Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!harpo!eagle!karn
From: karn@eagle.UUCP (Phil Karn)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Modem Users Beware: BELL $$$
Message-ID: <1116@eagle.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 15-Oct-83 03:32:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: eagle.1116
Posted: Sat Oct 15 03:32:27 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 16-Oct-83 10:05:27 EDT
References: <1997@utah-cs.UUCP>, <5480@cornell.UUCP> druxu.755
Lines: 64

Local data services and the alternatives is one of my favorite topics;
I'd like to add a few comments of my own to the fray.

Clearly, charging for having modems PER SE connected to your phone line
is unfair; I suspect that this particular tariff will get thrown out not
only because it is unreasonable but also because there is no way for the
telco to detect them without monitoring phone calls.  True, you're
supposed to report direct connect modems, but not accoustic couplers.

What is most likely to happen in Oklahoma if people complain enough
is that the "modem charge" will get replaced with steep connect time
charges.  In other words, the computer users will have a relatively
easily evadable charge replaced with an unavoidable one, probably just
as large if you use your modem a lot.

Clearly, the present situation is a bad one.  The telcos have a large
amount of plant invested that is designed for voice traffic and there is
also a growing need for local data service which is uneconomical to
handle via the old network.  There are two general ways out: innovation
by the Telcos and bypass by non-Telco carriers.

In the first category is Local Area Data Transport (LADT) which is being
developed for a home information field trial in Florida.  This uses
supersonic FSK modems on your local loop to carry full duplex data at
4.8 kbps to a packet switch at the central office.  I do not know how
if or when this service will become generally available. Clearly, however,
if the Telcos are going to provide an alternative to dialup modems, this
will be it.

In the second category there are several alternatives: two-way cable TV
and packet radio.  While all the technology has existed for the first
(Sytek, etc) for quite some time, I don't know of any regular CATV company
that is providing this kind of service on a general basis.  (If anybody knows
of one, I'd very much like to know the details.)  I would speculate that
the average CATV company is more interested in selling pay TV channels
than in experimenting with an exotic, special interest technology
for which they don't know how to charge.  Selling two-way services would
also move them a step closer to being considered common carriers, something
they've been trying to avoid for some time.

Packet radio has the interesting characteristic of being something that
you can take the initiative on instead of waiting for somebody else to
come to your door selling a data service. If you have the equipment and
can get an FCC license, that's all you need.  While there is no
"Personal Packet Radio Service" yet, I believe the FCC is now in the
most permissive mood it has ever been toward innovative new services. If
the system is strictly experimental and is not to be used for business,
then all you need is an amateur radio license.  The FCC greatly
liberalized the rules for digital data transmissions in the amateur
service a while ago, so that they are no longer a limiting factor. 
Quite a bit of original packet radio work is already taking place in the
amateur service, and I think you will see some impressive things coming
out of it.

If you want to experiment with packet radio for business, it should not
take too much effort to get an experimental FCC license if you do your
homework and can prove it to the FCC.  Of course, the fact that the
license is "experimental" means that the technology isn't really all
here yet, so if you just want simple, hassle free data communications,
then you're still probably best off sticking with the telephone!

The opinions expressed herein are strictly my own.

Phil Karn