Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- From: rkshullat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:17:15 +0000 (UTC)
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
mike weber <fairportfan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
mike weber <fairportfan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yeah, and it still has to come through TPC's switch. And if they
don't wanna, it ain't gonna.
There's no longer just one TPC. When I got fed up with Bell
Atlantic (formerly known as C&P, now known as Verizon), I switched
my local phone service to another provider. Presumably Bell
Atlantic would have preferred I did otherwise, but they didn't
block the change.
That's different from DSL.
Yes, of course. But it's an example of something coming through
"TPC"'s switch that "TPC" has no reason to approve of.
It may or may not be coming through TPC's switch. The same is true for
DSL. A provider can either buy and resell service from TPC or lease
space in TPC's CO for their own equipment. If they just want to be a
reseller then they have to comply with TPC's rules. If they want to
put in their own equipment then they can do whatever they want. The
drawback of the latter is that they have to lease space and add
equipment to every CO where they want to offer service. The advantage is
that they're not limited to offering only those services TPC provides.
A lot of early DSL providers just bought and resold TPC's DSL service and
acted as the ISP. Since TPC required an active POTS line before they'd
sell DSL the other providers had to do the same. Even some providers
that are using their own equipment may continue to do that since it
increases their profit. Since they're already having to pay TPC for the
copper run to your location and that cost doesn't change if you have
both POTS and DSL it's to their advantage that you have both. Requiring
it is one method, giving special "bundle" pricing is another. Also, they
may have experienced enough disconnect issues with DSL-only lines that
they decided it wasn't worth the support headaches and decided not to
offer them.
Robert
--
Robert K. Shull Email: rkshull at rosettacon dot com
.
- References:
- Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- From: mike weber
- Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- From: mike weber
- Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- From: mike weber
- Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- From: Keith F. Lynch
- Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- Prev by Date: Re: Urban Surprise: More Bicyclists Means Fewer Accidents
- Next by Date: Re: LHC dmaged worse than thought; at least two months downtime needed for repairs
- Previous by thread: Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- Next by thread: Re: Ansible 254 [long]
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
