[19038] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Transaction Based Settlements Encourage Waste (was Re: BBN/GT
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Derek Elder)
Tue Aug 25 14:00:45 1998
From: Derek Elder <delder@usweb.com>
To: "John A. Tamplin" <jat@traveller.com>, nanog@merit.edu
Cc: Mike Leber <mleber@he.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 21:20:33 -0400
And this is precisely why the RBOC's are refusing to pay the settlements
to the CLEC's. I personally agree that settlement based peering won't
work (with current technology). Whoever figures out a good solution
gets a truckload of beers from me ;)
>
> In fact, this already happens with telco termination charges.
> For example,
> there are CLECs that call up dialup ISPs and offer free PRIs.
> They plan
> to make more on termination charges than they could possibly
> get from the
> ISPs in a competitive environment. Aside from the fact that
> they don't
> have copper in the ground, this is the reason CLECs don't
> want residential
> customers, since they would be the ones paying termination
> fees on originated
> calls. When enough CLECs are concentrating on businesses
> that only have
> incoming calls (ISPs, tech support centers, 900-style
> services, etc), Bell
> will scream to the FCC that termination charges need to be
> reevaluated.
> With this approach, eventually *no one* will want customers
> that make lots
> of outbound calls -- let the other providers have them and
> then collect the
> money when they call your customers.
>
> The point is it is an unstable environment. Unlike
> capitalism where our
> innate greedy nature serves to balance the system, in this
> case the greedy
> nature serves to unbalance the system by promoting inefficient use of
> resources.
>
> John Tamplin Traveller
> Information Services
> jat@Traveller.COM 2104 West Ferry Way
> 256/705-7007 - FAX 256/705-7100 Huntsville, AL 35801
>
>
