es are required to pay, such as sup- port for E911, Universal Service Fund, etc. The FCC said that because calls that travel over the Internet don't provide anything in the way of enhanced features, standard rules apply. Furthermore, in a recent deci- sion, the FCC consolidated all regulatory power over VoIP service at the federal level, wresting it from the states. The key here is that regulatory agencies are trying to balance the need for a regulated telecommunications marketplace with the need for an unfettered development environment that can technologically inno- vate without fear of onerous fees and taxes. The FCC wants to engender a spirit of facilities-based competition, rather than the UNE-based envi- ronment that has not worked as well as hoped. Perhaps the reason for this is a realization on the part of the regula- tors of exactly what their role should be. For the longest time it appeared Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com) Copyright © 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website. The Byzantine World of Telecom Regulation Chapter 4 that regulators had come to believe that their primary responsibility was to create competition. In fact, the primary goals of regulation are two- fold: first and foremost, to ensure that users of the regulated service (whether it be telecommunications, power, or airlines) have the best pos- sible experience while using the service; and second, to "fill in the gaps" where the market fails to create the appropriate environment. Now, reg- ulators can use competition as a way to achieve these goals, but compe- tition is a means to an end, not the end itself. Furthermore, regulators should not be in the business of regulating technology per se, but rather the application of technologies according to the mandates listed previously. Today, there is significant regulatory attention being paid to VoIP. But consider this: VoIP is a technology, not a servic