On Friday 30 May 2003 05:10 pm, Buyer wrote:
> They can;'t "compress" a DS3 that way.
>
> You are mixing what they are required to deliver to the customer via
> Pairgain and other make do local loops with what they do as a matter of
> practice on intermachine trunks which are all 64k DS0 and multiples
> thereof.

Bingo.  TDM trunking over OC-n or DS3 is dirt cheap.  Compression is 
expensive.  VoIP is more expensive to produce, except for the uncompressed 
type that say Sonus runs, and that's almost a wash.  So if an ILEC were to 
spend *more* money in order to *degrade* service, they'd either a) get a 
lickin' from the Commission, or b) add yet another honking big count to that 
antitrust suit that's potentially a-brewin' every time they hassle a CLEC.

BUT... (see below)

> > As a facilities based ISP trying to get into the wonderful
> > world of CLEC, I had thought about Virtual NPA/NXX as
> > a way to serve a greater geographic area.
> >
> > But I concluded that any self-serving ILEC could hose
> > me by simply compressing the DS3 (or whatever) that
> > was doing transport to the point where I would be lucky
> > to get a 14.4Kb connection for the ISP part of the
> > business.  So I decided that it was too risky.  After all,
> > says I to myself, the ILEC is under no obligation to do
> > data over 14.4Kb here in Texas.
> >
> > Now I see Focal and Level 3 going after the business
> > and succeeding.  Verizon is hauling ISP traffic from
> > the location where I have my largest POP roughly 88
> > miles to a Level 3 POI - and getting darn little revenue
> > from it compared to what they charge me for a single
> > PRI.
>>
> > Are ILEC's THAT stupid?  Or is there some reason why
> > the ILEC can't take Level 3's pants off?
> >
> > What am I missing here?  Should I be looking at doing
> > likewise?

The ILECs are certainly trying to knock the VNXX operators off the air.  They 
won an inch on ISP-bound recip, so now they're going for the proverbial mile. 
The USTA has an active program to fight VNXX.

There's a case I'm involved with, pending decision by the Texas PUC the week 
after next, where the ILEC in question is trying to essentially knock all 
VNXX *and FX* off the air, by holding that their originating callers should 
pay toll to the physical location of the modem, NXX be damned.  The ALJ 
actually agreed with them, preponderance of evidence to the contrary 
notwithstanding.  (Note: I'm prejudiced; I was the lead witness for the good 
guy.) I hope L3 is putting the heat on.  Trouble is, big outfits like that 
often miss stuff on lists like that while it's happening, and get blindsided.

ILECs are also fighting VNXX by 
a) claiming that the codes shouldn't be issued, or should be revoked, because 
the customers with those numbers aren't "local" (ignoring the precedent of FX 
-- note that the Maine PUC bought this one, though others haven't yet);
b) claiming that the calls to those codes should be subject to switched-access 
(toll) charges anyway, paid by the CLEC, because the calls aren't really 
"local; and
c) requiring the terminating CLEC to pay for the trunking of inbound calls, 
rather than the originating ILEC, making it very costly (this is in quite a 
few interconnect agreements already).

The best workaround for a CLEC is to offer real, live local service to 
*somebody* in every rate center where they have a VNXX code.  That makes it a 
real code, not "virtual".  The *other* users, the ISPs, are then just FX, 
albeit foreign-code-in-switch style, not long-extension-cord style.  But 
there's ample ILEC precedent for doing that.  EELs are a good way to get 
customers in distant areas without collocation.  L3's switchless approach is 
weak, because it doesn't support local dial tone on EELs.  So they could be 
hurt in some states.

-- 
 Fred Goldstein      k1io   fgoldstein at ionary dot com
 ionary Consulting      http://www.ionary.com/ 

------------------------ANNOUNCEMENT---------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
                     >> Recycle Your Hardware <<
              Clean out your closets and make some cash.
               Reach thousands of ISP equipment buyers.
                     http://www.isp-equipment.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Replies

[isp-clec] Re: Virtual NPA/NXX, Roderick Beck

[isp-clec] Re: Virtual NPA/NXX, Kevin Burke

Replies

[isp-clec] Virtual NPA/NXX, Larry Summers

[isp-clec] Re: Virtual NPA/NXX, Buyer