Xref: utzoo comp.mail.misc:5504 comp.mail.uucp:6596 news.admin:14504 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!chinacat!chip From: chip@chinacat.unicom.com (Chip Rosenthal) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.uucp,news.admin Subject: Re: BITFTP grief! Message-ID: <1991May20.180914.26084@chinacat.unicom.com> Date: 20 May 91 18:09:14 GMT References: <1991May18.190644.27513@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991May19.133104.11572@balkan.TNT.COM> <1991May19.194044.24840@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> Distribution: na Organization: Unicom Systems Development, Inc. Lines: 18 In article <1991May19.194044.24840@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gsh7w@astsun9.astro.Virginia.EDU (Greg Hennessy) writes: >That is your decision, hence your problem. Calm down, Greg. It wasn't his decision - it was the Texas PUC which decided for him. The Texas PUC has mandated all carriers offer 900 blocking to customers. If the carrier can't offer this service, then 900 calls must be blocked through the entire exchange until the service is available. A good number of Texas exchanges are currently cutoff from 900 numbers. Therefore, there are folks out there willing to pay for a call to uunet to grab stuff who can't. But that's still all beside the point - I don't think that justifies BITFTP or mail servers. -- Chip Rosenthal | Don't play so Unicom Systems Development 512-482-8260 | loud, Mr. Collins.