adams@ucunix.san.uc.edu (James Warner Adams) (11/05/90)
I have seen several postings related to ISDN. Most have praised the
potential for simultaneous voice/data/fax, etc. I agree, but there
seems to me to be a potential downside as well:
First, this is going to obsolete a lot of expensive equipment. On the
other hand, this is something that society in general is going to have
to come to grips with (e.g., HDTV, etc.).
My main concern is that the implementation of ISDN is going to give
the telephone carriers a golden opportunity to clamp down on the
low-to-mid speed data comm market that more-or-less escaped control in
the wake of the Carterfone decision. Given the indifferent-to-hostile
attitude of the BOCs toward home BBS's and USENET sites, one has to
wonder what will happen when a new technology is installed. Given the
almost unlimited class-of-service control available under a purely
digital system, how will data comm access/billing be handled?
If this is a valid concern, perhaps it's time to start a movement to
raise the awareness of this issue among legislators and other officials.
Jim Adams Department of Physiology and Biophysics
adams@ucunix.san.uc.edu University of Cincinnati College of Medicine jwb@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen) (11/07/90)
In article <14368@accuvax.nwu.edu>, U5434122@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au writes: > I imagine that since digital voice telephony allocates 64kbps to a > channel the telcos will be hard pressed to justify charging different > rates for different uses. If an analogue modem is used on a digital > telephony circuit, then the situation is no different than before. Almost correct. Telecom Australia has a slightly lower tariff on 64k "digital telephony" than on 64k "digital data". On questioning they say that with digital telephony circuits they will be free to use interpolation techniques at a later stage, whereas they will leave the data circuits alone. The message here is to use the lower tariff circuits until Telecom ever gets around to putting in compression/ interpolation equipment (if ever.) A modem which maintains continuous carrier should be ok. Of course using a modem over ISDN is a terrible waste of bandwidth. Jim Breen ($B?@Ip(J) (jwb@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au) Dept of Robotics & Digital Technology. Monash University PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia (ph) +61 3 573 2552 (fax) +61 3 573 2745
U5434122@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (11/07/90)
In article <14339@accuvax.nwu.edu>, adams@ucunix.san.uc.edu (James Warner Adams) writes: > My main concern is that the implementation of ISDN is going to give > the telephone carriers a golden opportunity to clamp down on the > low-to-mid speed data comm market that more-or-less escaped control in > the wake of the Carterfone decision. Given the indifferent-to-hostile > attitude of the BOCs toward home BBS's and USENET sites, one has to > wonder what will happen when a new technology is installed. Given the > almost unlimited class-of-service control available under a purely > digital system, how will data comm access/billing be handled? I imagine that since digital voice telephony allocates 64kbps to a channel the telcos will be hard pressed to justify charging different rates for different uses. If an analogue modem is used on a digital telephony circuit, then the situation is no different than before. My guess is that as more people buy ISDN pads (or whatever they are called) for their PC's etc, the price will fall so the V22bis modems will be used by fewer and fewer people. As far as ISDN in the network is concerned, I think voice traffic will be considered as data traffic. Just my own (probably ill-informed) humble opinion, Danny