Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Rules and Regs for a LEC's and Non LEC's

  • From: Joe Provo
  • Date: Mon Aug 25 18:35:41 2003

On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 06:35:47PM -0400, McBurnett, Jim wrote:
> -RBOCs (note, not ILECs) cannot move inter-lata traffic without being
> -approved by PUC in each state for "interstate long distance". (I believe 
> -this is part of 1984 MFJ).
> 
> -CLECs have no restrictions on that. Neither do non-CLEC ISPs.
> 
> ---alex
> 
> I thought this only applied to VOICE traffic.

BZZT. Any inter-LATA traffic requires regulatory approval. Do 
you think the RBOC engineers wanted an ASN per LATA? They were/
are required to hand ALL traffic on the LATA boundary to their 
allocated carrier. This wound up as essentially regulated 
subsidies (albeit indirectly) for sprint, genuity, qwest, 
uunet ... they made out from both ends between the dot-com boom 
and RBOC-restrictions from the telecom act of 1996. Between the 
dot-bomb bust and regulatory relief for the RBOCs, is it any 
wonder that their cash cows are running dry and they are offering
fire-sale prices to try and get customers stuck in recurring
contracts?

Wild that people still don't understand the regulations so many 
years after they were cast in concrete. Do people actually
think any of these companies don't play all sides against the 
middle? Any deal you get from one of them is because they are 
getting something out of the transaction.

-- 
             RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE




Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.