TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Cost of POTS w/o Long Distance

Re: Cost of POTS w/o Long Distance

Tony P. (
Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:11:57 -0500

In article <>,

> BobT wrote:

>> Brief summary follows. Location, SBC, former Ameritech, specifically
>> Chicago. Incident involved intrastate local toll rather than
>> interstate LD. I had switched interstate LD carriers, and during the
>> transaction, without my knowledge, local toll carrier on one of my two
>> lines apparently was listed as unassigned, as you speculate. ...

> A common problem. Telephone providers, both local and long distance,
> have to spend time and money resolving such issues. Sometimes the
> dollar amounts are significant and the dispute makes the newspapers.
> It's tough to say who is at fault -- customer, base telephone provider,
> or long distance carrier, or combination.

> We all have to pay for this through higher rates and aggravation.

> I noticed some respondents said this was a reason they're switching to
> VOIP, but I it seems most VOIP are keeping one POTS line as a backup.
> I suspect getting VOIP to reach that "last mile" of service
> reliability to equal or exceed classic POTS will take some time in
> coming and be considerably expensive. (Can VOIP handle faxes
> transparently?) As an example, the 911 requirement was repeatedly
> extended; that was something the VOIP people should've had all set up
> and included from day one. In other words, down the road VOIP will
> cost much more than it does now.

The whole E-911 issue is a red herring. It is not that the VoIP
carriers can't connect to it, it's that incumbent companies are
playing #*%@# hardball.

I want to see the incumbents die by their tariffs.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Bruce: "Re: How to Dial US Toll Free from Toronto"
Go to Previous message: "Re: Is GNU Radio Open to Public Now?"
May be in reply to: Bob Alan: "Cost of POTS w/o Long Distance"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page