RE: Rules and Regs for a LEC's and Non LEC's
-RBOCs (note, not ILECs) cannot move inter-lata traffic without being -approved by PUC in each state for "interstate long distance". (I believe -this is part of 1984 MFJ). -CLECs have no restrictions on that. Neither do non-CLEC ISPs. ---alex I thought this only applied to VOICE traffic. AS far as I know Internet access traffic is non-regulated. I used to work at a CLEC and we never worried about PUC complaints on an Internet access level of service. now if the T-1 level was down, that was a different story. -J
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 06:35:47PM -0400, McBurnett, Jim wrote:
-RBOCs (note, not ILECs) cannot move inter-lata traffic without being -approved by PUC in each state for "interstate long distance". (I believe -this is part of 1984 MFJ).
-CLECs have no restrictions on that. Neither do non-CLEC ISPs.
---alex
I thought this only applied to VOICE traffic.
BZZT. Any inter-LATA traffic requires regulatory approval. Do you think the RBOC engineers wanted an ASN per LATA? They were/ are required to hand ALL traffic on the LATA boundary to their allocated carrier. This wound up as essentially regulated subsidies (albeit indirectly) for sprint, genuity, qwest, uunet ... they made out from both ends between the dot-com boom and RBOC-restrictions from the telecom act of 1996. Between the dot-bomb bust and regulatory relief for the RBOCs, is it any wonder that their cash cows are running dry and they are offering fire-sale prices to try and get customers stuck in recurring contracts? Wild that people still don't understand the regulations so many years after they were cast in concrete. Do people actually think any of these companies don't play all sides against the middle? Any deal you get from one of them is because they are getting something out of the transaction. -- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
Yep, if memory serves Bellsouth had 23. 1 for each one of the 22 latas and the 23rd was the dereg'ed ASN that would come after LD relief. Makes it hard to even talk about peering with other companies. Image when they ask for your ASN and you tell them u dont know offhand, u have to email them. So they decide that's kinda dumb and just do a trace to your webserver and run stats on that one ASN. THen they get the list of 23 and you can could the seconds before the phone rings with a #*$(*#. It's a tough sell. Hi Joe. dave At 18:30 -0400 8/25/03, Joe Provo wrote:
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 06:35:47PM -0400, McBurnett, Jim wrote:
-RBOCs (note, not ILECs) cannot move inter-lata traffic without being -approved by PUC in each state for "interstate long distance". (I believe -this is part of 1984 MFJ).
-CLECs have no restrictions on that. Neither do non-CLEC ISPs.
---alex
I thought this only applied to VOICE traffic.
BZZT. Any inter-LATA traffic requires regulatory approval. Do you think the RBOC engineers wanted an ASN per LATA? They were/ are required to hand ALL traffic on the LATA boundary to their allocated carrier. This wound up as essentially regulated subsidies (albeit indirectly) for sprint, genuity, qwest, uunet ... they made out from both ends between the dot-com boom and RBOC-restrictions from the telecom act of 1996. Between the dot-bomb bust and regulatory relief for the RBOCs, is it any wonder that their cash cows are running dry and they are offering fire-sale prices to try and get customers stuck in recurring contracts?
Wild that people still don't understand the regulations so many years after they were cast in concrete. Do people actually think any of these companies don't play all sides against the middle? Any deal you get from one of them is because they are getting something out of the transaction.
-- RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
participants (3)
-
David Diaz -
Joe Provo -
McBurnett, Jim