Re: Re-engineering the public switched network

[James Love <love@tap.org>]

  On Thu, 20 Jun 1996, Richard Kashdan wrote:
  > that do you agree with me?  In California, for example, where Pacific Bell
  > and I believe GTE already have packet networks, would these telco's need to
  > make any other hardware or software changes to accomplish this type of
  > bandwidth on demand?  Or would the only telco change be to lower the charges
  > for packet to make this economically feasible?
  
  1.    I thought the D channel was already used on a POTS line, anyway...
  
  2.    In a somewhat different vein... aren't the B channels derived channels,
  and if so, is there anything magic about 56 or 64 kbps?  What if there
  were lots of 9.6 kbps derived channels. and you only used as many as you 
  needed, at that time.... they everyone with an open connection would be 
  using at most about 17 percent of what a POTS line uses now, for 
  interoffice trunkage....  
  
  jamie
  
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  James Love / love@tap.org / P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036
  Voice: 202/387-8030; Fax 202/234-5176
  Center for Study of Responsive Law
     Consumer Project on Technology; http://www.essential.org/cpt
     Taxpayer Assets Project; http://www.tap.org
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~