FROM FCC DAILY DIGEST: FCC SAYS GTE'S ADSL INTERNET ACCESS SERVICES IS AN INTERSTATE SERVICE. <snip> The Commission intends to address next week, in a separate order, the broader issue of whether conventional dial-up access to the Internet, made through calls to information service providers, including Internet Service Providers (ISPs), is local or interstate in nature. That decision will address whether incumbent local telephone companies may be required to compensate their competitors for handling calls made by the incumbents' customers to ISPs that are the competitors' customers. Report No: CC-98-41. by MO&O. Action by: the Commission. Adopted: October 30, 1998. (FCC No. 98-292) CCB. ENGLISH TRANSLATION: why is this important? Most ISP's in Michigan purchase dialtone from Competitive Local Exchange Carriers(CLEC) at discounted rates from traditional Ameritech services and thus provide services at lower cost to consumers. If Internet access through CLEC's is deemed to be interstate telecommunications traffic, per minute tariff charges would begin to apply for calls delivered via CLEC's. This could mean a dramatic increase (on the order of 1-2 cents per minute) for Internet access. Additional information on the GTE "test" case can be found at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/News_Releases/1998/nrcc8081.html --------- Ivars Upatnieks v (734)998-0090 ICNet, Inc. f (734)998-0816 2901 Hubbard e ivars@ic.net Ann Arbor, MI 48105 www.ic.net
On Tue, Nov 03, 1998 at 01:39:29PM -0500, Ivars Upatnieks wrote:
The Commission intends to address next week, in a separate order, the broader issue of whether conventional dial-up access to the Internet, made through calls to information service providers, including Internet Service Providers (ISPs), is local or interstate in nature.
This stupidity again? An Internet dialup call is an interstate call if you're in one state dialing into a POP in another. Otherwise it's not. Duh. The FCC has much better things to do than debate a point for which the answer is painfully obvious. If you're going to tell me that when I dial up to my account in downtown Cleveland from my house ten minutes away, I'm going to either laugh at you, tell you you're a flaming idiot, or quite possibly both. Sorry. My ISDN line at home is serviced by Ameritech, and NACS's PRIs are serviced by ICG/Netcom. Maybe I should get charged for a call from Chicago to Denver since Ameritech is headquaratered in Chicago and ICG is in Denver, even though I'm calling from Cleveland to Cleveland. If there's something obvious that I'm missing here, please, PLEASE point it out to me... Oh yeah. Are they going to insist on charging per-minute for voice calls as well as data calls? I bet not. -- Steve Sobol [sjsobol@nacs.net] Part-time Support Droid [support@nacs.net] NACS Spaminator [abuse@nacs.net] Spotted on a bumper sticker: "Possum. The other white meat."
Oh yeah. Are they going to insist on charging per-minute for voice calls as well as data calls? I bet not.
If they do that, we'll have to create a DOSBS'alike for modems too :} _ __ _____ __ _________ ______________ /_______ ___ ____ /______ John Gonzalez/Net.Engineer __ __ \ __ \ __/_ __ `__ \/ __ /_ ___/ MDC Computers/netMDC! _ / / / `__/ /_ / / / / / / /_/ / / /__ (505)437-7600/fax-437-3052 /_/ /_/\___/\__/ /_/ /_/ /_/\__,_/ \___/ http://www.netmdc.com [---------------------------------------------[system info]-----------] 4:50pm up 23 days, 20:19, 3 users, load average: 0.04, 0.07, 0.08
Actually, what the FCC stated was that this tariff was filed properly as the DSL lines are an extension of GTE's inter-LATA frame network. Seems pretty dubious to me, although it's not the whole Internet as long distance thing which I was afraid of at first. Apparently there's to be yet another FCC statement on either access fees or reciprocal comp (I cant remember which but I think it's the latter) by the end of the week. Those RBOCs must have a bunch of lobbyist hanging out at the FCC. At 06:22 PM 11/3/98 -0500, Steven J. Sobol wrote:
An Internet dialup call is an interstate call if you're in one state dialing into a POP in another. Otherwise it's not. Duh.
The FCC has much better things to do than debate a point for which the answer is painfully obvious. If you're going to tell me that when I dial up to my account in downtown Cleveland from my house ten minutes away, I'm going to either laugh at you, tell you you're a flaming idiot, or quite possibly both.
Sorry. My ISDN line at home is serviced by Ameritech, and NACS's PRIs are serviced by ICG/Netcom. Maybe I should get charged for a call from Chicago to Denver since Ameritech is headquaratered in Chicago and ICG is in Denver, even though I'm calling from Cleveland to Cleveland.
If there's something obvious that I'm missing here, please, PLEASE point it out to me...
Oh yeah. Are they going to insist on charging per-minute for voice calls as well as data calls? I bet not.
-- Steve Sobol [sjsobol@nacs.net] Part-time Support Droid [support@nacs.net] NACS Spaminator [abuse@nacs.net]
Spotted on a bumper sticker: "Possum. The other white meat."
Peter Stemwedel Network Engineer InterAccess Co. petes@interaccess.com 168 N. Clinton (312) 496-4694 Office Chicago, IL 60661 (312) 496-4499 FAX
---Reply on mail from Peter Stemwedel about FCC Ruling, Cost of Internet
Actually, what the FCC stated was that this tariff was filed properly as the DSL lines are an extension of GTE's inter-LATA frame network. Seems pretty dubious to me, although it's not the whole Internet as long distance thing which I was afraid of at first. Apparently there's to be yet another FCC statement on either access fees or reciprocal comp (I cant remember which but I think it's the latter) by the end of the week. Those RBOCs must have a bunch of lobbyist hanging out at the FCC.
If it is for DSL lines, and if they are ruled to be non local, wouldnt that mean that the rbocs arent required to resell this service to the IXCs (and other ISPs) since the current ruling is for local service (at no less than a 17% discount no less)??? -- Bret McDanel http://www.rehost.com Realistic Technologies, Inc. 973-514-1144 These opinions are mine, and may not be the same as my employer
Actually, what the FCC stated was that this tariff was filed
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 properly as
the DSL lines are an extension of GTE's inter-LATA frame network. Seems pretty dubious to me, although it's not the whole Internet as long distance thing which I was afraid of at first. Apparently there's to be yet another FCC statement on either access fees or reciprocal comp (I cant remember which but I think it's the latter) by the end of the week. Those RBOCs must have a bunch of lobbyist hanging out at the FCC.
.. just like every other industry or special interest group. CLECs come to mind.. Remember: Lobbying is legalized bribery. Cheers, Chris - -- Christian Kuhtz <ck@adsu.bellsouth.com> -wk ck@gnu.org -hm Sr. Network Architect, BellSouth Corp., Advanced Data Services NOTE: "We speak PGP: key available at well-known key servers." "Turnaucka's Law: The attention span of a computer is only as long as its electrical cord." -- /usr/games/fortune -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.0 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBNkTM0IRXnO1Cm58sEQIUUgCgnzTEVzN02gGcLUQdkebmC2a4oaUAoJRv x90W1RpGCwM1kvGAr50ESWq2 =yJER -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
The Commission intends to address next week, in a separate order, the broader issue of whether conventional dial-up access to the Internet, made through calls to information service
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 providers,
including Internet Service Providers (ISPs), is local or interstate in nature.
This stupidity again?
Isn't the real issue inter-LATA vs intra-LATA?
An Internet dialup call is an interstate call if you're in one state dialing into a POP in another. Otherwise it's not. Duh.
The FCC has much better things to do than debate a point for which
Well, not quite so simple in the current regulatory disaster. the
answer is painfully obvious.
Is it really that obvious? I don't think so if you consider the full picture of everything resulting from the way the country is currently chopped up -- LATA region & state wise..
If you're going to tell me that when I dial up to my account in downtown Cleveland from my house ten minutes away, I'm going to either laugh at you, tell you you're a flaming idiot, or quite possibly both.
Even if you complete a call from one bedroom to another, it is conceivable that you might cross LATA boundaries, or state boundaries. I am not saying that it is a good way to do it that way, but that's the way the entire regulatory mess is defined. In fact, an RBOC could not sell you access that way. Meaning: RBOCs can't sell you inter-LATA traffic, although they make a lot of attempts to make it look like they are when they are in fact "teaming" with a 3rd party to provide service to you that looks like one offering.
Sorry. My ISDN line at home is serviced by Ameritech, and NACS's PRIs are serviced by ICG/Netcom. Maybe I should get charged for a call from Chicago to Denver since Ameritech is headquaratered in Chicago and ICG is in Denver, even though I'm calling from Cleveland to Cleveland.
Again, it isn't quite that simple. Unfortunately.
If there's something obvious that I'm missing here, please, PLEASE point it out to me...
L-A-T-A. *point* Regulatory garbage.
Oh yeah. Are they going to insist on charging per-minute for voice calls as well as data calls? I bet not.
Well, depends on how and where your calls are terminated. It is quite easily conceivable that an RBOC may get charged by the minute for each completed call, and yet all they are is local calls. It just so happens that the RBOC is the orginator and a CLEC customer a termination point. CLEC makes money for not doing hardly anything. Heck, the CLEC doesn't even need facilities. All it needs to do is have customers. Cheers, Chris - -- Christian Kuhtz <ck@adsu.bellsouth.com> -wk ck@gnu.org -hm Sr. Network Architect, BellSouth Corp., Advanced Data Services NOTE: "We speak PGP: key available at well-known key servers." "Turnaucka's Law: The attention span of a computer is only as long as its electrical cord." -- /usr/games/fortune -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 6.0 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com> iQA/AwUBNkTOg4RXnO1Cm58sEQJVPwCgrdcSUNzwHXvU1Zd1VdZUHFmjAS4Aniur 2Bf8wGrRdj7yocuZqQiIBx7L =HhcI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Sat, Nov 07, 1998 at 05:49:41PM -0500, Christian Kuhtz wrote:
This stupidity again?
Isn't the real issue inter-LATA vs intra-LATA?
. . .
L-A-T-A. *point* Regulatory garbage.
I was going to comment on this, went to check the recent FCC ruling WRT GTE ADSL, and found that I lost the URL. :( Can someone please give it to me again? Thanks. -- Steve Sobol [sjsobol@nacs.net] Part-time Support Droid [support@nacs.net] NACS Spaminator [abuse@nacs.net] Spotted on a bumper sticker: "Possum. The other white meat."
I'd recommend reading the actual text of the ADSL order (available at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/fcc98292.txt) it's actually remarkably lucid regarding the complexity of the issues. Note that the GTE ADSL decision applies to a specific service which is not switched per the classic definition. The decision to be announced is next week (with regard to conventional dial-up access) apparently will be much broader in nature covering whether or not the traditional inter-carrier reciprocal compensation should apply for dialup Internet calls terminating on an ISP/CLEC. Currently, a carrier pays compensation to terminate calls on another carriers network. Note that carriers don't pay "customers" for the privilege of terminating calls on their network. Depending on the actual ruling of the FCC to be announced, one possible outcome might be for an ISP acting also as a CLEC to be paid "compensation" for each call handed off to it by the local exchange carrier. Another outcome may be the FCC specifically stating that CLEC's should not receive compensation for such traffic. Needless to say, the anticipated order has some potential to alter Internet economics for dialup providers. /John
participants (7)
-
Bret McDanel -
Christian Kuhtz -
Ivars Upatnieks -
John Curran -
John Gonzalez/netMDC admin -
Peter Stemwedel -
Steven J. Sobol