how-to block ads
|
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| reply to JakCrow
Re: understand what your asking for folks.
said by JakCrow:
That's because the ILECs haven't been following the rules. Of course, they think they should also be rewarded for not following the rules....
Exactly which "rules" were the ILEC's not following? Please support your claim that the ILEC's were "breaking the law." | |
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| that's easy.
1. prevention of CLEC customers from being turned up on a timely basis through lengthy delays, often as long as six or more months, while turning up their own customers in the same building in a matter of days. it's not as if they couldn't just identify the damn pair of wires while they were right there, in the same phone closet as the rest of the building...efficiency be damned. they chose to blow off CLEC circuit tagging on purpose.
2. creating a hostile environment in every c.o. that had CLEC equipment installed, and creating barriers to that access through unending identification changes.
3. bizarre pricing for UNE's, with discounts given only after ridiculous amounts of lines were sold (that even the ILEC's weren't selling in that quantity)
4. unending delays to repair for CLEC customers, citing "overbooking" when ILEC customers in very same building are repaired that day
these are just a few I experienced first hand. if this isn't evidence of noncompliance with TA1996, then I'm not sure what you call "compliance". the law called for access to c.o.'s and UNE's. these subtle and not so subtle roadblocks I call noncompliance.
nobody wants to wait around for six months to wait on a CLEC to get its circuit turned up. this tactic alone is the probable cause of the demise of many a CLEC. (not to mention bad business models, but that's a different debate)
[text was edited by author 2002-08-03 16:30:25] | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| said by garagerock:
that's easy.
1. prevention of CLEC customers from being turned up on a timely basis through lengthy delays, often as long as six or more months, while turning up their own customers in the same building in a matter of days. it's not as if they couldn't just identify the damn pair of wires while they were right there, in the same phone closet as the rest of the building...efficiency be damned. they chose to blow off CLEC circuit tagging on purpose.
2. creating a hostile environment in every c.o. that had CLEC equipment installed, and creating barriers to that access through unending identification changes.
3. bizarre pricing for UNE's, with discounts given only after ridiculous amounts of lines were sold (that even the ILEC's weren't selling in that quantity)
4. unending delays to repair for CLEC customers, citing "overbooking" when ILEC customers in very same building are repaired that day
these are just a few I experienced first hand. if this isn't evidence of noncompliance with TA1996, then I'm not sure what you call "compliance". the law called for access to c.o.'s and UNE's. these subtle and not so subtle roadblocks I call noncompliance.
nobody wants to wait around for six months to wait on a CLEC to get its circuit turned up. this tactic alone is the probable cause of the demise of many a CLEC. (not to mention bad business models, but that's a different debate)
[text was edited by author 2002-08-03 16:30:25]
Six MONTHS for a circuit to be assigned to a pair? ID issues are the same for ILEC employees as they are for CLEC vendors. ALL pricing for UNE's are set by PUC's, not the ILEC. Speaking from experience, ILEC customers also have unending delays in repairs and installation- just look at the nightmare of 2000 for Ameritech for an example of THAT!
While it may seem that all of these bad experiences were as a result of the ILEC's willful misconduct to harass the CLEC's, it is the same on all ends- the grass isn't greener on the other side!
Boogie | |
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
|  said by boogie74:
While it may seem that all of these bad experiences were as a result of the ILEC's willful misconduct to harass the CLEC's, it is the same on all ends- the grass isn't greener on the other side!
How is that, exactly? Not like any CLEC can turn the tables and wait six months before installing a customer...they are always waiting on the damn ILEC to do their part.
so, basically you admit that willful misconduct to harass the CLEC's occurs??? haven't you proven my point for me? enforcement of TA1996 has been shoddy at best....so, how is it flawed if it hasn't been properly enforced? going back to 1984 by putting ma bell back together is NOT a solution any business customer would go for.
i (fortunately) don't even work in telecom anymore, and never will, quite frankly, given the current environment and reading these posts makes me wonder if the 1990's ever happened.
p.s. I saw many a pissed off customer go bye bye waiting longer than six months for a circuit ID. Sometimes that was average, especially in Ameritech territory.
[text was edited by author 2002-08-03 19:48:38]
[text was edited by author 2002-08-03 19:53:39] | |
JakCrow
join:2001-12-06
Palo Alto, CA
| reply to garagerock
Don't forget:
Stealing existing circuits CLEC customers to provide services for ILEC customers. (this happens frequently in Pac Bell territory)
And after the majority of the CLECs were eliminated in Pac Bell territory, prices were jacked up even though it has become cheaper to provide services.
I'm tired of the idiots that think because existing laws weren't enforced, we need new laws that repeal the existing one, but have more holes in them and are even looser than the original laws, like less restrictions will make it easier to enforce something. Like hell...
[text was edited by author 2002-08-03 22:11:30] | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| reply to garagerock
said by garagerock:
said by boogie74:
While it may seem that all of these bad experiences were as a result of the ILEC's willful misconduct to harass the CLEC's, it is the same on all ends- the grass isn't greener on the other side!
How is that, exactly? Not like any CLEC can turn the tables and wait six months before installing a customer...they are always waiting on the damn ILEC to do their part.
so, basically you admit that willful misconduct to harass the CLEC's occurs??? haven't you proven my point for me? enforcement of TA1996 has been shoddy at best....so, how is it flawed if it hasn't been properly enforced? going back to 1984 by putting ma bell back together is NOT a solution any business customer would go for.
i (fortunately) don't even work in telecom anymore, and never will, quite frankly, given the current environment and reading these posts makes me wonder if the 1990's ever happened.
p.s. I saw many a pissed off customer go bye bye waiting longer than six months for a circuit ID. Sometimes that was average, especially in Ameritech territory.
[text was edited by author 2002-08-03 19:48:38]
[text was edited by author 2002-08-03 19:53:39]
If you re-read my post you will see it says, "While it may seem that all of these bad experiences were as a result of the ILEC's willful misconduct to harass the CLEC's, it is the same on all ends- the grass isn't greener on the other side!"
I don't see how you can translate that into "There is definitely willful misconduct from the ILEC's" It does not prove your point at all.
Boogie | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| reply to garagerock
quote:
p.s. I saw many a pissed off customer go bye bye waiting longer than six months for a circuit ID. Sometimes that was average, especially in Ameritech territory.
Sometimes that was average? Average can only be defined as one concept at a time- perhaps the median average or the mean average. That's like being a little pregnant.
Do you mean to say that sometimes the average turnaround time was 24 hours and sometimes the average turnaround time was 6 months or more? I'm very lost as to the veracity of your statement.
quote:
How is that, exactly? Not like any CLEC can turn the tables and wait six months before installing a customer...they are always waiting on the damn ILEC to do their part.
How's this for a scenerio: A CLEC offers a customer service to be turned on in 3 business days. The CLEC then waits 6 weeks to turn in the order to the ILEC who takes 3 business days to work it. The CLEC then tells the customer that the ILEC is refusing to work the order and is holding up the whole process. The CLEC tells the customer to complain to the PUC about the situation. The PUC fines the ILEC and orders the ILEC to pay the CLEC for "lost revenue."
Is it at all possible that the CLEC has work to do in fullfilling orders? Or are you assuming that it is all done by the ILEC? And if so, why doesn't the CLEC invest in upgrading it's own equipment so in the future it doesn't have to rely on the ILEC?
Boogie
[text was edited by author 2002-08-04 23:23:47] | |
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| Its always high comedy to me when a phone company employee defends his/her company to the end, as if they were birthed, indoctrinated, and employed by the same entity.
Look man, why the hell would I cite such blatantly long delays unless I knew for sure that I was sitting on my ass waiting six months for a circuit ID from the ILEC AND I was the last CLEC employee to touch the order? I didn't wait six months to turn in orders, that's for damn sure, since I've got Customer A calling me by the hour wanting to know when he's getting turned up.
Is it at all possible that the CLEC has work to do in fullfilling orders? Or are you assuming that it is all done by the ILEC? And if so, why doesn't the CLEC invest in upgrading it's own equipment so in the future it doesn't have to rely on the ILEC?
This part kills me....hello? do you know what year it is? TA1996 has been law for 6 friggin years. The debate about this is as dead as Tupac Shakur (sorry Tupac, your the only celeb who died in 96 I could think of). The law said open up your networks to competition. I'm enlightened enough to think that is a good thing. Obviously, working for your precious employer makes you think otherwise. This makes you pretty self serving in my book. The hell with competition and the hell with consumer choice-wouldn't want to cut into your 401k now, would we?
I hear these arguments over and over again from your ilk, and it just kills me-that's all you folks care about is your own asses.
I experienced firsthand the bullsh*t delays and anti-competitive behavior displayed by all of the ILEC's, you just can't convince me otherwise.
p.s. I don't work for telecom anymore, so I'm not saving my ass by defending CLEC's...
[text was edited by author 2002-08-05 08:44:53] | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| quote:
Look man, why the hell would I cite such blatantly long delays unless I knew for sure that I was sitting on my ass waiting six months for a circuit ID from the ILEC AND I was the last CLEC employee to touch the order? I didn't wait six months to turn in orders, that's for damn sure, since I've got Customer A calling me by the hour wanting to know when he's getting turned up.
Looks like I've struck a nerve. If you re-read my post, I never said that there was NEVER a delay for circuitry or line assignments from an ILEC. I specifically said that such delays are NOT unique to CLEC orders- that MANY orders for ILEC customers actually have delays as well.
The suggested scenerio is something that has been documented on many occasions- even worse, the orders that aren't being submitted are DISCONNECT orders.
quote:
Is it at all possible that the CLEC has work to do in fullfilling orders? Or are you assuming that it is all done by the ILEC? And if so, why doesn't the CLEC invest in upgrading it's own equipment so in the future it doesn't have to rely on the ILEC?
This part kills me....hello? do you know what year it is? TA1996 has been law for 6 friggin years. The debate about this is as dead as Tupac Shakur (sorry Tupac, your the only celeb who died in 96 I could think of). The law said open up your networks to competition. I'm enlightened enough to think that is a good thing. Obviously, working for your precious employer makes you think otherwise. This makes you pretty self serving in my book. The hell with competition and the hell with consumer choice-wouldn't want to cut into your 401k now, would we?
I'm a bit lost here, did you actually answer the question? The law said open up the networks to competition. It's happening. Residential competition is slow to develop because CLEC's don't want the low income business. THAT has been proven.
CLEC's that offer high end business services ARE putting out their own networks. It's not an issue of what the law says. It's an issue of "INVEST IN YOUR BUSINESS."
Why is it that you would actually believe that the if law stating to open up markets to competition, that would mean that companies looking to compete are prohibited from investing in their own businesses? The law doesn't state, "Subsidize every business that wants to compete with you forever and ever"
Boogie | |
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| when, exactly did I suppose the point that you put in such a glib fashion:
CLEC's that offer high end business services ARE putting out their own networks. It's not an issue of what the law says. It's an issue of "INVEST IN YOUR BUSINESS."
All I'm saying, and anyone else who's ever had to put up with ILEC foot dragging, is allow unfettered access to the last mile. Period. Any CLEC network interfaces with the last mile, which your beloved employer controls. The law says give up access, not build a new national infrastructure. My point still is that I and every other employee I had contact with during my stint with a CLEC could testify to endless delays to repair, to circuit ID, and to practically every other issue that involved the ILEC in any region of the country.
For some bizarre reason, you keep putting words in my mouth. I never said anything about subsidizing the CLEC's, just give them unfettered access to the last mile without the anti-competitive bullsh*t you and I both know happens. (well, you're not willing to admit it, but hey, that's your crutch)
I specifically said that such delays are NOT unique to CLEC orders- that MANY orders for ILEC customers actually have delays as well
Like I said before, I saw ILEC customers get repaired and/or turned up in the same building as CLEC customers, on several occasions. Sooooooooo, from my puny personal experience (not to mention various other customers' experiences) I have to suppose that there were bullsh*t delays occurring. I think I'm smart enough to see a pattern developing.
obviously we disagree. i give up trying to convince anyone on this issue, including you, but you could check the lawsuit being filed by Covad-I bet they'd agree.
[text was edited by author 2002-08-05 10:15:33]
[text was edited by author 2002-08-05 10:17:12] | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs: | When did you work for a CLEC? | |
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY | why do you ask? | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| said by garagerock:
why do you ask?
Because you stated that you don't work in telecom but you used to. You then state that there is currently an average wait of 6 months or more to provision circuits to CLEC's.
So, that being said, I feel that the time period (and CLEC for that matter) that you worked there might have some relevance to your point of view.
For instance, if you worked there from 1996-1998, there are HUGE leaps in improvement since then that you would not be aware of.
Boogie | |
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| Oh, I see. The third degree on my background, eh? which evil master do you serve, Boogie? Do you have any evidence to suggest Ma Bell doesn't drag her feet???
I served Covad faithfully from 2000 to the demise of Bluestar, so I really have two companies perspectives on ILEC provisioning and delays. The six months I was citing was information I had access to as a regional engineer, in my desperate attempt to get as many customers turned up in a timely manner. There were many projects that never were completed, and there were many circuits in Ameritech territory that had a six month average to installation. Sorry, didn't get to keep any documents that prove this, just my foggy memory.
So yeah, in the 18 months I was there, there were several customers in Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan that never got turned up. We would call, check status, and get the same bullshit story-no facilities, no facilities, no facilities. Never mind that many other customers were getting Ameritech DSL from the same c.o.'s
I never said there was a current average, my information is outdated, obviously...so you got me there, I guess.
But, my points are still valid. The lawsuit news today with BellSouth is just the beginning. And no one in your shoes has any credible story to explain all of this away.
--
My attitude sucks. I know it, and I don't care anymore. Age has that effect on you.
[text was edited by author 2002-08-05 19:36:07] | |
boogie74
join:2001-06-19
Neenah, WI
clubs:
| said by garagerock:
Oh, I see. The third degree on my background, eh? which evil master do you serve, Boogie? Do you have any evidence to suggest Ma Bell doesn't drag her feet???
You are the one making the claim that the ILEC's are dragging their feet all the time- based on the concept that no one is going very far to disprove it? I am not making the claim, you are- I'm asking you to support it.
quote:
I served Covad faithfully from 2000 to the demise of Bluestar, so I really have two companies perspectives on ILEC provisioning and delays. The six months I was citing was information I had access to as a regional engineer, in my desperate attempt to get as many customers turned up in a timely manner. There were many projects that never were completed, and there were many circuits in Ameritech territory that had a six month average to installation. Sorry, didn't get to keep any documents that prove this, just my foggy memory.
So yeah, in the 18 months I was there, there were several customers in Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan that never got turned up. We would call, check status, and get the same bullshit story-no facilities, no facilities, no facilities. Never mind that many other customers were getting Ameritech DSL from the same c.o.'s
So your job was to handle ILEC delays? In other words, you have no data on how many jobs were turned over in a TIMELY manner, only that ALL the jobs you saw were turned over with delays.
The CO has nothing to do with "no facilities" delays. If a CLEC orders a pair for ANYTHING and no good pair to the location is available, the answer will be, "No facilities" for a number of reasons- none of which have to do with whether the order is CLEC or ILEC. You can bet your booty that if the same customer (not same CO, same customer) were to order service with the ILEC, the same delay would occur. It is ONLY YOU that has come to the conclusion that the delay is because it is a CLEC order.
quote:
I never said there was a current average, my information is outdated, obviously...so you got me there, I guess.
But, my points are still valid. The lawsuit news today with BellSouth is just the beginning. And no one in your shoes has any credible story to explain all of this away.
Your points are using outdated information. I have no comment on the Bellsouth lawsuit, as I have no information on it. In 2000, Ameritech had BIG TIME delays in service for its OWN customers- it had nothing to do with whether the lines were with a CLEC or not. My point is simply that.
Also, there is something smelling rotten in Denmark when the same company continues to sue ALL the ILEC's for the same thing- as though the ILEC's are calling each other up to say, "Let's get Covad!"
Boogie | |
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY
| well, this debate is tiresome at this point.
keep making excuses for ma bell, although i don't see a reason as to why.
as to data on timely installs, i'd venture a percentage guess of 50%, which is horrible in any industry. any retail establishment worth their salt doesn't wait on the wholesaler like any CLEC waits on the ILEC. perhaps your company just isn't ready or willing to be a wholesaler.
like i said before, i'm highly suspicious of the "no facilities" bullshit excuse, you can say what you like but I've seen what happens, and it happens with so much frequency it just can't be justified with the excuses you cite.
(yawn) yeah, yeah....all ILEC's had delays in 2000, no kidding. but i really doubt 100% of those delays were just coincidence in regards to CLEC's.
i'll just let the lawyers do the talking at this point. you can choose to continue this, but you'll be talking to yourself. i'm just one guy, hundreds of others in my shoes experienced the same things i did. and all you have is a pile of the same old excuses, and apologies for ma bell.
i say "bah"
--
My attitude sucks. I know it, and I don't care anymore. Age has that effect on you. | |
|
