Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: JDurand@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Data vs Voice
Message-ID: <12630@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 25 Sep 90 19:38:56 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 22
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 681, Message 4 of 11


In Message-ID: <12542@accuvax.nwu.edu> adiron!tro@uunet.uu.net (Tom
Olin) writes:

>Please pardon my ignorance.  I don't work in the telecom industry and
>I don't know many of the technical details.
I work in the industry and still don't know a lot of the details. 8-)

>They have pointed out the higher bandwidth utilized by data calls 
>and the problems of multiplexing such calls.

>What happens if all those callers simultaneously break into song or in
>some other way push their duty cycles up to 100%?  

It just occurred to me that all of us people sitting on hold all day
should have the lowest duty cycle except for the constant
music-on-hold that raises our duty cycle up to that of the dreaded
modems.  Does that mean there should be higher rates for companies
that put people on hold for a large percentage of their calls?  8-)


Jerry Durand, Durand Interstellar, Inc., jdurand@cup.portal.com, 408 356-3886