[31148] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: HR 4445 Reciprocal Compensation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeff Mcadams)
Thu Sep 14 08:30:29 2000
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 08:28:31 -0400
From: Jeff Mcadams <jeffm@iglou.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20000914082830.A22694@iglou.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <39C0C02F.EF8D540D@greendragon.com>; from wsimpson@greendragon.com on Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 08:10:35AM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Also sprach William Allen Simpson
>"To exempt from reciprocal compensation requirements telecommunications
>traffic to the Internet. "
>Anybody know about this? Seems like it kills payments by ILECS to
>CLECs for dialups, when the calls are to an ISP. Note, only _TO_ an
>ISP; folks wanting to provide voice are still required to pay ILECs for
>traffic _from_ an ISP.
>Is this the "ILECs put ISPs out of business" act?
Bingo. Hit the nail on the head with that one. BellSouth has been
particularly onerous about recip. comp. They've lost their PUC filings
in just about every state that they've been brought up where they claim
that calls are not terminated at the access server equipment, but are
instead better considered as terminating somewhere out on the Internet.
That they haven't even made any semblance of effort to try to determine
where the calls really *do* terminate, they just do lots of hand waving
about it being out on the Internet somewhere, which I find humorous, at
best.
This is logic that I'm convinced that only a threatened monopoly could
understand. I also find it rather interesting that the ILECs were the
ones that initially insisted on recip. comp., and now they're the ones
whining about it being unfair.
--
Jeff McAdams Email: jeffm@iglou.com
Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848
IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456
