TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines

Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines

Steve Sobol (sjsobol@JustThe.net)
Sun, 13 Feb 2005 09:27:48 -0800

Clark W. Griswold wrote:

> Now, the DSL providers want to sell a naked product. Well, all those
> laws/systems/regulations have to change. In fact, in many cases the
> telco doesn't even know what it costs on an individual basis for a
> naked line - they've never had to compute it that way before or track
> costs that way before. Far easier to add it all up and divide by the
> number of subscriber lines, eh?

How is that *not* the fault of the telco?

> While there is no technological reason to prevent naked DSL from being
> sold, you clearly don't grasp all the other factors that take time and
> money to change.

What other factors? OK, I was not aware that the telcos had lobbied to
set up the tarriff you described. But they asked for it.

Michael D. Sullivan wrote:

> There is at least one technology issue, and maybe more. Verizon's
> many millions of ADSL/POTS lines are identified by telephone number.

When I purchased a Yellow Pages ad from SBC a few years ago, my
account number looked a lot like a telephone number. But it wasn't. It
was something like 216-R##-###-#### (216 was the area code I was in at
the time, and the #'s represent random numbers that I don't
remember). It seemed pretty obvious that they bill for directory
services using the same billing system that bills for POTS
services. Verizon could use a similar account numbering system. Sure,
there are costs involved in implementing it, but I have no sympathy
for any of the telcos where services over copper are involved, since
they milked lots of money out of that copper for so many years before
DSL came along, and didn't do many upgrades.

> and network databases as the mobile ID number (MIN). In order to
> break the hard link between the MIN and phone number, or mobile
> directory number (MDN), several years of planning and implementation
> of complex database changes were required.

Technically, what you're describing isn't a technical issue, it's a billing
issue.

JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"In case anyone was wondering, that big glowing globe above the Victor
Valley is the sun." -Victorville _Daily Press_ on the unusually large
amount of rain the Southland has gotten this winter (January 12th, 2005)

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have had AT&T billing numbers in the
past which were my area code, followed by a seven digit number which
*appeared at first* to be a telephone number except that it was not
a dialable number, such as 137-xxxx or 109-xxxx. I am sure the telcos
could deal with this issue with a minimum of hassle. PAT]

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: AES: "Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines"
Go to Previous message: Monty Solomon: "Interactive TV Poised for a Rollout"
May be in reply to: Charles Cryderman: "Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines"
Next in thread: AES: "Re: Verizon Plans to Offer "Naked DSL" on 4/5 of its Wirelines"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page