tom@gatech.edu (Tom Wiencko) (08/15/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0290m07@vector.dallas.tx.us> eli@chipcom.com writes: > Why do you dread Sprint more than any other long haul carrier? > Don't all carriers have problems with starting charges if you > let the phone ring or give a busy signal for a "very long time"? > > Which carriers are immune from such charges? If Sprint alone is > >[Moderator's Note: For one, AT&T has no problem with call supervision. They This brings up an interesting point which might merit some discussion here. Until recently, I had regularly told friends and associates who were plagued by one minute calls on their phone bills that if their carrier was not AT&T that those calls may well be no-answers or busy, or dropped calls, and they may be able to get a phone bill credit for their one minute billings. Recently, one of these companies (a sales organization, with massive phone bills) did this, and reported back to me that their carrier (Sprint) will soon (and may by now) provide true answer supervision on their lines, and will therefore credit old bills, but not future bills (after answer supervision is in place). I told them to verify this by checking on how, technically, they are going to do this. They reported back that alternative carriers are now allowed to use Feature Group C lines, and are installing equipment to allow them to provide true end-to-end line supervision. I was astounded. Has anybody else heard of this happening? My (informal) information is that most of the major LD carriers will have their routes wired for supervision by the end of this year (which I find somewhat incredible). Thoughts? Rumors? Comments? Tom