cable modem services offered by
cable television companies. The same issues related to the internet apply for DSL
access to the internet.

Sites within the ARC region reported a wide range of technology types and
transmission speeds for videoconferencing. The speeds included in the chart on the
following page include 128kbps, 384kbps, ISDN, T-1, and Broadband Fiber. Other
reported speeds are included in the 'other' category and the remaining sites reported
'unknown' transmission speeds.



Transmission Speeds
ISDN (128Kbps)
2%

ISDN (384Kbps)
10%

ISDN (Unspecified)
Unknown 14%
52%

Broadband Fiber
7%
T-1
9%
Other
6%

Figure 20 - Public Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds

The distribution of transmission speeds are represented on Map 6, 6B, 6C and 6D:
Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds (by zip code). Using the zip codes of
each site proved the most accurate way of plotting the collected data, due to
variances in street names, numbers, and other address features. Each point on the
map represents a unique zip code, and each symbol indicates that at least one
videoconferencing system with that transmission speed is located within the
representative zip code.

Based on the data collected it is not possible to create a map that demonstrates all of
the various types of circuits available across the region. This would require a survey
of all companies providing telecommunications services in Appalachia including local
exchange carriers, competitive local exchange carriers, cable television companies,
etc. With the increase of competition within this market in recent years, this
information is often considered to be strategically significant by these companies and
they are often reluctant to share such information in detail.



Figure 21 – Map of Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds by Zip Code



Figure 22 – Map of Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds (T-1)



Figure 23 – Map of Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds (Broadband Fiber)



Figure 24 – Map of Videoconferencing Site Transmission Speeds (ISDN)


Section 1: Project Overview

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (7)

Semelhante a Section 1: Project Overview

Semelhante a Section 1: Project Overview (20)

Mais de Videoguy

Mais de Videoguy (20)

Section 1: Project Overview