[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IP: Pac Bell says Net use may collapse phone system
On Mon, 28 Oct 1996, Dave Reid wrote:
> 1 residential line consumes 3 CCS on average, while 1 ISP line
> consumes 36 CCS on average.
Am I mistaken? I thought that 36CCS was full-time usage. If any ISP has
all of their lines in use all the time, they are a truely poor one and
won't be in business very long.
Here, we get concerned if usage goes over 90% of the most busy times. But
we are a very small ISP. Maybe the big boys play different.
Therefore the fixed resource consumption
> is over 10 times as much for an ISP line. The calling rate per line
> is not the big issue, it's the holding time. While a call is up a
> 64k digital channel is being held up thourgh the fabric of the switching
> network. Rates are based on CCS consumption. Should an ISP pay ten times
> as much for a line than a residential customer? Should a residential
> customer pay more if they are having long holding times? Why should a
> normal voice only residenital customer pay more to subsidize long
> holding pattern callers? Cleary there needs to more emphazize on a user
> pay structure to allow greater investment in switching plant to occur.
> ISP's that underprovision thier lines and oversell their accounts (no one
> does that right?) cause another headache for the telco. Everytime a caller
> gets busy, they call back again and again and again. This creates large volumes
> of uncompleted calls all of which consume switch resources. When an ISP's
> incoming line pool closely matches what their requirements really are their
> impact on the switching fabric is reduced.
This would seem to be obvious and true, but worth pointing out.
> Seems to me we need more cooperation between the telco and ISP communitty. Both
> need each other. The ISP's can't currently survive without the Telco's lines and
> the Telco's need the extra renevue generated by the growth in local loop
> that occurs both at the ISP end and the residential end.
I debate this issue. Telcos have survived very long and well in their
monopoly market. While most internet access is now through telco,
alternative local-loop carriers, cable modems, dedicated wireless data &
cellular are all alternatives.
What telco really wants to do, IMHO, is to push charges for some
unregulated side of their business into the regulated side, thus
justifying a rate increase. This is the way they have made money for
Of course, since I have no good solid evidence and am afraid of being sued
for slander by saying the above, I must mention that I am propounding a
theory, which I will continue to investigate.
Sinister Networks...Boston's Smallest ISP