Subject: RE: [Ieprep] Re: GETS calls placed from corporate PBXs

From: "Garrity, Jack" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:39:36 -0500

Ran,

I hope this isn't disruptive, since you've gotten at least one other
response to your email at the bottom.  Here are my responses to three points
you raised.

[RJA] "...is one operating best-effort on the inbound
      links at least as far as the first RBOC switch?

Everyone competes for dial tone on an equal basis, unless one purchases
Essential Line Service or its equivalent.  Every switching system I know of
has the capability albeit with their own brand name.  I don't know how many
GETS-user organizations have purchased the service, nor how many other
organizations.  My suspicion: next to none.

[RJA] "Is it best effort from the first RBOC switch inward
      to the destination?"

I take it inward means onward.  In most cases, the first RBOC switch invokes
Alternate Carrier Routing and other enhanced GETS features that it has been
paid to provide.  "Most cases" implies greater than 85 percent of the
nation's access lines.  Since many of those access lines serve PBXs, I
imagine the measure implies a larger percentage of potential users.

[RJA] "And is there any pre-emption in GETS?"

Absolutely not.  The received wisdom is: that would violate the
Communications Act of 1934.  As an aside, read the Comm Act and survey the
challenges to that section; there is no real prohibition to preemption.  My
personal view is that the telephone industry has brainwashed government
users for several generations.  If you're worried about preemption, change
the law.

~~~ Jack ~~~
Work: 703/676-2358 | Fax: 703/848-0299
Home: 703/278-9250 | Cell: 703/508-0065
E-mail: [email-masked]

-----Original Message-----
From: RJ Atkinson [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 4:22 PM
To: Gunn, Janet
Cc: King, Kimberly S.; ieprep
Subject: Re: [Ieprep] Re: GETS calls placed from corporate PBXs

On Friday, Dec 13, 2002, at 16:12 America/Montreal, Gunn, Janet wrote:

> If 710 doesn't work from a particular phone, there are some 800 numbers
> which will take you straight to a GETS capable IXC.  So as long as 800
> works, you are OK.

OK, that's useful.  But in such a case, is one operating best-effort
on the inbound links at least as far as the first RBOC switch ?
Is it best effort from the first RBOC switch inward to the destination ?

And is there any pre-emption in GETS ?  That is will a GETS call cause
a non-GETS call that was already placed and is currently in use to get
dropped.  My earlier understanding was "no", but I want to be sure I
understood correctly.

Ran

_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep
_______________________________________________
Ieprep mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep

---

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 16:58:02 -0500

Thanks very much.  The clarity is very helpful.

> imagine the measure implies a larger percentage of potential users.

OK.  So there should be preferred access from the RBOC switch on the
T1 (or whatever) that connects to the destination's PBX.

(And I suppose what happens from the destination gateway PBX depends
on how that company/organisation has configured their PBX.)

Ran
[email-masked]