Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: asuvax!gtephx!mothra!bakerj@ncar.ucar.edu (Jon Baker)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Boston Gas "Specially-equipped Gas Meter"
Message-ID: <8559@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 1 Jun 90 17:12:18 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: gte
Lines: 47
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 407, Message 10 of 10


In article <8436@accuvax.nwu.edu>, PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu (Peter Weiss)
writes:

> Does this mean they only install this stuff at dwellings that have
> telephone circuits installed?

I would presume so.

> Are there any implications on what kind of circuits?

Might not work with multi-party, but with most other common
residential connections it should work.  Wouldn't work on a pure data
line.

> What happens if a data call is in progress?

A call is a call.  If the line is siezed, the metering is aborted.  If
you have a data line (as opposed to voice line transmitting voice-band
data), I doubt this system would work.

> If measured service, who foots the cost of the call?

The utility, of course.  It is a service provided to the utility by
the telco.  The telco allows the utility to use their facilities for a
fee.

> Is there an implied theft of (telephone) service from the subscriber's
> point of view?

Why?  If you go off-hook during the metering process, the metering is
aborted.  There is no denial of service at any time to the subscriber.

> What does the FCC & PUC think of all this?

Ask 'em.  Since it's been going on for a while, I doubt they object.
The line up to your house is telco property, after all.

> If this is saving the utility money, will it be reflected back into
> the rates?

Are you kidding?  Why should it?

> I guess these are rhetorical questions since I don't really want to
> start a flame war.

No one does ...