Re: Smoking gun in CA

[rberger@Internex.NET (Robert Berger)]

  That's not a smokeing gun, its a good response to a situation where they did
  not have the capacity to deliver. They told their sales reps (we are one) to
  slow down selling cause they couldn't install in many Silicon Valley and other
  locations.
  
  It took 3 months to get an ISDN line to where I moved because they had no
  capcity on the CO switch I was located on (Apple Computer used up almost all
  the BRI and PRI capacity on that switch) They eventually brought it in from a
  seperate foriegn CO at their own expense.
  
  The backlog does seem to be getting better as they have been able to get
  delivery on hardware upgrades to their switches.
  
  Why should they incenitvize a sales force and not have enough supply to
  satisfy demand?
  
  I still feel that you and many of the people on this list don't understand
  telephony enough to make the assumptions, accusations and regulatory requests
  that you are. NO DIALUP TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYED TODAY (other than connections
  within the same CO switch) can be used as dedicated services. If you flat rate
  dialup circuits, people have no incentive to ever break their connection to
  their ISP.
  
  This ties up trunks and other resources that have high ratios of simultaneous
  users to potential customers based on VOICE usage patterns. For phone companies
  to support large volumes of nailed up connections with dialup switch circuits,
  they would have to deploy dramatic amounts of capital equipment and charge much
  higher rates.
  
  That's why Frame Relay, SMDS and ATM were deployed (to support dedicated
  connections).
  
  Now this does not mean that some of the tarrifs proposed by the phone companies
  make total sense, but demanding flat rate for dialup switched circuits is also
  non-sensical.
  
  If you wanted to do good for tarrifs, then don't demand flat rates at
  unrealistic prices (like under $200/month for 2 B Channels). Instead, demand
  tierd pricing at appropriate rates. (IE bundles of hours/month at differnet
  hours and price points). This is where you can successfully argue for lower
  prices.
  
  Also demand that ISDN equipment makers ALL support the fast call setup times
  possible on ISDN, that ALL phone companies support D channel signalling and 64K
  clear channel to support fast call setup and remove penalties (high first
  minute charges vs following minutes).
  
  Demand equipment makers and telcos to support D channel packet traffic so that
  there is no cost to make ISDN "Look" like its permanently connected. (ie if you
  had a web server at your home connected to your ISP via ISDN:
  
  * When someone clicked on a link that was at your server, the ISP hardware
  would use the D channel to start sending the data from your server to the
  requester.
  
  * Your ISDN hardware would see the demand for bandwidth higher than the D
  channel can support and would then open up one or two B channels for up to
  128kbps bandwidth. (The D channel would go down as soon as the B channels come
  up as there is usually a per kilopacket charge on X.25 networks used by the D
  channel).
  
  * Your 2 B Channels would go down soon after the data is transmitted.
  
  This would be fine for most small scale, low volume personal servers. ISDN is
  not appropriate for commercial or high usage servers. Use a dedicated link or a
  webFarm to connect Web sites to the 'Net.
  
  Thus you have the effect of a low cost virtual permanent connection that
  sensibly utilize dialup services. Even when you are surfing the net, the B
  channels can go up and down transparently to your experience. It seems to you
  that you are permanently connected all day long, but your acutaly accrued time
  on the ISDN line is a fraction of the time you feel like you have been on-line.
  
  --
               Robert J. Berger - CTO / VP of Engineering
  InterNex Information Services, Inc. 2302 Walsh Rd. Santa Clara, CA 95051
                 Voice: 408-327-2290 Fax: 408-496-5484