| |
PA2AGA > TCPDIG 16.02.97 01:38l 158 Lines 6668 Bytes #-10720 (0) @ EU
BID : TCP_97_17A
Read: DG7DAH GUEST
Subj: TCP-Group Digest 97/17A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0KCP<DB0ULM<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0ZDF<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0ACH<
DB0ACC<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<PI8VNW
Sent: 970215/2038Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:41526 [Hoek v Holland] FBB5.15c
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : TCPDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA28945 ; Sat, 15 Feb 97 20:21:42 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.1) with SMTP
id AA00001600 ; Sat, 15 Feb 97 21:11:02 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga with SMTP
id AA00001596 ; Sat, 15 Feb 97 21:09:05 MET
Received: from pa2aga-1 by pa2aga-1 (NET/Mac 2.3.62/7.6) with SMTP
id AA00009158 ; Sat, 15 Feb 97 21:08:18 MET
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 97 21:01:16 MET
Message-Id: <tcp_97_17A>
From: pa2aga
To: tcp_broadcast@pa2aga-1
Subject: TCP-Group Digest 97/17A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
TCP-Group Digest Sat, 15 Feb 97 Volume 97 : Issue 17
Today's Topics:
@CC ISP Access Fees
@CC Solicits Comments?
ISPs to be charged IEXC access fees?
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <TCP-Group@UCSD.Edu>.
Subscription requests to <TCP-Group-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>.
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the TCP-Group Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 06:52:28 GMT
From: brian@nothing.ucsd.edu (Brian Kantor)
Subject: FCC ISP Access Fees
More info at http://www.fcc.gov/isp.html.
Get the real info instead of rumours:
Internet Access & Information Service Provider NOI
The NOI seeks comment on whether the FCC should, in addition to access
charge reform, consider actions relating to the implications of
information service and Internet access provider usage of the public
switched network. In particular, in light of concerns raised over
congestion on the public switched network, the Commission seeks comment
on how it can most effectively create incentives for the deployment of
services and facilities to allow more efficient transport of data
traffic to and from end users. The Commission made no specific
proposals, but tentatively concluded that providers of information
services (including Internet service providers) should NOT be subject
to the interstate access charges that local telephone companies
currently assess on long-distance carriers.
Comment Date: March 24, 1997
Reply Comment Date: April 23, 1997
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 01:14:00 PST
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)
Subject: FCC Solicits Comments?
(This is from Patrick Crispin's TOURBUS. This is a new perspective on
the mail going around the net asking for comments to the FCC. Tad
Cook tad@ssc.com)
FEAR AND LOATHING AT THE FCC
Over the past couple of weeks, you may have received e-mail letters telling
you that:
Many local telephone companies have filed a proposal with the FCC
[The United States' Federal Communications Commission] to impose
per minute charges for Internet service. They contend that use
of Internet has or will hinder the operation of the telephone
network.
At first, I thought that this was simply a new version of the old
"modem tax" hoax (http://www.eff.org/papers/eegtti/eeg_83.html#SEC84)
that has been floating around the Net since *1987*. After all, the
current FCC story has all of the markings of a classic urban legend:
1. It uses official-looking language;
2. It mentions a government agency or an organization with
which everyone is familiar;
3. It contains a plea for you to take some sort of immediate
action; and
4. It requests that you forward the warning letter to as many
people as possible.
Besides, according to an article that appeared in this morning's Edupage,
ONLINE COMPANIES ASK TELCOS, "WHERE'S THE BEEF?"
Tired of telephone companies' complaints that Internet usage is
overwhelming their network capacity, the Internet Access
Coalition has released findings contending that Net usage is, in
reality, a bonanza for the Bells. The study found that local
carriers received a total of $1.4 billion in 1995 in revenues
resulting from the installation of second lines in homes, while
spending only $245 million to beef up their networks for the
additional usage. A Bell Atlantic spokesman says the real
problem is that the telcos have no idea when a line will be used
for data rather than voice, and thus tied up longer. Both sides
agree that the ultimate solution is higher capacity networks.
(Business Week 17 Feb 97)
Well, out of curiosity -- and out of a deep-felt desire to avoid
studying for the two major economics tests that I have next week --
your fearless bus driver decided to call the FCC in Washington to see
if anyone there was willing to talk about this rather explosive issue.
Unfortunately, I soon discovered that the FCC only has one employee,
she is a secretary, and her job is to transfer all incoming telephone
calls into voice mail hell. :)
Actually, I talked to some nice people at the FCC who faxed me a ten
page explanation of what's *really* going on. Unfortunately, the ten
page explanation was written in "FCC-ese," so I am going to have to
translate their explanation into English for you (and I can assure you
that, since I know *NOTHING* about telephony, my translation will
probably contain a few inaccuracies; if it does, please let me know).
First, some local telephone companies have indeed asked the FCC to
allow them to assess a per minute access charge on the telephone lines
used by Internet Service Providers. Local telephone companies
currently charge long-distance carriers (like AT&T and MCI) an
interstate access charge for the long-distance traffic that travels
over their local lines, and the local telephone companies would like
to see this charge extended to include the high-speed lines that your
local Internet Service Provider uses to access the Internet.
In December, the FCC rejected the telephone companies' request and
tentatively concluded "that the existing pricing structure for
information services should remain in place." In other words, the FCC
has tentatively concluded that Internet service providers should *NOT*
be subject to the interstate access charges that local telephone
companies currently assess on long-distance carriers.
The FCC now seeks the public's comments on this conclusion.
Unfortunately, the "warning" letter that is currently circulating
To be continued in digest: tcp_97_17B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
