From pub-infra-request Tue Dec 10 13:34:55 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA05611 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Tue, 10 Dec 1991 18:34:57 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 18:34:55 -0500 Message-Id: <199112102334.AA05606@eff.org> Subject: What is ISDN Good For? From: mkapor (Mitch Kapor) Sender: ckd habs@panix.com (Harry Shapiro) writes: "What applications that require ISDN can't already run with existing products like switched 56 kbit, and 14,400 modems?" Switched 56 kilobit service has the same order of bandwidth as 64 kbit ISDN, but its availability is strikingly different. Switched 56 is not intended to be a residential service. Our vision of ISDN is that you simply order it the way you order an additional voice-grade phone line. Further, we believe ISDN must be priced like voice telephone service. Switched 56 is not priced like voice service. It is much more expensive. ISDN must be ubiquitous and affordable. Switched 56, while useful for businesses which can afford expensive installation and fees is not. The ISDN rate of 64 kb is at the critical threshold which will permit interactive multimedia using video and audio compression. 14.4 is simply too slow, even with compression, for videotelephony, much less other more demanding forms of video. Before it is argued that the effective rate of a V.32bis modem is not 14.4 kb, but 14.4 kb plus compression effects, let me point out that the same compression techniques can and will be applied over 64 kb ISDN lines, boosting its effective rate by an equivalent factor of two to four. While it is still considered heretical in some quarters to assert that VHS-quality video will be possible over a 64 kb line, there is a growing consensus among researchers at the cutting edge of work in this area that that is exactly where we are headed. In such a scenario, using desktop personal computers of the year 1995 as video production studios, everyone with access to a PC and ISDN potentially becomes a video producer, with ISDN as the switched distribution network providing video dial-tone. This will open the floodgates of innovation in video, acheiving the richness of video (not passive, but interactive) with the type of diversity heretofore associated only with print. Beyond ISDN are other protocols which can run over copper-pairs, such as ADSL, which runs at 300 kb /second. More on that later. Mitchell Kapor Electronic Frontier Foundation From pub-infra-request Tue Dec 10 13:33:37 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA05564 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Tue, 10 Dec 1991 18:33:39 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 18:33:37 -0500 Message-Id: <199112102333.AA05559@eff.org> Subject: ADSL From: mkapor (Mitch Kapor) Sender: ckd habs@panix.com (Harry Shapiro) writes: If we really want to have competition for the Cable and Telco companies we need a digital product that can let Telco deliver movies and entertainment at VCR quality and above... It is within the technical ability of cable companies to offer phone service, plus cable and other people offering PCN. ADSL can be used to offer VCR quality video, using compression techniques to most homes. ADSL, is a T1 speed (1.54 mbits) connection into the home with a 16 kbit up to 144 kbit bi-directional (base rate isdn) connection. Uncompressed CD audio, compressed NTSC, computer graphics, etc. All this can be offered within a T1 rate. (All most anything we (as consumers) want, t1 could do... Yes some of us want 45 mbits and some of us what even more.... ADSL (Asymmetrical Digital Subscriber Line) is still in field trials. It will be in trials in the 92/94 time frame... The sept. 16, 1991 -page 18- issue of computer world reports, "ADSL, developed by Bell Communications Research Inc., (Bellcore) delivers a bitstream of 1.5M bit/sec. to homes with two-way, Basic-Rate Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN)" The August 26 th 1991 issue of FIBER OPTIC NEWS on page 8, reports, "VCR quality television, voice and data can be sent simultaneously over a single cooper telephone line... The achievement is possible because of ... ADSL which uses digital signal processing techniques and experimental very-large-scale integrated (VLSI) circuitry." The June 10th issue of Telephony on page 27 reports, "ADSL... has a design goal of 18,000 feet on just one copper pair.... The Technology The anticipated range of ADSL equipment using quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) is from 0 to 18,000 feet. About 75% of residential telephone customers are served today on non-loaded facilities less than 18,000 feet from the CO." [We agree. ADSL sure sounds like a good thing. We are finding out what Bellcore and RBOC deployment plans are, if any. As previously noted, we think video over ISDN is a valid medium. But faster is clearly better, especially if it still runs over copper. -MK] My point being lets not spend public money on things like ISDN, when something better and more useful is coming. [We're not advocating spending large amounts of additional public money on ISDN. Telco plant modernization for digital switches etc. is going to happen whether or not consumers get ubiquitous, affordable ISDN. We're paying for it anyway. -MK] From pub-infra-request Tue Dec 10 13:35:47 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA05634 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Tue, 10 Dec 1991 18:35:50 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 18:35:47 -0500 Message-Id: <199112102335.AA05629@eff.org> Subject: Initial Positive Response to the Open Platform Proposal From: mkapor (Mitch Kapor) Sender: ckd The initial response to the Open Platform concept has been extremely positive in many quarters. 1. Congress In a letter to Mitchell Kapor from the Chairman of the Subcommittee with primarily jurisdiction over telecommunications policy dated November 5, 1991, Representative Edward J. Markey complemented Mitchell Kapor on his "insights on the development of a national public information infrastructure" which "were appreciated greatly by myself and the Members of the Subcommittee." Chairman Markey, writing to Mitch Kapor as a representative of the computer industry, called for other leaders in the industry to participate more actively in the policy process. The letter states: "In crafting the right policies [for the telephone network], the assistance of you and your colleagues in the computer industry is critical if we are to bring the benefits of advanced information technology to the American public. As I said at the hearing, we need to pursue policies that encourage the Bell companies to work with other sectors of the communications industry to create a consumer-oriented, public information network. Please let me or my staff know what policies you and others in the computer industry believe would best serve the public interest in creating a reasonably priced, widely available network in which competition is open and innovation rewarded. I also want to learn what lessons from the computer industry over the past ten to fifteen years should apply to the current debate on structuring the information and communications networks of the future....I ask your help in gaining input from the computer industry so that the Subcommittee can shape policies that will bring this spirit of innovation and entrepreneurship to the information services industry. Key members on the Senate Commerce Committee have also expressed serious interest in the proposal and for it to be further developed in cooperation with others in the computer industry. We have agreed to reach out to leaders in the computer industry such as yourself to obtain your input and seek your participation in this policy process. 2. Communications Industry Since unveiling the proposal, Mitchell Kapor and Jerry Berman, EFF's Washington Office Director, have met with top officials of many of the communications and electronic publishing firms involved in the current debate, including the American Newspaper Publishers Association, the National Cable Television Association, Dun and Bradstreet, AT&T, and the Electronic Publishers Association. All have expressed enthusiasm about the Open Platform concept and have urged that we develop the proposal in more detail. They want to know if it is both economically and technically feasible to deploy a feature rich ISDN or whether innovation must await the full and costly deployment of residential fiber optics. 3. Consumer Groups On November 25, 1991 the Communications Policy Forum, a consumer forum cosponsored by the Consumer Federation of American, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and the American Civil Liberties Union, met to discuss the future of telecommunications policy in the wake of the court's decision to permit the RBOCS to engage in information services. At this meeting, EFF presented the Open Platform Proposal as a necessary part of any legislation that seeks both to establish fair competition as well as innovative health, education, and other information services. Consumer groups expressed great interest in the idea and called on EFF to develop its concept further and to use the Communications Policy Forum as a mechanism for developing a more detailed open platform design for further consumer review in early 1992. From mkapor Tue Dec 10 14:43:29 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA07520 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Tue, 10 Dec 1991 19:43:53 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1991 19:43:29 -0500 Message-Id: <199112110043.AA07515@eff.org> From: mkapor (Mitch Kapor) Subject: Tutorial on Telephone network architecture [Tim Gorman <71336.1270@compuserve.com> provides the following useful tutorial on ISDN in the telephone network. -MK] Probably the first comment that needs to be made about ISDN availability is the capability of the network to provide the service. There are several pieces of the network involved in providing the service and all must be available or none of the rest are useful. Basically these consist of: 1. local subscriber outside plant facilities a. copper pairs b. Subscriber carrier (either copper or fiber based) 2. Central Office line card modules (and corresponding line cards) 3. Central office line concentrating modules (primarily software) 4. Central office interoffice trunk modules 5. Central office switch generics Central office --------------- First, some generic background on central office switch architecture is needed. For the most part, the following descriptions apply to all digital central offices regardless of vendor. | | | | | | | | |dist. |_____|line |_____|concentrating|_____|switch |__________ |frame | |cards| |module | |fabric | | | | | | | | |interface| | |______| |_____| |_____________| |_________| | | | | | | | | | Subscriber |trunk | | Outside interoffice ________|interface |_________| Plant facilities |module | |__________| | | (controls the interoperation of |Central | the modules and some of the |Processing| complex internal operations) |Unit (CPU)| |__________| The line card module, concentrating module, and switch fabric module are all smart, highly sophisticated pieces of equipment. Although some call them "multiplexing" equipment, in essence they are all dedicated purpose computers. As such, they all have software (or firmware or whatever is appropriate to the vendors architecture and jargon) which dictate their operation. In many cases, this software is arranged as various packages or "features" that are licensed (via a right-to-use fee) from the vendor. These software features include software for the various module operations as well as for the CPU "generic" software. ISDN functionality is usually included as one or more of these features (e.g. basic ISDN, D-channel packet, D-channel backup could all be different feature packages). There may be multiple physical variants of each module for use in providing different serving arrangements in different switches. These may also many times be distinguished by different pricing levels. At least one vendor has available a standard, analog line card/line drawer/line frame module and a different ISDN, 2B1Q compatible line card/line drawer/line frame module. The 2B1Q ISDN line frame module is to be upgraded in 1992 to be physically and software compatible with all standard analog line cards as well as the ISDN 2B1Q line cards. Network ----------- Making ISDN a viable service will require providing the right physical equipment and software in the network. Individual physical pieces that will need to be considered are: a. line terminating equipment b. interoffice trunking equipment (for 64kb clear channel signaling) c. interoffice facilities (for 64kb clear channel signaling) d. subscriber loop carrier equipment It is probable that most existing line terminating equipment is not ISDN capable. The primary reason in most cases will probably have to do with the need for splitting off the D-channel signaling and routing it through the switch to the necessary processing modules. Most existing line module equipment just doesn't provide for this. This does, of course, depend on the switch vendors equipment design. Most trunk interface module equipment now in use is not 64kb clear channel signaling capable. For at least two major switch vendors, making the equipment capable will not require provisioning new equipment modules but will require adding "common equipment" to the existing modules. The common equipment consists of additional plug-in boards providing the necessary functionality. The major problem with this upgrade is the complexity of adding these plug-ins. If you have a trunk interface module that handles twenty DS-1 lines and they are all in service only two approaches are available. You can obtain "turn-down releases" on all of the circuits, busy them out, perform appropriate maintenance activity on the interface module, add the new circuit packs, download any needed software to the trunk interface peripheral, and then reverse the previous steps to put the circuits back in service. The alternative is to provide a "conversion" trunk interface module (properly equipped of course), transition all DS-1 lines from the next module to be converted to the conversion module, convert the just vacated one, and then continue the process with the next module in line and the one that was just converted. Both methods are VERY manpower intensive and therefore expensive to perform. It is also not a quick process in terms of overall interval. Manpower must be allocated to this task when other, higher priority service-impacting activities are not pending. Providing full ISDN capability in the interoffice facility network is much like providing it in the central office trunk interface modules. Multiplexing equipment, fiber terminating bays, line repeaters, etc. must be changed out or upgraded. The major complicating factor here is the number of circuits that can be involved and the resulting service impacts. Subscriber Loop Carrier -------------------------- Subscriber Loop Carrier (SLC) was developed to take advantage of DS1 signaling to save outside plant investment. By using two pairs to provide a DS1 span with a capability of 24 circuits, a savings of 22 pairs could be realized. Most Subscriber Loop Carrier (SLC) equipment being provided today operates much in the same fashion as standard T-1 equipment. This means each individual module provides some kind of grouping of 24 56kb lines. Different vendors provide different line capacities such as AT&T's SLC-96 (tm?) equipment. In order to provide full ISDN capability the equipment must first be upgraded to provide 64kb channel service instead of 56kb. Then the appropiate plug-in cards must be installed to interface with the actual pair going toward the subscribers location. The major concern in this serving arrangement will be the impact on equipment quantities. To serve 2B+D at a 160kb rate will probably require three channels (64kb * 3 = 192kb) on the SLC module. A large penetration of ISDN could result in having to increase equipment investment to a level of about three times what it is now. Some investigation also is needed to determine if ISDN and standard analog lines can co-exist on the same SLC module. If not, even a small penetration of ISDN could result in a large requirement for additional equipment. Generic SLC architecture looks as follows: 24 24 subscribers | | Lines | | |SLC | DS1 | | __ |Line | |Dist | |Central | |SLC | o/ \o |Interface|_______|Frame|_______|Office |_____//_______|Remote |____/\ |Module | | | |Terminal| // |Terminal| / \ |_________| |_____| |________| |________| ---- 2 lines (1-transmit) (1-receive ) The arrangement shown here is what is generically termed "dedicated" mode. Each subscriber has a channel to the switch available at all times. Most vendors offer enough intelligence in their terminals (usually via additional plug-ins) to also provide concentration ratio's ranging from 48 subscribers vying for 24 channels (2:1) to as high as 5:1. This would mean that of the 120 customers connected to the remote terminal, only 24 could have calls in progress at once. One primary reason for for SLC equipment not being exactly like standard T1 systems is the need to provide for additional signaling modes required in the loop plant. Interoffice trunk signaling generally uses what is termed 2-State signaling. The far end can signal you as either off-hook or on-hook (busy/idle, seizure/idle, etc.) Similarly, you can signal the far end an off-hook or on-hook. Physically, this signaling can take many forms: loop closed/loop open, battery reversal/normal battery, E lead ground/E lead open, etc. Basic station service typically uses 3-State signaling from the Central Office (CO) toward the station and 2-State from the station to the CO. The CO needs to signal battery applied to the line, battery not applied to the line, and alerting (usually ringing voltage). Special stations such as ground start lines or coin lines can use 3-State signaling or even higher (the CO needs to signal a coin station for coin collect, coin return, dialing pad enable, dialing pad disable, and ringing among others). This requires the SLC equipment to encode the signaling information in the PCM bitstream differently than standard T1. As an enhancement to this service, some switch vendors make what is termed "integrated" SLC modules for their switches. All this really does is take the central office terminal and integrate it directly into the switch architecture. The DS1 lines from the remote terminal can then be terminated directly on the central office switch. This architecture has never "caught on" in this area because of the difficulty in maintaining load balance objectives (i.e. you can't move a high usage line to a low usage line interface module to keep switch usage in balance without moving at least 23 other customers). Interoffice Facilities ---------------------- In general, interoffice facilities are arranged as follows: | |________| | | | |CO | DS1 |DS1 | |Light Fiber | |Trunk |________|to | |Terminating Bay | |Interface|________|DSx |________| or |______\ WORLD |Module |________|Multiplexer| |Digital Radio Bay| / |_________| |___________| |_________________| LFTB - Light Fiber Terminating Bay DRB - Digital Radio Bay MUX - DS1-to-DSx Multiplex/Demultiplex Bay DSX - Digital Signal X-conn (cross-connect) Bay COTIM - Central Office Trunk Interface Module DCS - Digital Crossconnect System A more detailed breakdown of a CO would look as follows: (fiber) | |_____| | | | | /| | | _| |________|LFTB|____\ WORLD | |____|/ |_____|DACS| _| | _| | |____| / |COTIM| | /| |____| _| | _|DS3| | | | \|________________|MUX|____|DSX|________| | | |____|DSX|________________| | _| | |LFTB|_____\ WORLD |_____| |___| |___| _|___| |____| / Instead of the fiber shown in this drawing, digital radio or cable based T1, T1C, and T2 may be used in the interoffice plant. Each piece of equipment in this arrangement must be capable of 64kb clear channel signaling or it cannot be made available on an end-to-end basis. For service protection, the trunk paths between two end points are usually spread over as wide a range of equipment as possible. Thus, providing 64kb clear channel capability for certain interoffice connections may involve updating a significant amount of equipment in the central office. From mkapor Wed Dec 11 12:17:32 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA05481 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Wed, 11 Dec 1991 17:17:35 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1991 17:17:32 -0500 Message-Id: <199112112217.AA05476@eff.org> From: Russ Nelson (by way of mkapor@eff.org (Mitch Kapor)) Subject: Tutorial on Telephone network architecture > [Tim Gorman <71336.1270@compuserve.com> provides the following useful > tutorial on ISDN in the telephone network. -MK] Tim left off the subscriber end, perhaps because this is more common knowledge. But I'll fill it in anyway... Everyone knows that ISDN carries synchronous 2B+D, and that each B is 64Kbps packet or circuit switched, and the D is 16Kbps packet switched. Synchronous means that the data is constantly flowing at the specified rate. Most modems in use today use asynchronous transmission, which means that each chunk of information has a starting indication and an ending indication. Packet switched means that the stream of bits is formatted into packets, and each packet is transported as a unit. Circuit switched means that the stream of bits goes from one end to another without being interpreted by the switching equipment. There are two different flavors of 2B+D: U and T. ANSI has defined two different interfaces in the customer's premises, T (or S/T) and U. The U interface connects directly to the switch over a 0 to 18,000 foot loop, and uses one pair. The T interface connects to the U interface through a signal converter called an NT1. It uses two pair (transmit and receive) and runs at most 1,000 feet. The U interface is electrically more sophisticated. The transmission rate is 80Kbaud and each pair of bits is encoded into four different voltage levels. This makes the data rate 160Kbps, plus it transmits and receives in both directions at the same time. It does this by knowing what it's sending, and subtracting that from what it's receiving. Then it digitally filters the result. This is necessary because the local loop to your premises may contain multiple changes in impedance. That happens when your wire gauge changes, or you have a tee connection. These impedance changes muddy the digital signal. There can be only one device on the U interface, most probably an NT1. The T interface, on the other hand, can be shared between multiple devices. This is done because you can hang a telephone, a modem, and a FAX machine off the same phone line. When a FAX machine calls you, your FAX machine answers. When a modem calls you, your modem answers, etc. There are three concerns with ISDN: o Powering o Wiring o Extensions Powering The current telephone network (POTS -- Plain Old Telephone Service [seriously]) is powered by the central office. Ever notice that your phone has a "REN"? That stands for Ringer Equivalence Number. It's given in units of the standard telephone bell. Your central office can ring about five of these bells. If the total of all your RENs is over five, then your phone may not ring. ISDN, on the other hand, uses no power from the central office. That seems like an advantage, but what happens when you lose local power. The central office still runs because it has its own batteries. But you can't make calls unless you have your ISDN sets on a UPS. Wiring POTS phones can and have been wired willy-nilly, in a star configuration, or bus. Because only two wires are necessary, sometimes only two wires work. ISDN, on the other hand, requires a single stretch of wire with terminators on both ends, and it requires four wires. Extensions POTS sets can join into an existing phone call simply by going off hook. Only one ISDN set can communicate on a B channel at a time. That means that only the originating or receiving set can communicate. All the other sets cannot transmit or receive. --russ I'm proud to be a humble Quaker. Peace is not the absence of war. Peace is the presence of a system for resolving conflicts before war becomes necessary. War never creates peace. From mkapor Thu Dec 12 14:46:57 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA14385 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Thu, 12 Dec 1991 19:47:06 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Thu, 12 Dec 1991 19:46:57 -0500 Message-Id: <199112130046.AA14379@eff.org> From: peterm@halcyon.com (Peter Marshall) (by way of mkapor@eff.org (Mitch Kapor)) Subject: Article on "The Argument Against ISDN" ...Let's set the mirrors aside and see what we really have with ISDN: ISDN provides 64 kilobit digital, full-duplex data. It does so to any other ISDN line when using a carrier that is fully digital, compatible and offers the service. ISDN provides point-to-point connections, similar to a telephone. Connections can be established in a few seconds. ISDN provides several enhanced features, such as calling line identification and data privacy.... Telephone companies invariably fear new technology.... New technology upsets rate structures. And new technology upsets *the natural order of things.* ISDN is a new technology.... ISDN represents competition to local dialtone loops.... There are many questions. The traditional telco response is simple: Charge a high enough price that these concerns simply go away because of the profits generated.... implementation of ISDN has involved changing out central office lines. Designing $1000 boxes for the customer end. It has meant converting the *entire* public nationwide network to an all-digital one. In short, ISDN was designed to take more than a decade to implement.... ISDN has some serious "reality checks" to go through to succeed. And unless it can pass that reality check, it will be increasingly a fantasy. Back when it was just a dream, it might have made sense to charge twice as much for an ISDN call.... But today, modems are equally fast, and thus ISDN *cannot* cost more per minute if it is to succeed in the mainstream marketplace. Because not everybody has ISDN lines to every desktop, ISDN has less effective connectivity than a modem. And this, too, reduces the value of ISDN. Because telephone companies are in no position to prevent independent competitive technology from being introduced, they will have to compete. The cost of installing an ISDN line must be low.... The cost of ISDN terminal equipment must be lowered.... What can be done to preserve the potential benefits of ISDN's ubiquitous digital service...? ISDN is better suited for some types of data than modems will be for perhaps another five years.... ISDN achieves its 64,000 bits per second speed *without* compression. This could be a tellingly significant point.... ISDN can combine a voice line with a data line for simultaneous use. This can eliminate the need for a second line.... ISDN, being a network service, may combine to offer X.25-like capability. This means that a single ISDN termination could maintain many simultaneous "virtual" connections through a packet-switched network.... To widely succeed, ISDN needs an aggressive posture. Terminal equipment costs must be affordable(or lower), per minute rate charges must be comparable(or lower), and efforts need to be made to achieve compatability with existing software. Otherwise, ISDN will merely service your Group IV FAX machine and your desktop video system. Maybe this is enough for your telephone company. But is it really enough for you?... -- The 23:00 News and Mail Service - +1 206 292 9048 - Seattle, WA USA PEP, V.32, V.42bis +++ A Waffle Iron, Model 1.64 +++ From mkapor Fri Dec 13 10:17:35 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA15057 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Fri, 13 Dec 1991 15:17:38 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1991 15:17:35 -0500 Message-Id: <199112132017.AA15051@eff.org> From: (by way of mkapor@eff.org (Mitch Kapor)) Subject: Re: What is ISDN Good For? It seems that the main attribute of interest in ISDN is the (relatively) high bandwidth. Actually, this it is modest compared with other media (such as cable TV and newspapers), but still better than standard phone lines. But there are other aspects that I'm more concerned about including: * Ideally, ISDN should provide peer protocols between my premises equipment and the central offices in terms of controlling connections and accessing network resources. I should also be able to provide services. A simple example is call forwarding -- I should be able to implement this locally. One advantage of a local implementation is the ability to add policies. These protocols should support queries about pricing and other service aspects. * For data transmission I need to be able to connect to multiple services using either a datagram capability or multiple virtual circuits. This should be a standard offering so that I can build software that takes advantage of it. * Addressing (phone number) issues should be cleaned up over the current system so that I have a uniform way of addressing resources on the network. I.e., no dial "9" for an outside line. But this should be extended to subaddressing as in specifying an extension number, a person or service. This is similar to DID but universal without the high costs of a DID trunk. This is extending the view of what ISDN is. For example, I should be able to use standard ISDN protocols to pass the additional data bits to a pager. (Of course, the character set should be Unicode and not just digits). * Of course, pricing should be such that casual connection to network services for many hours should be comparable to the price for an unmeasured service line. The current message unit pricing assumes that the use of the phone is an unusual event. If it is our connection to the communications infrastructure then the default is to be connected and use of a modest size information pipe should be negligible Perhaps a better price comparison would be to the newspaper. Getting the newspaper delivered via ISDN should not cost more than getting some ink laden woodpulp hand carried to my house. In reading the notes about the physical wiring for ISDN, I'm concerned about ISDN being an MIS manager dream and an end user's Procrustean bed. From mkapor Wed Dec 18 06:32:35 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA07893 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Wed, 18 Dec 1991 11:32:38 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1991 11:32:35 -0500 Message-Id: <199112181632.AA07888@eff.org> From: Mitchell Kapor Subject: if you haven't seen this.... ------- Forwarded Message MessageName: (Message 103) From: dae@world.std.com (Dwight A Ernest) Date: Wed, 18 Dec 91 08:53:44 -0500 To: isdn@list.prime.com Subject: ISDN in Japan and USA: Contrasts I pass without comment a posting from Usenet's comp.dcom.telecom newsgroup by Jim Haynes: > From: haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes) > Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom > Subject: ISDN in Japan and USA > Message-ID: > Date: 12 Dec 91 00:40:47 GMT > Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz > X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 1018, Message 4 of 12 > > At the Sun User Group conference this week a lunch speaker was David > S. H. Rosenthal of SunSoft. He remarked that in Japan one can just > call the telephone company and ask to have your home service converted > to ISDN and it will be done the next day, no charge for the conversion > and no extra charge for ISDN service. He contrasted with the U.S. > where if you can get it at all ISDN is available only at high cost. > > He also noted that ISDN pay phones are becoming common in Japan; they > have an RJ-45 jack on the side. > > > haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------- End of Forwarded Message From mkapor Wed Dec 18 10:36:54 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA15169 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder@eff.org); Wed, 18 Dec 1991 15:37:00 -0500 Reply-To: pub-infra Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1991 15:36:54 -0500 Message-Id: <199112182036.AA15160@eff.org> From: fujisawa@sm.sony.co.jp (Kenji Fujisawa) (by way of Mitchell Kapor ) Subject: Re: ISDN in Japan and USA In article , haynes@cats.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes) says: > He remarked that in Japan one can just call the telephone company > and ask to have your home service converted to ISDN and it will be > done the next day, no charge for the conversion and no extra charge > for ISDN service. It's overstated. The time for instllation varies between one week to six months depending on the area, the availability of the digital exchanges. And you have to pay an instllation fee of about $100 - $150. Futermore, the monthly charge becomes twice of the analog telephone: ie, about $35. Kenji Fujisawa fujisawa@sm.sony.co.jp [we are working on getting the mail headers to be more precise. - MK] From mkapor Thu Dec 19 06:25:32 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA18415 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder); Thu, 19 Dec 1991 11:25:38 -0500 Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1991 11:25:32 -0500 Message-Id: <199112191625.AA18409@eff.org> From: uunet!decwrl!apple!well!hlr@world.std.com (Howard Rheingold) (by way of Mitchell Kapor ) Subject: Re: ISDN in Japan and USA Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra (pub-infra mailing list) For Kenji Fujisawa (fujisawa@sm.sony.co.jp) via Mitchell Kapor: What do people get for their ISDN connection in Japan? What services are offered? What kind of people use them? From mkapor Sat Dec 21 05:45:58 1991 Received: by eff.org id AA04122 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for pub-infra-exploder); Sat, 21 Dec 1991 10:46:02 -0500 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1991 10:45:58 -0500 Message-Id: <199112211545.AA04117@eff.org> From: peterm@halcyon.com (Peter Marshall) Subject: Re: U.S. SAID TO PLAY FAVORITES IN PROMOTING NATIONWIDE COMPUTER NETW Precedence: bulk To: pub-infra (pub-infra mailing list) >From psi.com!com-priv7-forw Thu Dec 19 10:49:25 1991 remote from halcyon Received: by halcyon.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Thu, 19 Dec 91 17:50:54 PST for peterm Received: from psi.com by sumax.seattleu.edu with SMTP id AA01734 (5.65a/IDA-1.4.2 for peterm); Thu, 19 Dec 91 10:49:25 -0800 Received: by psi.com (5.61/2.1-PSI/PSINet) id AA04534; Thu, 19 Dec 91 00:52:09 -0500 Received: from fernwood.mpk.ca.us by psi.com (5.61/2.1-PSI/PSINet) id AA04497; Thu, 19 Dec 91 00:50:23 -0500 Received: by fernwood.mpk.ca.us; id AA09124; Wed, 18 Dec 91 21:53:00 -0800 Message-Id: <9112190553.AA09124@fernwood.mpk.ca.us> To: members@farnet.org, regional-techs@merit.edu, com-priv@psi.com co+re@ans.net Subject: U.S. SAID TO PLAY FAVORITES IN PROMOTING NATIONWIDE COMPUTER NETWORK Date: Wed, 18 Dec 91 21:52:57 PST From: the terminal of Geoff Goodfellow U.S. SAID TO PLAY FAVORITES IN PROMOTING NATIONWIDE COMPUTER NETWORK By John Markoff c.1991 N.Y. Times News Service Just one week after President Bush signed legislation calling for the creation of a nationwide computer data "superhighway," a debate has erupted over whether the government gave an unfair advantage to a joint venture of IBM and MCI that built and manages a key part of the network. The IBM-MCI venture, known as Advanced Network and Services, manages a network called NSFnet, which connects hundreds of research centers and universities. NSFnet also manages links to dozens of other countries. All these networks are collectively known as Internet. Some private competitors say Advanced Network and Services uses its favored position to squeeze them out of the data-transmission market by establishing rules that make it difficult to connect to NSFnet. NSFnet was founded by the National Science Foundation, a federal agency, and is composed of leased telephone lines that link special computers called routers, which transmit packages of data to three million users in 33 countries. Data traffic over the NSFnet backbone has doubled in the last year. The government wants to develop a national data highway for electronic commerce, digital video transmissions to homes and vast electronic libraries that could be drawn on by the nation's schools. Advanced Network and Services, based in Elmsford, N.Y., was set up last year as a non-profit corporation with $10 million from International Business Machines Corp. and MCI Communications Corp. Earlier this year it set up a for-profit subsidiary, called ANS CO+RE, to sell computer network services. That led some competitors to complain that Advanced Network and Services would be able to compete unfairly because of its arrangement with the government. People involved in planning for a national data network say it is essential to provide for fair competition, which will lead rival companies to offer creative and entrepreneurial services in the hope of building market share. Without competiton, they say, the government will have created a monopoly that has little incentive to innovate. "This is the first major communication business to be born under the deregulation era," said David Farber, a computer scientist at the University of Pennsylvania and a pioneer in data networking. "This hasn't happened since the growth of the telephone industry. You want it to be a business that doesn't repeat the errors of the past." In recent years, the National Science Foundation has tried to shift its operations and ownership of NSFnet to Advanced Network and Services. And it will try to establish competition through contracts for networks to compete with NSFnet next year. But there is no level playing field, complained William L. Schrader, president of Performance Systems International Inc., a Reston, Va., company that provides commercial data connections to Internet. He made public two letters between officials of Advanced Network and Services and the National Science Foundation that he said gave the company unfair control over access to the network. The result, he added, was that the government turned over valuable public property to a private company. "It's like taking a federal park and giving it to Kmart," Schrader said. "It's not right, and it isn't going to stand. As a taxpayer, I think it's disgusting." Performance Systems and several other companies have set up an alternative to NSFnet, known as a CIX. Schrader said his company and the venture of IBM and MCI were competing for the same customers but unlike his rival he lacked a federal subsidy. He said he might ask the Internal Revenue Service to look at the business relationship between Advanced Network's non-profit and for-profit operations. Allan Weis, the president of Advanced Network, disputed that his company had an unfair advantage. "It's a very competitive environment right now," he said. "We have lost quite a few bids to PSI and to other competitors as well." At the National Science Foundation, Stephen Wolff, director of its networking division, said IBM and MCI had overbuilt the network and were selling commercial service based on the excess capacity that was available. A number of organizations are working informally to settle the dispute. "I think it's a mess," said Mitchell D. Kapor, the founder of Lotus Development Corp. and now head of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a public-interest group focusing on public policy issues surrounding data networks. "Nobody should have an unfair advantage. This is important because we're talking about something that is in its infancy but that one day could be on the order of the personal computer industry." -------