*BSD News Article 93790


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.mira.net.au!news.netspace.net.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!news.syd.connect.com.au!news.bri.connect.com.au!fjholden.OntheNet.com.au!not-for-mail
From: Tony Griffiths <tonyg@OntheNet.com.au>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Cheap ISDN solutions [was: What's the state of ISDN support?]
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 11:14:22 +1000
Organization: On the Net (ISP on the Gold Coast, Australia)
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <3356CAEE.1258@OntheNet.com.au>
References: <33303AE2.503C@cmr.no> <5gqhjt$k3t$1@gail.ripco.com><333226A6.ABD322C@FreeBSD.org> <5hqooq$gtn@ui-gate.utell.co.uk><33423F01.167EB0E7@net-tel.co.uk><5hvtj8$e44@ui-gate.utell.co.uk> <139@fridaycs.win-uk.net> <861220198.962@dejanews.com>
Reply-To: tonyg@OntheNet.com.au
NNTP-Posting-Host: swanee.nt.com.au
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (WinNT; I)
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:39252

b13c54v@cpslsops.bell-atl.com wrote:
> 
> In article <333226A6.ABD322C@freebsd.org>,
> "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> 
> Since I was also lucky enough to live close to work, I
> got a Centrex ISDN circuit which means I basically just leave it nailed
> up 24 hours a day and it costs me about $60/mo.  Naturally, YMMV on the
> line charges, and the fact that my "ISP" is also my work gives me free
> 
> You know Jordon,
> 
> People like you who use centrex and ISDN the way you do are going to
> eventually over burden an already taxed local telephone telephone network
> and drive ISDN costs up for everybody else.  Do you know what kind of
> burden you place on the network when you leave a line up 24 hours a day
> not to mention the added burden of ISDN.  And then you are irresponsible
> enough to encourage the whole world to do the same thing by posting your
> comments on the internet.  That is a very shortsighted attitude.

This is the same BULLSHIT line that Telstra (Australia's incumbent
telecommunications "monopoly") tried to use in it's submissions to a
Senate committee.  Basically, an ISDN call uses LESS electronics in the
telecommunications system than an analogue call.  It is a digital device
talking directly to a digital switching network without all the A/D and
D/A stuff getting in the way.  That is the reason why the same crappy
pair of copper wires can do ISDN Basic rate (2xB+D == 144 Kbps in each
direction) or even ISDN Primary rate (1.5 Mbps in the US, 2 Mbps
elsewhere) as are used for a single analogue telephone call!

If the target of the call is off the same local exchange, then the cells
of data will simply go up one set of dedicated wires (which the customer
has payed for) and then go down another set of dedicated wires (also
payed for)...  Where is the COST to the Telecom in that???

I have a friend who did some work for Alcatel (Australia) who supplies
switching infrastructure to Telstra.  Telstra was complaining about the
"COST" of one of these modern digital switches but shut up when Alcatel
pointed out that at their margins each switch made enough profit to pay
for itself in 3 DAYS!!!

The Telco's keep complaining about the Internet and long-held calls
COSTING them money.  Basically, the ONLY problem they have is getting
caught "with their pant's down" in their planning and provisioning. 
Yes, the Internet and related infrastructure requires more resources but
it also generates more revenue.  They like the revenue but don't want to
spend any extra on equipment over and above their 3% per year growth
projections that worked with the old POTS services.

What they need to do is "get their finger out" and change their planning
models then spend some of their profits (some would say "obscene"
profits) on additional infrastructure and stop complaining...

Tony