Re: Note from a satisfied customer

[Tronic <tronic@ix.netcom.com>]

  Bill Frezza wrote:
  
  >.... When you do your calculations of the "outrageous" charges,
  > best stick to a single B channel as the second one will almost never get
  > used......
  
  ++ The second channel would commonly be used for CSV services.  Bill, do a
     calculation of placing all your voice calls over the BA-PA tariff.
  
  > .... THIS AIN"T A LEASED LINE, IT'S A SWITCHED CIRCUIT. When
  > you use it between offices, it ties up trunks. Why is this so hard to
  > understand?....
  
  ++ It *is* a switched circuit Bill, but it uses exactly the same inter-office plant
     that a POTS call uses, that a 56KB leased line uses, that a CSV ISDN call
     uses.  Which is precisely the reason that an ISDN call, whether CSV or CSD,
     should not be tariffed differently than a POTS call.  The bandwidth requirement
     for an ISDN CSD call is precisely the same as an analog modem POTS call.
  
  
  > And why should ISDN users be subsidized by plain old telephone users? What
  > about poor old grandma....
  
  ++ Right now, residential POTS usage is subsidized by most other categories of service.
     I don't think Grandma is going to get screwed if ISDN is priced at a reasonable
     cost-plus.
  
  > 
  > I've got to hand it to you, Jamie, you do wonderful political theater.
  > 
  
  ++ Bill, is your forte PR for the LECs?
  
  Have a good weekend all,
  
  Bob