Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pyrdc!netsys!vector!nobody From: USEREAFJ%RPITSMTS.BITNET@MITVMA.MIT.EDU Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: (none) Message-ID: Date: 17 Oct 88 08:54:32 GMT Sender: chip@vector.UUCP Lines: 81 Approved: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-Submissions-To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu (TELECOM Digest Coordinator) X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.uucp (USENET Telecom Moderator) X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 8, issue 163, message 1 I've noticed in recent Telecoms that there was mention of allowing alternate long distance carriers to access the AT&T/Bell calling card database, so that alternate LD customers can use the same 0+ dialing system that Bell Calling Cards use... - Such a system would seem to make placing a calling card call even more difficult than it has recently become. (And it is ESPECIALLY difficult for people who travel from state to state). - For example, when I dial a inter-late (roughly "long distance") calling card call from a Bell payphone, the call goes to AT&T and thus AT&T's billing/calling card equipment. I believe that all Bell Operating Companies (and perhaps even the GTE and other "lesser" ( :-) ) operating companies) use AT&T as the default carrier for all 1+ and 0+ calls from their own payphones. Ie, New York Tel or Pac*Bell will connect you to AT&T is you were to dial Chicago from one of their payphones, unless you specify another carrier with a 10xxx/950/800 number. - Therefore, if you were to dial 0+312-555-1212 from, lets say, Los Angeles, you get put through to AT&T's equipment. Now if you have an AT&T account, fine; the call will go through with no problem. But let's say the customer has a Sprint account, and is trying to use his Sprint card instead. (This assumes that Sprint has some arrangement to have AT&T Card like digit formats, with a PIN number that identifies the caller as a Sprint customer.) Should the AT&T Calling Card system pass the call over to Sprint, to let Sprint handle the call? Should AT&T proccess the call, and then bill Sprint? And at what rates? - The problem appears to be that once the customer dials 0+ number, the call automatically goes over to the local Bell Co. or AT&T, and THEN takes the PIN number, after it has reached the final carrier's calling card equipment. It would be foolish to have a call go to AT&T, and THEN have AT&T send the call back to Sprint once AT&T realized it was a Sprint calling card number which was being used. - Morever, I think that AT&T is not allowed to provide intra-lata calls in some areas, such as Mass, New York or Connecticut. (Or AT&T hasn't asked to do so...) So if a Sprint customer wanted to call from Boston to Lexington (both in the 617 LATA) , and wanted to use the Bell 0+ method (not the 800 FONcard number or 950-1033), then he would have to go over New England Tel's Calling Card system, which would see the Sprint number, and then hand it over to Sprint. But once it did so, a customer would be able to make a second call (a "sequence call") without hanging up to ANYWHERE else he wanted to, since Sprint does both intra and inter-LATA calls. IE, after calling from Boston to Lexington, I want to call LA on the same call. Under some terribly stupid divestiture rule, I can no longer do this on my AT&T/Bell card. Since I made a local call first, I am on New England Tel's equipment, so I have to hang up and dial 0+213-555-1212 to get LA over AT&T's equipment. In other words, there are two calling card systems - One which the local Bell uses for it's calls, and the other which AT&T uses. Some areas don't have this (like CT) and some will eventually get it (like New York City), while most of the larger metro areas allready do. However, Sprint presently does both - I can sequence call from local to long distance back and forth as manyt times as I want. This of course is over their 800/950 number, but if Sprint were to be allowed to make use of Bell's/AT&T's 0+ system, they would have the advantage of unrestricted sequence calling which AT&T customers, unfortunately, do not. - All in all, it seems both too cumbersome and too unfair to allow Sprint, MCI and all the others have 0+ access. Interestingly, if Green had allowed Bell Calling Card/operator system to remain the same (ie, not splitting up services between AT&T and the Bells) then it would seem to be easier to institute alternate long distance carriers' use of the 0+ system. If there was only one system, which would be operated by the local Bells, then the local Bell could determine who would handle the call by the PIN number, and hand the call off to the appropriate carrier. (Very much like 10xxx dialing is now...Of course I don't know too many people who ever use it, but that's another story...) Even this would be complicated, but it would be less complicated than doing so under the current "dual" system. - If I've made any mistakes please let me know...This stuff is in my thesis and I'd like to get it right! :-) - -Doug usereafj@rpitsmts.bitnet (temp)