km@emory.UUCP (Ken Mandelberg) (08/21/85)
GTE/TELENET is offering a new service called "PC Pursuit". It allows
unlimited 1200 baud modem calls between 12 major cities for a flat fee
of $25/month. The calls can on|y be made after 6PM or on weekends.
Currently the cities supported are: Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Dallas,
Denver, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, San
Francisco, and Washington DC.
Only the originator of the call has to be signed up with GTE, the
destination can be any answering modem in the 12 supported cities. The
$25/month buys the right to originate the calls from one fixed number.
GTE imposes this as follows: You call a local number, identify yourself
and make the destination request. GTE drops the line, calls the
destination, and when successful calls you back at your registered
number. They guarantee to call you back withing 30 seconds of carrier
at the destination.
GTE is marketing this to PC users who want to access out of town
databases. However, it strikes me that this service could cut
UUCP/mail/netnews and other phone based networking costs way down. The
service appears to be transparent to the destination, but clearly the
connection software would have to be hacked to accomodate GTE's call
origination scheme.
GTE will provide information about the service at 800-368-4215.
I have no connection with GTE, and the above exhausts my knowledge
of the service. I don't know, for example, if the data path provided
is really a full 8 bit path, or if there are timing issues that
would interfere with some protocols. I would guess they run their
own error correction for the long haul part of the circuit, and
the subscriber would only have to worry about errors on the local
circuits at the endpoints.
--
Ken Mandelberg
Emory University
Dept of Math and CS
Atlanta, Ga 30322
{akgua,sb1,gatech,decvax}!emory!km USENET
km@emory CSNET
km.emory@csnet-relay ARPANETlauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) (08/24/85)
There are some significant limitations to this service that people should be aware of (I talked to one of the system designers)... 1) Calls are limited to one hour. 2) While they haven't implemented the restrictions yet, they are likely to limit both the originating and terminating ends of the calls to phone numbers that are a LOCAL CALL from their dialout nodes. This might mean, for example, that a person in West L.A. couldn't use the service since they are not local to the dialout node (which is in downtown L.A.). The problem is that the service must dial out at both ends, and they are apparently unwilling to eat the ZUM/toll charges indefinitely. When and how restrictions would be implemented (and on what basis) is still unclear, but they told me that something would definitely happen in the area of restrictions. 3) The service is really designed for individuals, not for commercial use. They aren't trying to screen out the companies at this time and will let them sign up, but it isn't clear what will happen if commercial users start clogging things up. 4) Capacity is limited. In L.A., for example, there can only be a maximum of 24 users on the service at any given time. They can obviously expand this within some limits, but not indefinitely. 5) It isn't clear how good the response is going to be for many applications. TELENET is always very bursty and subject to pretty slow throughput much of the time (as any TELENET user will tell you). It's certainly an interesting service, but seems mostly oriented toward what they originally said -- people sitting there typing at remote BBS's. --Lauren--
rick@seismo.CSS.GOV (Rick Adams) (08/27/85)
I used PC pursuit over the weekend to tranfer data with uucp to ihnp4, hao and gatech. I saw no data errors (or packet retransmissions either. the line was quite clean) and the throughput was as good as normal direct dial. It's 1200/300 only, you can't get 2400 baud throughput. Then again, it's a fixed cost no matter how long you are on the line. The only real pain with pc-pursuit is that they will ONLY bill you with a Visa or Mastercard. No checks, no purchase orders. I expect to save about $6000 per year with pc pursuit (presuming nothing changes fromt the current status) If I could only get to northern New Jersey or Columbus, I save even more. ---rick
lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) (08/28/85)
Some tests someone ran locally with PC Pursuit failed dismally. Terrible throughput at anything faster than 300 bps. There still seems to be extreme variability from place to place. Also, I was told (off the record) that the implementation of non-local- calling blocking would take place "as soon as they could get accurate prefix info for their tables" to block out most prefixes. They also mentioned that they might be asking for certification that the service is not being used by commercial firms but only by individuals, since they don't want commercial traffic people tying things up. The thing they DON'T want is people tying up the dialers with call after call. Another possibility mentioned was a "cap" on the amount of time the service could be used in any one 24 hour period, so "everyone would be able to get some time." A one or two hour limit was mentioned. Anyway, all of this was off the record. Take with as many grains of salt as you wish. ---- Opinion section starts here: If you analyze this service, it's pretty clear what's going on. GTE is attempting to maximize use of facilities already in place that tend to sit idle outside the business day. Those facilities are not massive (24 dialers for all of Los Angeles, for example). It seems unclear how they can EXPAND beyond the current levels based on the $25 flat rate fee, since local telephone lines and dialers are going to be one of the most expensive recurring costs in the operation. It's also pretty obvious why they are concerned about making non-local calls. Take a call from L.A. Central (where TELENET has their node) to Santa Monica. This is a very modest ZUM call (there are MUCH more expensive calls possible within the tiny 213 area code). Even so, that call (evening rate, night is a little cheaper) is 10 cents for the first minute and $.05 for each additional. So a one hour call (either on the originating or terminating end of the call) is going to cost them something like $3.00/hour. Figure that (until blocking is in place) many calls are of this sort, and you might find that $6.00/hour (considering both ends) will be the minimum cost of such calls (ignoring equipment and other costs at this point). If you make FIVE one-hour calls of this sort during evening hours during the month, you've already cost them more than the price of the service! It takes a few more hours (or slightly more expensive non-local calls) to reach that level at late night-rate, but you can still reach the "no-profit" point for them damn fast. Hell, businesses in most areas pay about $.60/hour even for LOCAL calls--never mind the toll and ZUM charges! All of this cuts into GTE's profit margin on such a service. Even if GTE opens the service up to other metro areas, the fundamental economics don't change. So, what will occur? Let's ignore service quality issues (throughput, dialer congestion, insufficient ports, etc.) for the moment. The sheer economics of the phone charges will either force the blockage of many non-local calls (which will make the service much less generally usable) or force restructuring of the service. Either prices will change, or service limitations will be set in place, or... something else will have to give. A couple of hundred BBS fanatics in each of the 12 metro areas could totally tie up the service in nothing flat. Once again, I'm only considering port and dialer congestion, not the overall impact on TELENET throughput of all these people. One can't help but suspect that GTE is already very aware of the changes that will have to occur. One might suspect that what they're trying to do is get people signed up now--and then announce whatever changes (in pricing, type of service, etc.) that they want down the line. I guess there's nothing terribly wrong with doing that--but I think people are being a little naive is they think that such a service can continue in its currently announced form and at currently announced prices indefinitely! I fully expect to see changes--or else the congestion and other factors will simply make the service unusable except for BBS crazies who don't have to worry about having anything important going wrong if they can't get through much of the time... --Lauren--
rb@ccivax.UUCP (rex ballard) (09/14/85)
> > Opinion section starts here: > > If you analyze this service, it's pretty clear what's going on. > GTE is attempting to maximize use of facilities already in place > that tend to sit idle outside the business day. Those facilities > are not massive (24 dialers for all of Los Angeles, for example). > It seems unclear how they can EXPAND beyond the current levels based > on the $25 flat rate fee, since local telephone lines and dialers > are going to be one of the most expensive recurring costs in the > operation. > If you make FIVE one-hour calls of this sort during evening hours > during the month, you've already cost them more than the price > of the service! It takes a few more hours (or slightly more > expensive non-local calls) to reach that level at late night-rate, but > you can still reach the "no-profit" point for them damn fast. Not necessarily. One of the major problems facing the telco's in general and the long distance companies in particular is the problem of people using SPRINT to call a long distance bulliten board. The modems are converting 300 baud signals into binary signals between the two computers. The lines being used are analog lines being digitized at the rate of about 50KB/sec. In other words, a line capable of handling over 100 calls is being tied up for up to an hour. The solution is simple, have 'modem callers' call telenet to call that long distance board, and have computers at each end of the digital line converting back down two 300 baud. Even at 10 cents an hour, they come out ahead (your throughput problem may have been a result of load averaging). The problem is, if telenet must bill the consumer for this service, the cost of billing a 1 hour/week user is more than the cost of servicing the line. (Sending a bill with a 25 cent postage stamp to collect a 50 cent bill). A way has to be found to get the user to use the system enough to make the product pay for collection costs and still appear to be a 'bargain' over calling point to point on SPRINT. Local telepone companies are considering similar tactics to reduce the traffic on the local exchanges. Some are selling 56Kb lines to the PBX busineses already (Illinois). Others are selling 9600 KB lines to the home (Pacific Tel). The main point is that competition will be stiff because the market has only started to appear. Currently less than 1% of all current computer owners use a modem for more than an hour a week, if costs can go down and services can improve, you may eventually see the time when you can use your telephone like a disk drive.
larry@kitty.UUCP (Larry Lippman) (09/16/85)
> One of the major problems facing the telco's in general and the long distance > companies in particular is the problem of people using SPRINT to call a long > distance bulliten board. The modems are converting 300 baud signals into > binary signals between the two computers. The lines being used are analog > lines being digitized at the rate of about 50KB/sec. In other words, a line ^^^^^^ > capable of handling over 100 calls is being tied up for up to an hour. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You must be joking! No one on Usenet can possibly be that naive about data communication. Or can they... +++ Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York +++ +++ UUCP {decvax,dual,rocksanne,rocksvax,watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry +++ +++ VOICE 716/741-9185 {rice,shell}!baylor!/ +++ +++ FAX 716/741-9635 {AT&T 3510D} syr!buf!/ +++ +++ TELEX 69-71461 ansbak: ELGECOMCLR {via WUI} ihnp4!/ +++ +++ +++ +++ "Have you hugged your cat today?" +++
rb@ccivax.UUCP (rex ballard) (09/18/85)
> > One of the major problems facing the telco's in general and the long distance > > companies in particular is the problem of people using SPRINT to call a long > > distance bulliten board. The modems are converting 300 baud signals into > > binary signals between the two computers. The lines being used are analog > > lines being digitized at the rate of about 50KB/sec. In other words, a line > ^^^^^^ > > capable of handling over 100 calls is being tied up for up to an hour. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > You must be joking! No one on Usenet can possibly be that naive about > data communication. Or can they... > > +++ Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp., Clarence, New York +++ > +++ UUCP {decvax,dual,rocksanne,rocksvax,watmath}!sunybcs!kitty!larry +++ > +++ VOICE 716/741-9185 {rice,shell}!baylor!/ +++ > +++ FAX 716/741-9635 {AT&T 3510D} syr!buf!/ +++ > +++ TELEX 69-71461 ansbak: ELGECOMCLR {via WUI} ihnp4!/ +++ > +++ +++ > +++ "Have you hugged your cat today?" +++ The line being referred to is the typical PCM LEASED LINE used by long distance carriers. The actual rate is between 50KB and 56KB. I used expr 50000 / 300 and came up with 166 300 baud lines into the system, assuming that ECC and TDM are used 100 is a conservative estamate. For 1200 baud lines, the number would be expr 50000 / 1200 or about 40 lines, for more info find a copy of the CCITT YELLOW BOOK. For statistical multiplexing, each number would be about half. I hope this clears up any confusion.