300 lines
16 KiB
Plaintext
300 lines
16 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
|
|
Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04352;
|
|
31 Aug 90 0:04 EDT
|
|
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa02297;
|
|
30 Aug 90 22:35 CDT
|
|
Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac07282;
|
|
30 Aug 90 21:30 CDT
|
|
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:30:07 CDT
|
|
From: TELECOM Moderator <telecom@eecs.nwu.edu>
|
|
[To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
|
|
Subject: TELECOM Digest V10 #606
|
|
BCC:
|
|
Message-ID: <9008302030.ab18594@delta.eecs.nwu.edu>
|
|
|
|
|
|
TELECOM Digest Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:30:00 CDT Special: Dial Tone Monopoly
|
|
|
|
Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson
|
|
|
|
The End of the Dial Tone Monopoly [Donald E. Kimberlin]
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 20:20:00 CDT
|
|
From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com>
|
|
Organization: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL
|
|
Subject: The End of the Dial Tone Monopoly
|
|
|
|
|
|
Several weeks ago, one of our British colleagues here placed a good
|
|
description of the current status of telephone services deregulation
|
|
in the UK, and asked for a response that indicated the usual question
|
|
of, "How is it over there?" The way here in the US is definitely
|
|
different, but no one seemed to respond. It just might be that many
|
|
US Digest readers don't yet understand. What follows is a short piece
|
|
I recently prepared for an editor, and I hope it answers both kinds of
|
|
parties:
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE END OF THE DIAL TONE MONOPOLY
|
|
By: Donald E. Kimberlin, Principal Consultant
|
|
Telecommunications Network Architects
|
|
Safety Harbor, FL
|
|
August 12, 1990
|
|
|
|
While many Americans have been trained to believe that "dial tone" is
|
|
the sacrosanct property of telephone companies, evidence is coming
|
|
clear to show that "dial tone" is not a "natural monopoly." Saying
|
|
this is certain to raise many hackles, but it is time we faced up to
|
|
it: The "natural monopoly" view of providing Public Switched Telephone
|
|
Network services on a local basis was valid in its 1913 context, when
|
|
the Bell interests struck a deal to end their pillage of Indpendent
|
|
telephone companies in the U.S.
|
|
|
|
Technology and removal of the art of running a telephone network from
|
|
the status of "trade secret" has changed all that. It's occurred so
|
|
rapidly and in so many ways that few know of all the prongs now stuck
|
|
into what was once a nicely-closed pie.
|
|
|
|
Even though it was published, few took note that in 1984, the
|
|
departing Chairman of the FCC said in a speech that since the
|
|
demonopolization of long distance service had been accomplished, the
|
|
time had come to work on breaking up the local telephone monopoly.
|
|
Nobody reported that speech, except the general press the following
|
|
day. It was obvious the Chairman had touched on a taboo of the
|
|
telephone business.
|
|
|
|
Despite the fact that the FCC's Open Network Architecture mandate has
|
|
gone on and continues to move, nobody wants to face up to what it
|
|
really means: Detaching the dial tone of the local network from the
|
|
wires of the local telephone company, separating the two such that the
|
|
dial tone is put on somebody else's transmission channel, or
|
|
connecting the local telephone company's wire to somebody else's dial
|
|
tone.
|
|
|
|
That's not any technological breakthrough. It's been possible for
|
|
decades. The single thing that made the dial tone and transmission
|
|
channel inseparable was the lack of "somebody else" being around to do
|
|
it with.
|
|
|
|
Well, that's all changed, in more ways than one might think. Let's
|
|
run through a few of the possibilities that really could happen today
|
|
... but for the desire of "somebody else" to take up the cudgel and
|
|
push the matter into full visibility.
|
|
|
|
There are some historical backgrounds to the alternatives that may be
|
|
worth knowing about; these often have roots in history of things the
|
|
monopoly-era telephone business didn't care too much about. They are
|
|
generally exemplified in reasons behind the FCC's 1947 and 1948
|
|
decisions that opened radio-paging and use of microwave radio to
|
|
non-Telcos. (That's right, we're here talking of temblors some four
|
|
decades prior to the eruption of nearly unbridled competition in "the
|
|
phone business.")
|
|
|
|
For the most part, the Bell interests had so narrowly focused their
|
|
business that even though they claimed anything moving information was
|
|
their birthright, there were numerous items they handled in only the
|
|
most marginal of ways.
|
|
|
|
Among these was telephone service to ships in coastal waters, several
|
|
earlier versions of mobile telephone service, various forms of
|
|
telegraphy, burglar alarm services and others. For the most part,
|
|
other firms engaged these markets, particularly in the 65% of the land
|
|
area of the U.S. covered by non-Bell "Independent" telephone
|
|
companies, which focused totally on telephone business. In that large
|
|
territory, almost all non-telephone aspects of telecommunications were
|
|
provided by private, often local business. These almost all used some
|
|
form of radio in their business and became known as Radio Common
|
|
Carriers (RCC's).
|
|
|
|
We can thus see the roots of the FCC policy of two competing cellular
|
|
companies in every market reaching back into these RCCs. In fact,
|
|
McCaw Cellular, one of the larger "non-wireline" cellular operators,
|
|
was a long-standing RCC in the pre-divestiture era.
|
|
|
|
In that era of the "natural monopoly," there was more "patching" and
|
|
"hauling" of dial tone on RCC facilities than ever made official
|
|
print. Where it was of note, the Telcos treated it as "private," not
|
|
as a connection of their PSTN to another common carrier. The point
|
|
was that the only breach in the wall was the connection of "foreign
|
|
apparatus" at the extremity of the local network; the bond between
|
|
dial tone and local telco wire remained intact.
|
|
|
|
The traffic truth was that telcos accounted for less than half of the
|
|
stations and traffic with boats and aircraft, and as the famous Huber
|
|
report showed, less than a third of paging and mobile radio
|
|
operations. Much of that had already extended the "dial tone" into
|
|
non-Telco hands.
|
|
|
|
That situation was stable for several decades, but it ultimately did
|
|
wind up today with dial tone coming from non-wireline cellular
|
|
carriers and even dial marine VHF shore stations that are now all
|
|
private.
|
|
|
|
The "hauling" of dial tone we can readily see today as microwave
|
|
bypass, but it has also gone a giant step beyond. In a case that no
|
|
Telco-employed "consultant" will tell about (it's doubtful they have
|
|
been "trained" on it), Arco Oil Company put in its own private
|
|
microwave from downtown Dallas, Texas to its corporate headquarters in
|
|
suburban Richardson, about ten miles away. Arco's reason:
|
|
Dissatisfaction with the performance levels of GTE of Texas, the
|
|
"natural monopoly" dial tone supplier for Richardson. The microwave
|
|
hauled Southwestern Bell dial tone from downtown Dallas to Richardson.
|
|
To reach Arco, all one did was dial a Dallas number. The dial tone on
|
|
Arco's PBX was SW Bell, not GTE.
|
|
|
|
When Arco's "illegal action" was discovered, GTE of course wanted its
|
|
brother in the cloth, Southwestern Bell to disconnect the dial tone.
|
|
Both telcos got the Texas utility regulators to order them to
|
|
disconnect, but Arco is no stranger to court action. Arco immediately
|
|
went to the FCC, arguing that the dial tone was only incidental to
|
|
connections containing a high proportion of interstate traffic, which
|
|
was beyond the purview of the Texas State regulators. The result: The
|
|
FCC ordered Southwestern Bell to maintain dial tone supply to Arco's
|
|
microwave channels to Richardson, to provide interstate calling
|
|
service. GTE and Southwestern Bell appealed, and after several years
|
|
in the Federal Appeals courts, GTE and SW Bell lost again in early
|
|
1990, with but one step left: The U.S. Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
It is unlikely that GTE or SW Bell want to risk a Supreme Court
|
|
decision after the several slaps they have suffered on their way to
|
|
the Supreme Court; they doubtful would want to be responsible for it
|
|
becoming wide public knowledge that the "natural monopoly" for a dial
|
|
tone is really no longer supported by the US government and its
|
|
courts.
|
|
|
|
An outfall of this is that if you have the means and desire, you can
|
|
really carry in a dial tone from wherever you want. That opens a
|
|
wealth of possibilities. It means that anyone who has the means to
|
|
provide transmission to your premises can import a dial tone from
|
|
whatever local telco network they want. The issue to settle is if
|
|
they can SELL it to you. This portends a boon to independent Telcos
|
|
located in the hinterlands who want to engage in selling their dial
|
|
tone to people a thousand miles away. (And if you REALLY understand
|
|
the true love/hate relation between Bell and Independent Telcos in the
|
|
US, you'll see that's not a flight of fancy!)
|
|
|
|
Who would sell this dial tone? The first moves have already been made
|
|
in England, where instead of simply demonopolizing long distance, the
|
|
government authorized a "duopoly," permitting England's globe-spanning
|
|
Cable & Wireless to establish Mercury Communications to provide local
|
|
dial tone as well. Mercury has done so in more than one way. In the
|
|
major cities, Mercury immediately pulled fiber into abandoned steam
|
|
pipes and used Northern Telecom's telephone network architecture and
|
|
equipment to pop electronic exchanges in service with a speed most
|
|
telephone people would not understand.
|
|
|
|
The Mercury network was operational almost overnight, in typical
|
|
telephone capital plan terms. And, Mercury offered services that
|
|
British Telecom hadn't thought of, like Centrex, intrinsically
|
|
available in the NT equipment, but not in BT-controlled designs, even
|
|
the fabled System X. In less-dense areas, Mercury used existing
|
|
technology to use vacant capacity in cable TV systems to reach
|
|
telephone subscribers. The latter method has been slow to expand, but
|
|
not for technical limits as much as economic disagreement with the
|
|
cable operators.
|
|
|
|
The implication for the U.S. is obvious: Your local cable TV company
|
|
has the transmission plant in place to become the "other phone company
|
|
in town." The technology to get telephone channels on the present
|
|
coaxial cble plant exists; there is no need for a "fiber rebuild" to
|
|
handle the need. Existing unused capacity in many US cable TV systems
|
|
offers in the order ot 50,000 lines of capacity in every cable passing
|
|
every building. The "fiber" story is chanted by Telcos, because they
|
|
need fiber to get their capacity up to be able to compete in wideband
|
|
data and television carriage. Adding fiber to the cable TV systems is
|
|
just a convenience and modernization to their plant. In fact, in many
|
|
disparate areas of the nation, cable TV companies have quietly sold
|
|
telephone and data channel capacity for years, some even
|
|
interconnected between cable companies for distances in excess of 100
|
|
miles, and channels up to T-1 digital rate. Again, these are not
|
|
applications stories your Telco-paid "consultant" is likely to tell
|
|
you about, but they are not secret nor are they illegal. Carrying a
|
|
dial tone down them is no great technology problem at all.
|
|
|
|
Another front of the attack on the "dial tone monopoly" exists in the
|
|
buzzword "co-location" now being raised more loudly by another new
|
|
form of competition to the local Telcos, the Alternative Access
|
|
Carriers. The AACs are typically local fiber optic network providers
|
|
such as the Metropolitan Fiber Systems now building in more than 20
|
|
cities around the nation, with nearly parallel competition from
|
|
Teleport Communications in most of the same cities, while there are a
|
|
number of unpublicized regional local fiber companies, like Florida's
|
|
Intermedia Communications. Williams Telecommunications Group
|
|
headquartered in Tulsa, OK seems to be making moves to acquire some of
|
|
these firms and as well build some plant of its own in cities.
|
|
|
|
Another aspect of this incursion into the "local monopoly" may come
|
|
from MCI, through its acquisition last year of the local facilities of
|
|
Western Union Telegraph natiowide. My own work led to discovering
|
|
miles of brand new Western Union conduit in the streets of Los Angeles
|
|
late last year prior to the MCI purchase, while another recent
|
|
revelation was discovery of *wooden* WUTCo conduits in Oklahoma City
|
|
recently. All this is now MCI property, and its purpose is obvious;
|
|
MCI's intent to use it is not yet so obvious.
|
|
|
|
The AAC segment is following MFS's lead to get local Telcos ordered to
|
|
permit interconnection of their channels to user premises to Telco
|
|
dial tone.
|
|
|
|
But, they have no need to wait for that. They can just as well import
|
|
dial tone from wherever they want, for VSATs already make that
|
|
practical. In fact, if the U.S. can get cheap computer data entry
|
|
performed on Caribbean islands by VSAT link, what is there to prevent
|
|
U.S. AACs from importing cheap dial tone via VSAT from them as well?
|
|
Probably nothing, if anyone really looks into the possibility.
|
|
|
|
And, most recent, we have alternative space-based potentials.
|
|
Motorola's IRIDIUM is but one, and has recently been well-publicized
|
|
and described. Less public is NASA's Personal Access Satellite System
|
|
(PASS), which proposes to use techniques rather well-developed by the
|
|
military for acquiring and tracking on geosynchronous satellites. PASS
|
|
focuses on developing use of the 35 gigahertz portion of the spectrum
|
|
where enormous dish gains are possible with 0.3 meter (12 inch!)
|
|
dishes and tiny transportable earth stations, offering megabit-sized
|
|
data streams to even the remotest of locations. Both IRIDIUM and PASS
|
|
propose use of satellite "crosslinks," the satellite term for having
|
|
the switching network in the sky with direct trunklines between
|
|
satellites. So, you could readily be in Detroit but getting your dial
|
|
tone from Auckland. In fact, what's to say there can't be a "virtual
|
|
Centrex" located in satellites, so the "global corporation" can have a
|
|
"global Centrex?"
|
|
|
|
In this context of our ability to get a dial tone from anywhere at a
|
|
cheap price, does it really seem so strange that we do it? The
|
|
technology for much of it is already in hand; some of it has really
|
|
already been used, and all of it is so close to accomplishment that we
|
|
will be doing it soon.
|
|
|
|
The largest obstacle is not in technology at all; it is in people's
|
|
emotions and in vested economic interests of an industry that faces
|
|
threats many of its most endangered species participants cannot even
|
|
understand: America's local "natural monopoly" telephone companies.
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
(Historical afternote: One way to understand the way in which the
|
|
"natural dial tone monopoly" has been fabricated and ingrained into
|
|
minds in the U.S. is to read a book on the non-Bell "independent"
|
|
telephone industry. This history has been documented several times
|
|
this century, and the latest is titled, "The Spirit of Independent
|
|
Telephony," by Charles A. Pleasance, 1989, ISBN 0-9622202-0-7.
|
|
|
|
It indexes 37 U.S. cities that once had independent telcos competing
|
|
with Bell, and I know of others that had multiple independent Telcos,
|
|
some until after WW II. This history will surprise some when they
|
|
learn that the Independent telcos even tried to form a non-Bell long
|
|
distance network; one that Bell interests finally quashed with the
|
|
formation of AT&T's Long Lines "department," really a shadow company
|
|
that built the long-distance links and pooled the money collected for
|
|
long distance calls. The point here is that the "natural monopoly"
|
|
concept for dial tone is a fabrication that may have made sense in
|
|
1913, was driven home by vested interests, and today is obviously a
|
|
dinosaur running out of food.)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
End of TELECOM Digest Special: Dial Tone Monopoly
|
|
******************************
|