Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: bukys@cs.rochester.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Being Charged For No-Answers
Message-ID: <5181@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 14 Mar 90 15:41:08 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 32
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 174, Message 7 of 8


I have recently discovered that my department is being charged for
long-distance phone calls after 4 rings, whether there is an answer or
not.  The University has a ROLM phone system internally.  It does
"least cost" routing to a number of long-distance carriers.

Now, in the consumer world, I thought it was long settled that charges
for incomplete calls were not acceptable and that the various
technical issues had been laid to rest.  Am I right?

Now, I'm wondering 

	(1) whether there is any technical excuse:

		(a) in general, or

		(b) for a PBX (e.g. our ROLM system), or

		(c) for international calls.

	(2) whether this violates any tarriffs.

I will be pursuing this with our telecommunications people as well,
but would appreciate the commentary of all you smart and disinterested
telecom experts.


Liudvikas Bukys
<bukys@cs.rochester.edu>
University of Rochester
Rochester, NY
USA