ncreasingly, organizations are deploying even room-based interactive video communications via IP (Internet protocol). While doing SO over the Internet is risky business, doing SO over leased broadband circuits can be viable. In such a case, a videoconferencing unit will connect via an Ethernet cable to a router, which either includes or is connected to a CSU/DSU. The advantage in this case is that video traffic is packetized and can thereby share bandwidth with data traffic. This is not advisable without the assistance of an experienced network integrator that can ensure that all contenders for network bandwidth share nicely. A videoconference can hog SO much bandwidth that the network cannot effectively support any other traffic. Similarly, a videoconference can fail because of extensive data traffic such as a large batch transfer. DSL is generally not a practical means of supporting an interactive video session. ADSL, in particular, is impractical because, although download speeds may be ample, upload speeds may not. IDSL was largely created to provide ISDN BRI equivalent service where there was not ISDN service. It is adequate for a personal session, but not for a group session. Cable TV networks are becoming increasingly robust. Nevertheless, because the target is generally the consumer market, the network is not optimized for group video communications systems. Leased frame relay circuits are commonly used for IP-based video communications. Although dicing bandwidth into frames and subsequently into IP packets is inefficient, it can work well if a knowledgeable integrator properly configures all ends of the network. Leased native IP circuits may be the most practical approach to IP-based video communications until the Internet develops with sufficient quality-of-service (QoS) mechanisms. Video Communications: The Whole Picture PROMOTING VIDEO COMMUNICATION Before a video communication system is being installed, one should be formulating plans for fostering its use. The countless organizations that have faile