Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: gardner@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Mike Gardner) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Thoughts on BBSs and Business Rates Message-ID: <16258@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 21 Jan 91 04:14:04 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 45 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 44, Message 5 of 11 >And if calling a BBS forced a measured service tariff, BBS users would >be discouraged from using them (it would be trivial to run up hundreds >of dollars of charges calling a BBS on measured service), and the >sysops would complain about the charge driving them out of hobby. It >sounds to me like a reasonable compromise was reached; limiting a BBS >to three lines limits the amount of load that BBS can put on the >network, but still permits the service to be free. I've slogged through a lot of this topic and I don't seem to recall anyone providing real information about how BBS's impact the switch traffic in a reasonably sized city(say 150,000) people. How many BBS's(and lines) exit per 100,000 people. What percentage of the total traffic in the local switch can be attributed to local BBS lines? 1%, 10% .005%? Local switching systems are designed with some "typical" or "average" use in mind. Surely this average varies with the size of city, "type" of city (industrial vs college town) etc. The local operating company must then design the local switch to accommodate the local usage patterns. Why should bbs use be considered as anything other than part of the "local usage pattern"? I'm not sure of the exact details of the process but I'm fairly confident that if a local switch needed expansion because of local usage patterns that that cost would be easily reflected in the rate base. Of course it can be said that if you charge the "excessive" users either through measured service or business rates(back door) that you don't have to raise everyone's rates. Well that's ok, EXCEPT there you go again, making comparisons against this "average and acceptable use". This "standard" is not defined in the tariffs nor anywhere else in the public domain. Why is putting four lines on a BBS any worse than building a twenty unit apartment building? Are we talking about an inability to design the system to meet local needs, or the unwillingness to admit that when you get a phone line you are only entitled to use (or be called) up to some arbitrary amount before the phone company must invent extra charging methods that are not defined in the tarrifs? University of Illinois, Computing Services Office 1304 W Springfield, Urbana, Il 61801 Michael G. Gardner, Assistant Director, 1122 DCL (217)244-0914 gardner@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu FAX (217)244-0916