Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site cbosgd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!clyde!ihnp4!cbosgd!mark
From: mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton)
Newsgroups: net.dcom
Subject: Re: Modem Users Beware: BELL 5959$ - (nf)
Message-ID: <455@cbosgd.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Oct-83 22:21:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbosgd.455
Posted: Wed Oct 19 22:21:57 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 20-Oct-83 22:18:53 EDT
References: <3325@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus
Lines: 11

Does the OK tariff also apply in Texas?  Can anyone tell how the
tariff defines "modem"?  Is it in terms of the protocol, the
functionality, the frequencies transmitted, or left undefined?
I can picture a computer emulating 212 protocol not being considered
a "modem" because it's a "computer".

I think it's pretty clear that there is a big demand for an unlimited
class of service, and we modem users are one of the groups who make
up that demand.  Until TPC offers us a reasonable alternative (e.g.
direct digital service) I don't think they have any moral right to
try to force us to give up our modems.