john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) (06/06/90)
After being soundly taken to task for criticizing the GTD-5, and being
told how state of the art capable it is, I decided to do a little
experimenting. I'm still unimpressed.
As most who participate in this forum know, a prerequisite to CLASS is
SS#7 between participating offices. Without that, the data required
for the handshake necessary for CLASS services cannot be sent. For
well over a year now, all Bay Area COs have been speaking SS#7 between
switches that are capable of it. Presumably, they want to be ready
when the PUC stops picking its teeth.
Actually, what I meant to say was, "All Bay Area COs except the three
in Los Gatos and the one in Morgan Hill." This is, of course, our
token GTE punishment area. (Doesn't everyone have to suffer with GTE
somewhere nearby?) These COs (all GTD-5) speak MF to each other and to
the outside world. No CLASS available here!
What this means to a telephone user, CLASS aside, is that a call from
a point in Los Gatos to a telephone a few blocks away takes NOTICABLY
longer to complete than a call from San Jose to San Francisco, a
distance of about 45 miles. Once again--the wonders of GTD-5.
I have received many kilobytes of material from GTE folks trying to
sell the virtues of GTD-5. But after my little experimentation, I'm
going to invoke my Jackson County, MO heritage: Show me!
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !dcr0@gte.com (David Robbins) (06/06/90)
From article <8686@accuvax.nwu.edu>, by john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon): > I have received many kilobytes of material from GTE folks trying to > sell the virtues of GTD-5. But after my little experimentation, I'm > going to invoke my Jackson County, MO heritage: Show me! It may be that you are complaining about the wrong thing! If my information is correct, the GTD-5 itself is quite capable of doing SS7 and CLASS. However, the operating company that buys the GTD-5 decides whether or not to make use of its capabilities. Your experimentation has shown, quite convincingly, that GTE has not taken advantage of any of the GTD-5's SS7 capabilities in your area. This is pure speculation, but it may be that the GTE operating company has not worked out any arrangement with Pac*Bell to interconnect the systems with SS7 (perhaps they haven't even *thought* of doing that ??). The question here is who to blame for the conditions you describe. Do you blame the equipment manufacturer or the equipment operator? Ultimately, the telephone service you receive depends most heavily upon the operating company, for it is they who decide what equipment to buy and which of the equipment's capabilities to offer to their customers. I don't feel any compulsion to defend either the GTD-5 or the GTE operating companies, although I am a GTE employee. I know nothing about the commitment of the operating company to provide the service its customers want. All I can do is point out that the latest and greatest switching technology, even if it is in the possession of the operating company, won't do you any good if the operating company chooses not to provide you the service. From a practical point of view, the technology might as well not exist if you are not permitted to use it! If enough customers rag on the telco to provide these neat services, perhaps they will perceive that there is enough demand for the service that it will be provided. And the PUC, as a (supposed) servant of the public, might be able to apply some pressure (although from what I know of PUCs, this may or may not ever happen :-)). Dave Robbins GTE Laboratories Incorporated drobbins@bunny.gte.com 40 Sylvan Rd. ...!harvard!bunny!drobbins Waltham, MA 02254 CYA: I speak only for myself; GTE may disagree with what I say.
bakerj@ncar.ucar.edu (Jon Baker) (06/07/90)
In article <8686@accuvax.nwu.edu>, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Actually, what I meant to say was, "All Bay Area COs except the three > in Los Gatos and the one in Morgan Hill." This is, of course, our > token GTE punishment area. (Doesn't everyone have to suffer with GTE > somewhere nearby?) These COs (all GTD-5) speak MF to each other and to > the outside world. No CLASS available here! Please clarify your point here - are you claiming that CLASS is not available in the Bay Area? No argument there. Are you claiming that CLASS is not available on the GTD-5? Argument there. It is available on the GTD-5, and has been deployed to, at the least, Santa Barbara and Downey, for about ayear now. It was first offered in the domestic market on SVR 1631, which was not widely deployed. Expanded CLASS features are available on SVR1632, which only recently was standarized for general deployment throughout GTE. It should be deployed with increasing frequency throughout GTE operating areas in California. As they say, 'coming soon to a site near you' ... > I have received many kilobytes of material from GTE folks trying to > sell the virtues of GTD-5. Actually, just trying to defend it against scathing and undeserved criticism. I have yet to hear a GTD5/GTE bashing that does not apply equally well to a 5ESS/RBOC. > But after my little experimentation, I'm > going to invoke my Jackson County, MO heritage: Show me! Patience is a virtue ...
Paul V Flynn <pvf@houdi.att.com> (06/07/90)
In article <8722@accuvax.nwu.edu> dcr0@gte.com (David Robbins) writes in response to article <8686@accuvax.nwu.edu>, by john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon): >Your experimentation >has shown, quite convincingly, that GTE has not taken advantage of any >of the GTD-5's SS7 capabilities in your area. This is pure >speculation, but it may be that the GTE operating company has not >worked out any arrangement with Pac*Bell to interconnect the systems >with SS7 (perhaps they haven't even *thought* of doing that ??). I don't know how two local exchange carriers such as GTE and Pac*Bell interconnect their systems with Signaling System 7, but when interexchange carriers interconnect with local exchange carriers with SS7, SS7 Network Interconnect is required. One of the purposes of SS7 Network Interconnect is to perform gateway screening between the two signaling networks to control the kinds of SS7 messages one carrier can send into another carrier's network. That's necessary (among other reasons) to allay fears that one carrier could inadvertently bring down someone else's SS7 network. SS7 Network Interconnect trials began in the last half of 1989 and are continuing this year. I'm not directly involved with the SS7 Network Interconnect protocol or its deployment, but the last I heard, it won't be until 1992 that SS7 Network Interconnect is deployed widespread throughout the United States. It could be that GTE in the Bay Area must wait for SS7 Network Interconnect before it can interconnect with Pac*Bell. In the meantime, if they only have three switches in the area to interconnect with SS7, some of the CLASS services won't be very useful. If that is the case, John Higdon may be suffering from the fact that his local carrier only serves a small area surrounded by another carrier, rather from the fact that his local carrier is GTE. Paul Flynn
Marc O'Krent <marc@ttc.uucp> (06/11/90)
It seems to me that I read sometime ago that GTE has *abandoned* the GTD5's further development and/or something like decided to go with the #5's from AT&T. Some part of this is not coming back correctly, but perhaps you could clarify. There's no filing for CLASS by GTE of CA as far as I know. Marc O'Krent The Telephone Connection Internet: marc@ttc.info.com MCIMail: mokrent Voice Mail: +1 213 551 9620
bakerj%mcdphx.UUCP@ncar.ucar.edu> (06/13/90)
In article <8861@accuvax.nwu.edu>, marc@ttc.uucp (Marc O'Krent) writes: > It seems to me that I read sometime ago that GTE has *abandoned* the > GTD5's further development and/or something like decided to go with > the #5's from AT&T. Some part of this is not coming back correctly, > but perhaps you could clarify. GTE has abandoned development of ISDN features on the GTD5. As of this date, GTE has not completely abandoned all development on the GTD5. A small number of new features, and design maintenance, continue. GTE is pursuing 'other alternatives' for delivering ISDN to GTE subscribers. ONe such alternative is the 5ESS. \ / C r o s s r o a d s C o m m u n i c a t i o n s /\ (602) 941-2005 300-2400,9600 PEP Baud 24 hrs/day / \ hplabs!hp-sdd!crash!xroads!bakerj