1996-09-20 - Re: 56 kbps modems

Header Data

From: “David Lesher / hated by RBOC’s in 5 states” <wb8foz@wauug.erols.com>
To: gnu@toad.com (John Gilmore)
Message Hash: a82acdc3bbd0320cceeed0a43e26b1542db55d7a3ba2392caedd1757d74c3db9
Message ID: <199609201408.KAA11269@wauug.erols.com>
Reply To: <199609200744.AAA07457@toad.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-09-20 17:30:39 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 01:30:39 +0800

Raw message

From: "David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states" <wb8foz@wauug.erols.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 01:30:39 +0800
To: gnu@toad.com (John Gilmore)
Subject: Re: 56 kbps modems
In-Reply-To: <199609200744.AAA07457@toad.com>
Message-ID: <199609201408.KAA11269@wauug.erols.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


John Gilmore sez:
> 
> 
> The rest of this is speculation and fantasy on my part.

{....}

This goes along with what others have postulated.

But I have to wonder -- how long will the [re]train take?
One of the gripes about PEP was that retrains were slow....
This sounds slower.

Further, how stable will the outcome be -- will the 'slop' in the 
CO's AD conversion overwhelm things?

Lastly, what will the RBOC's do to stifle its use? [I take it as a
given that they will object to anything that benefits subscribers
and does not give them an added cut.. witness ISDN pricing, for
example.]

-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433





Thread