home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04352;
- 31 Aug 90 0:04 EDT
- Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa02297;
- 30 Aug 90 22:35 CDT
- Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac07282;
- 30 Aug 90 21:30 CDT
- Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:30:07 CDT
- From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
- [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
- Subject: TELECOM Digest V10 #606
- BCC:
- Message-ID: <9008302030.ab18594@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
-
-
- TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:30:00 CDT Special: Dial Tone Monopoly
-
- Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
-
- The End of the Dial Tone Monopoly [Donald E. Kimberlin]
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:20:00 CDT
- From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com>
- Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
- Subject: The End of the Dial Tone Monopoly
-
-
- Several weeks ago, one of our British colleagues here placed a good
- description of the current status of telephone services deregulation
- in the UK, and asked for a response that indicated the usual question
- of, "How is it over there?" The way here in the US is definitely
- different, but no one seemed to respond. It just might be that many
- US Digest readers don't yet understand. What follows is a short piece
- I recently prepared for an editor, and I hope it answers both kinds of
- parties:
-
-
- THE END OF THE DIAL TONE MONOPOLY
- By: Donald E. Kimberlin, Principal Consultant
- Telecommunications Network Architects
- Safety Harbor, FL
- August 12, 1990
-
- While many Americans have been trained to believe that "dial tone" is
- the sacrosanct property of telephone companies, evidence is coming
- clear to show that "dial tone" is not a "natural monopoly." Saying
- this is certain to raise many hackles, but it is time we faced up to
- it: The "natural monopoly" view of providing Public Switched Telephone
- Network services on a local basis was valid in its 1913 context, when
- the Bell interests struck a deal to end their pillage of Indpendent
- telephone companies in the U.S.
-
- Technology and removal of the art of running a telephone network from
- the status of "trade secret" has changed all that. It's occurred so
- rapidly and in so many ways that few know of all the prongs now stuck
- into what was once a nicely-closed pie.
-
- Even though it was published, few took note that in 1984, the
- departing Chairman of the FCC said in a speech that since the
- demonopolization of long distance service had been accomplished, the
- time had come to work on breaking up the local telephone monopoly.
- Nobody reported that speech, except the general press the following
- day. It was obvious the Chairman had touched on a taboo of the
- telephone business.
-
- Despite the fact that the FCC's Open Network Architecture mandate has
- gone on and continues to move, nobody wants to face up to what it
- really means: Detaching the dial tone of the local network from the
- wires of the local telephone company, separating the two such that the
- dial tone is put on somebody else's transmission channel, or
- connecting the local telephone company's wire to somebody else's dial
- tone.
-
- That's not any technological breakthrough. It's been possible for
- decades. The single thing that made the dial tone and transmission
- channel inseparable was the lack of "somebody else" being around to do
- it with.
-
- Well, that's all changed, in more ways than one might think. Let's
- run through a few of the possibilities that really could happen today
- ... but for the desire of "somebody else" to take up the cudgel and
- push the matter into full visibility.
-
- There are some historical backgrounds to the alternatives that may be
- worth knowing about; these often have roots in history of things the
- monopoly-era telephone business didn't care too much about. They are
- generally exemplified in reasons behind the FCC's 1947 and 1948
- decisions that opened radio-paging and use of microwave radio to
- non-Telcos. (That's right, we're here talking of temblors some four
- decades prior to the eruption of nearly unbridled competition in "the
- phone business.")
-
- For the most part, the Bell interests had so narrowly focused their
- business that even though they claimed anything moving information was
- their birthright, there were numerous items they handled in only the
- most marginal of ways.
-
- Among these was telephone service to ships in coastal waters, several
- earlier versions of mobile telephone service, various forms of
- telegraphy, burglar alarm services and others. For the most part,
- other firms engaged these markets, particularly in the 65% of the land
- area of the U.S. covered by non-Bell "Independent" telephone
- companies, which focused totally on telephone business. In that large
- territory, almost all non-telephone aspects of telecommunications were
- provided by private, often local business. These almost all used some
- form of radio in their business and became known as Radio Common
- Carriers (RCC's).
-
- We can thus see the roots of the FCC policy of two competing cellular
- companies in every market reaching back into these RCCs. In fact,
- McCaw Cellular, one of the larger "non-wireline" cellular operators,
- was a long-standing RCC in the pre-divestiture era.
-
- In that era of the "natural monopoly," there was more "patching" and
- "hauling" of dial tone on RCC facilities than ever made official
- print. Where it was of note, the Telcos treated it as "private," not
- as a connection of their PSTN to another common carrier. The point
- was that the only breach in the wall was the connection of "foreign
- apparatus" at the extremity of the local network; the bond between
- dial tone and local telco wire remained intact.
-
- The traffic truth was that telcos accounted for less than half of the
- stations and traffic with boats and aircraft, and as the famous Huber
- report showed, less than a third of paging and mobile radio
- operations. Much of that had already extended the "dial tone" into
- non-Telco hands.
-
- That situation was stable for several decades, but it ultimately did
- wind up today with dial tone coming from non-wireline cellular
- carriers and even dial marine VHF shore stations that are now all
- private.
-
- The "hauling" of dial tone we can readily see today as microwave
- bypass, but it has also gone a giant step beyond. In a case that no
- Telco-employed "consultant" will tell about (it's doubtful they have
- been "trained" on it), Arco Oil Company put in its own private
- microwave from downtown Dallas, Texas to its corporate headquarters in
- suburban Richardson, about ten miles away. Arco's reason:
- Dissatisfaction with the performance levels of GTE of Texas, the
- "natural monopoly" dial tone supplier for Richardson. The microwave
- hauled Southwestern Bell dial tone from downtown Dallas to Richardson.
- To reach Arco, all one did was dial a Dallas number. The dial tone on
- Arco's PBX was SW Bell, not GTE.
-
- When Arco's "illegal action" was discovered, GTE of course wanted its
- brother in the cloth, Southwestern Bell to disconnect the dial tone.
- Both telcos got the Texas utility regulators to order them to
- disconnect, but Arco is no stranger to court action. Arco immediately
- went to the FCC, arguing that the dial tone was only incidental to
- connections containing a high proportion of interstate traffic, which
- was beyond the purview of the Texas State regulators. The result: The
- FCC ordered Southwestern Bell to maintain dial tone supply to Arco's
- microwave channels to Richardson, to provide interstate calling
- service. GTE and Southwestern Bell appealed, and after several years
- in the Federal Appeals courts, GTE and SW Bell lost again in early
- 1990, with but one step left: The U.S. Supreme Court.
-
- It is unlikely that GTE or SW Bell want to risk a Supreme Court
- decision after the several slaps they have suffered on their way to
- the Supreme Court; they doubtful would want to be responsible for it
- becoming wide public knowledge that the "natural monopoly" for a dial
- tone is really no longer supported by the US government and its
- courts.
-
- An outfall of this is that if you have the means and desire, you can
- really carry in a dial tone from wherever you want. That opens a
- wealth of possibilities. It means that anyone who has the means to
- provide transmission to your premises can import a dial tone from
- whatever local telco network they want. The issue to settle is if
- they can SELL it to you. This portends a boon to independent Telcos
- located in the hinterlands who want to engage in selling their dial
- tone to people a thousand miles away. (And if you REALLY understand
- the true love/hate relation between Bell and Independent Telcos in the
- US, you'll see that's not a flight of fancy!)
-
- Who would sell this dial tone? The first moves have already been made
- in England, where instead of simply demonopolizing long distance, the
- government authorized a "duopoly," permitting England's globe-spanning
- Cable & Wireless to establish Mercury Communications to provide local
- dial tone as well. Mercury has done so in more than one way. In the
- major cities, Mercury immediately pulled fiber into abandoned steam
- pipes and used Northern Telecom's telephone network architecture and
- equipment to pop electronic exchanges in service with a speed most
- telephone people would not understand.
-
- The Mercury network was operational almost overnight, in typical
- telephone capital plan terms. And, Mercury offered services that
- British Telecom hadn't thought of, like Centrex, intrinsically
- available in the NT equipment, but not in BT-controlled designs, even
- the fabled System X. In less-dense areas, Mercury used existing
- technology to use vacant capacity in cable TV systems to reach
- telephone subscribers. The latter method has been slow to expand, but
- not for technical limits as much as economic disagreement with the
- cable operators.
-
- The implication for the U.S. is obvious: Your local cable TV company
- has the transmission plant in place to become the "other phone company
- in town." The technology to get telephone channels on the present
- coaxial cble plant exists; there is no need for a "fiber rebuild" to
- handle the need. Existing unused capacity in many US cable TV systems
- offers in the order ot 50,000 lines of capacity in every cable passing
- every building. The "fiber" story is chanted by Telcos, because they
- need fiber to get their capacity up to be able to compete in wideband
- data and television carriage. Adding fiber to the cable TV systems is
- just a convenience and modernization to their plant. In fact, in many
- disparate areas of the nation, cable TV companies have quietly sold
- telephone and data channel capacity for years, some even
- interconnected between cable companies for distances in excess of 100
- miles, and channels up to T-1 digital rate. Again, these are not
- applications stories your Telco-paid "consultant" is likely to tell
- you about, but they are not secret nor are they illegal. Carrying a
- dial tone down them is no great technology problem at all.
-
- Another front of the attack on the "dial tone monopoly" exists in the
- buzzword "co-location" now being raised more loudly by another new
- form of competition to the local Telcos, the Alternative Access
- Carriers. The AACs are typically local fiber optic network providers
- such as the Metropolitan Fiber Systems now building in more than 20
- cities around the nation, with nearly parallel competition from
- Teleport Communications in most of the same cities, while there are a
- number of unpublicized regional local fiber companies, like Florida's
- Intermedia Communications. Williams Telecommunications Group
- headquartered in Tulsa, OK seems to be making moves to acquire some of
- these firms and as well build some plant of its own in cities.
-
- Another aspect of this incursion into the "local monopoly" may come
- from MCI, through its acquisition last year of the local facilities of
- Western Union Telegraph natiowide. My own work led to discovering
- miles of brand new Western Union conduit in the streets of Los Angeles
- late last year prior to the MCI purchase, while another recent
- revelation was discovery of *wooden* WUTCo conduits in Oklahoma City
- recently. All this is now MCI property, and its purpose is obvious;
- MCI's intent to use it is not yet so obvious.
-
- The AAC segment is following MFS's lead to get local Telcos ordered to
- permit interconnection of their channels to user premises to Telco
- dial tone.
-
- But, they have no need to wait for that. They can just as well import
- dial tone from wherever they want, for VSATs already make that
- practical. In fact, if the U.S. can get cheap computer data entry
- performed on Caribbean islands by VSAT link, what is there to prevent
- U.S. AACs from importing cheap dial tone via VSAT from them as well?
- Probably nothing, if anyone really looks into the possibility.
-
- And, most recent, we have alternative space-based potentials.
- Motorola's IRIDIUM is but one, and has recently been well-publicized
- and described. Less public is NASA's Personal Access Satellite System
- (PASS), which proposes to use techniques rather well-developed by the
- military for acquiring and tracking on geosynchronous satellites. PASS
- focuses on developing use of the 35 gigahertz portion of the spectrum
- where enormous dish gains are possible with 0.3 meter (12 inch!)
- dishes and tiny transportable earth stations, offering megabit-sized
- data streams to even the remotest of locations. Both IRIDIUM and PASS
- propose use of satellite "crosslinks," the satellite term for having
- the switching network in the sky with direct trunklines between
- satellites. So, you could readily be in Detroit but getting your dial
- tone from Auckland. In fact, what's to say there can't be a "virtual
- Centrex" located in satellites, so the "global corporation" can have a
- "global Centrex?"
-
- In this context of our ability to get a dial tone from anywhere at a
- cheap price, does it really seem so strange that we do it? The
- technology for much of it is already in hand; some of it has really
- already been used, and all of it is so close to accomplishment that we
- will be doing it soon.
-
- The largest obstacle is not in technology at all; it is in people's
- emotions and in vested economic interests of an industry that faces
- threats many of its most endangered species participants cannot even
- understand: America's local "natural monopoly" telephone companies.
-
- ----------------
-
- (Historical afternote: One way to understand the way in which the
- "natural dial tone monopoly" has been fabricated and ingrained into
- minds in the U.S. is to read a book on the non-Bell "independent"
- telephone industry. This history has been documented several times
- this century, and the latest is titled, "The Spirit of Independent
- Telephony," by Charles A. Pleasance, 1989, ISBN 0-9622202-0-7.
-
- It indexes 37 U.S. cities that once had independent telcos competing
- with Bell, and I know of others that had multiple independent Telcos,
- some until after WW II. This history will surprise some when they
- learn that the Independent telcos even tried to form a non-Bell long
- distance network; one that Bell interests finally quashed with the
- formation of AT&T's Long Lines "department," really a shadow company
- that built the long-distance links and pooled the money collected for
- long distance calls. The point here is that the "natural monopoly"
- concept for dial tone is a fabrication that may have made sense in
- 1913, was driven home by vested interests, and today is obviously a
- dinosaur running out of food.)
-
- ------------------------------
-
- End of TELECOM Digest Special: Dial Tone Monopoly
- ******************************
-