home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!telecom-request
- Date: Sat, 9 Jan 93 09:44 PST
- From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
- Subject: Re: SS7 Links Fron CA to NY
- Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
- Message-ID: <telecom13.17.5@eecs.nwu.edu>
- Organization: Green Hills and Cows
- Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
- Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
- X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
- X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
- X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 17, Message 5 of 9
- Lines: 31
-
- tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> writes:
-
- > So the PUC could order this be done in PB-land and also require that
- > PB negotiate with the switch vendors to insure the capability is
- > retained from this day forward.
-
- Boy, are you giving the CPUC an order of magnitude credit more than it
- deserves! You have to understand that the CPUC is absolutely brain
- dead. I could give you a list of things that are wrong with CA
- utilities as long as your arm that the CPUC shrugs off routinely.
- Fortunately, the marketplace provides a modicum of inherent
- regulation, even in monopolies.
-
- In any event, I can guarantee you that the California
- excuse-for-a-regulatory board has not a clue regarding the switch
- features, technological ramifications, or in fact anything more
- complex than dialing a call. Check that -- the commissioners have
- secretaries place calls.
-
- Example: Remember the matter that I brought up a couple of years ago
- about the fact that all cellular prefixes in the Bay Area should carry
- no toll and be available for $.20 from utility phones? I checked and
- this is indeed the tariff. Six months of griping to Pac*Bell and the
- PUC has never resolved the problem of inconsistent charging from PB
- payphones. Our PUC at work.
-
-
- John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 | FAX:
- john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407
-
-