IP Transition Workshop

Federal Communications Commission - July 15-16 2026

VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR | ARCHIVE | PERMALINK

Session-by-Session Summary

Welcome

Deputy Chief Jodie Griffin opened the workshop by framing the IP transition as far more than the retirement of legacy telephone technology. She described it as a coordinated modernization effort encompassing IP interconnection, fiber deployment, intercarrier compensation reform, public safety, and Universal Service. The workshop was designed to examine how these interdependent policy areas could be advanced together while maintaining reliable communications services throughout the transition.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Opening Remarks

Chairman Brendan Carr set an ambitious tone, presenting completion of the IP transition as one of the FCC’s highest priorities. He argued that retiring legacy TDM infrastructure would strengthen network resilience, reduce operating costs, improve robocall mitigation, and free investment for next-generation networks. At the same time, he emphasized that no single rulemaking could accomplish the transition on its own—the Commission would need to move multiple reforms forward in parallel while working closely with industry stakeholders to resolve difficult implementation issues.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Session I: Accelerating the Transition to All-IP Interconnection

Panel 1: The Right Interconnection Framework for an All-IP World

The opening panel addressed the workshop’s foundational question: what should replace the legacy interconnection framework once TDM networks disappear? While every participant agreed that the industry must complete the migration to IP, the discussion revealed competing visions for how carriers should exchange traffic in the future. Debate centered on the proposed Agreement-Less IP Interconnection over the Internet (ALIII) framework, the continuing role of regulation, and whether market-driven arrangements alone could preserve universal connectivity, affordability, and competition. Rural providers, competitive carriers, incumbent operators, and public-interest advocates all agreed that modernization was necessary, but differed sharply over how much regulatory structure should survive the transition.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Panel 2: Considerations in Transitioning to IP Interconnection

Having debated the policy framework, the second panel turned to implementation. Participants explored the practical challenges of completing the transition, including network reliability, routing, security, transport costs, operational accountability, and migration timelines. Although panelists broadly supported replacing aging TDM infrastructure, they cautioned that technical details—including where traffic is exchanged and who bears associated costs—would determine whether the transition proves seamless or disruptive, particularly for smaller and rural providers.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Session II: IP Transition Considerations

Panel 3: Public Safety Considerations in Transitioning to IP Interconnection

The discussion shifted from carrier operations to the nation’s emergency communications infrastructure. Panelists argued that modernization cannot come at the expense of 911 reliability, emphasizing that Next Generation 911 depends upon carefully managed IP interconnection rather than simply replacing legacy technology. Participants highlighted the need for close coordination among carriers, public safety organizations, standards bodies, and regulators to ensure that emergency communications become more resilient—not less—as the transition proceeds.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Panel 4: Consumer Protection and the IP Transition

The final panel of the first day examined modernization through the consumer’s perspective. Speakers argued that fully IP-based networks can significantly strengthen caller authentication, reduce robocalls, improve accessibility services, and enable more trustworthy communications. At the same time, they stressed that technological progress alone is insufficient; the benefits of authenticated calling, fraud prevention, and accessible communications depend on eliminating remaining TDM bottlenecks while ensuring that all consumers—including people with disabilities—continue to receive reliable services throughout the transition.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Day 2 Opening Remarks

Commissioner Olivia Trusty opened the second day by shifting the discussion from strategic vision to implementation. While reaffirming the Commission’s modernization objectives, she emphasized that success would depend on balancing innovation with appropriate regulatory oversight. She encouraged participants to focus on practical solutions capable of building consensus across the many interconnected proceedings that make up the IP transition.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Session III: Completing the Transition to Bill-and-Keep

Panel 5: Considerations in Transitioning Access Charges to Bill-and-Keep

The workshop next examined one of the transition’s longest-running regulatory reforms: eliminating the remaining switched access charges. Although participants broadly supported completing the move to bill-and-keep, discussion focused less on whether reform should occur than on how to coordinate it with IP interconnection while minimizing disruption for rural carriers and their customers. Speakers debated transition mechanisms, implementation timelines, and the continuing role of intermediary providers in facilitating nationwide traffic exchange.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Panel 6: Transitioning CAF-ICC and Telephone Access Charges to an All-IP Future

Attention then turned to the remaining legacy support mechanisms that continue to finance rural communications networks. The discussion highlighted a recurring theme of the workshop: modernization enjoys broad support, but disagreement remains over how rapidly legacy funding should disappear. Large providers emphasized the costs of maintaining parallel TDM and IP networks, while rural carriers argued that support mechanisms such as CAF-ICC remain essential until the entire industry completes the transition. The panel explored how intercarrier compensation reform, IP interconnection, and Universal Service funding increasingly intersect as the transition enters its final stages.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Reconvening Remarks

Commissioner Anna Gomez offered a contrasting perspective by emphasizing that modernization should be measured not only by technological progress but also by its impact on consumers. She argued that the transition must proceed carefully enough to protect rural communities, older Americans, people with disabilities, and others who continue to rely on legacy services, urging participants to identify practical safeguards alongside proposals for regulatory reform.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Session IV: Reforming the High-Cost Program for an All-IP Future

Panel 7: Funding for an All-IP Future

The first panel of the final session explored a fundamental question raised by the IP transition: how should Universal Service evolve once broadband networks become predominantly IP-based? Participants agreed that rural connectivity remains a national priority but disagreed over how support should be structured in the future. Traditional rural providers argued that high-cost economics continue to justify ongoing public support, while others emphasized competition, technology neutrality, and market evolution. The discussion underscored that funding policy can no longer be separated from broader questions about IP interconnection, affordability, and long-term network sustainability.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Panel 8: Updating the Commission’s Legacy High-Cost and A-CAM Mechanisms

The workshop concluded by examining whether legacy high-cost support mechanisms should be modernized, replaced, or eventually sunset. The panel featured the workshop’s clearest debate over the future role of government support, with traditional rural broadband providers advocating continued operational funding for facilities-based networks while SpaceX argued that emerging low Earth orbit satellite services fundamentally change the economics of Universal Service. The discussion extended beyond current programs to broader questions about technology neutrality, long-term infrastructure investment, and how the FCC should define comparable communications services in an increasingly competitive marketplace.
VIDEO | RECAP EN / ES / FR

Overall Themes

Taken together, the workshop revealed broad consensus that the transition to all-IP communications is both necessary and inevitable. The principal disagreements concerned how to complete it: the balance between market forces and regulation, the future of interconnection obligations, the pace of retiring legacy funding mechanisms, and the safeguards needed to protect consumers, public safety, and rural communities. Rather than treating interconnection, intercarrier compensation, Universal Service, and consumer protection as separate proceedings, the discussions consistently demonstrated that they form a single, interconnected policy challenge that will shape the future of the nation’s communications infrastructure.

RESOURCES

• FCC IP Transition Workshop — event page for the July 15–16, 2026 Wireline Competition Bureau workshop

• Workshop Agenda and Panelists (DA 26-665) — the authoritative roster for all eight panels

• Advancing IP Interconnection NPRM (FCC 25-73) — WC Docket 25-304, behind Session I

• Reforming Legacy Rules for an All-IP Future NPRM (FCC 26-11) — WC Dockets 25-311 and 25-208, behind Sessions II and III

• Reforming the High-Cost Program for an All-IP Future NPRM (FCC 26-35) — WC Dockets 26-96 and 10-90, behind Session IV

• Big Issues Raised at FCC’s Voice IP Transition Workshop — independent commentary by ECG engineer Mark Lindsey, published as the workshop closed