Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: kabra437@pallas.athenanet.com (Ken Abrams)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Full Service Long Distance
Message-ID: <15738@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 31 Dec 90 16:05:00 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Reply-To: Ken Abrams <pallas!kabra437@uunet.uu.net>
Organization: Athenanet, Inc.,  Springfield, Illinois
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 11, Issue 2, Message 6 of 11


>The complicated part in having other IECs handle coin-paid calls is, I
>think, as much an accounting problem as it is one of technology.  If

>[Moderator's Note: Why do you feel the accounting would be any more of
>a problem than it is now? At present, the collecting agent (here, it
>is of course IBT) still has to detirmine which coins were deposited
>for local calls and which coins were deposited for long distance

You are probably correct about the method used to divvy up the money.
I don't really know because I have never been involved in that part of
the business.  It COULD become much more complicated, however, if
there were, for instance, twenty players in the game instead of just
one.  I can't help but think of the "slamming" story.  What do you do
if the total "bill" from all the carriers adds up to more than what
you collected from the money box?  I sure wouldn't want to be the one
who had to try to figure out why that happened!
 

Ken Abrams        uunet!pallas!kabra437
Illinois Bell     kabra437@athenanet.com
Springfield       (voice) 217-753-7965