New Zealand's Leading Daily Net-News Online Publication |
Net-Industry NEWS! |
|
|
Publishing Internet News and Commentary since 1995
.
| ||
| ||
|
Dateline: 16 December 1999 All Day Edition Read Yesterday's Edition
Editorial
It appears that due to a fault at IHUG, the phone network was suddenly hit
hard by lots of PCs trying to automatically redial to connect.
According to the release the problem happened at around 10:15pm on Monday
night and the "IHUG call numbers" leapt from 200 per minute to 2,000 or more.
"Almost instantaneously" the report goes on to say, " the 0867's call management
system moved into action to prevent this incident from having any wider impact
on Telecom's network, and in particular the critical Airedale Street exchange,
through which most of the calls were being channelled."
"We were able to limit calls to 600 a minute."
"... it was also important to note that 93 111 emergency calls were made
through the exchange during the period of the network incident."
"... internet calling is continuing to burgeon. Internet calling now accounts
for close to half (about 45%) of all local residential calling, up from
around 28% a year ago."
Now this all sounds pretty damned convincing doesn't it?
Although I do have some questions...
If, as the release says, "we were able to limit calls to 600 a minute" then
how can Telecom also claim that the 0867 network will not result in a reduction
in the level of service? Surely it was simply dumping anywhere from 1,400 to
2,400 calls a minute and that would not have happened if those calls were placed
outside the 0867 network.
Then their's the very crafty wording "Internet calling now accounts to close to
half of all local residential calling." This is rather ambiguous isn't it?
Are they talking about the number of calls placed or the total minutes spent
off-hook? There's a significant difference.
And one must question: why was the number of 111 emergency calls mentioned --
given that Telecom was forced to admit that a previous claim
it was introducing 0867 to protect the 111 service from Net-calls was false and
misleading.
The release also claims that British Telecom are now planning to
introduce a system similar to 0867 which, coincidentally, also uses an 08 prefix.
Perhaps Telecom might consider that the reason it starts with 08 is because
it actually offers a flat-rate access, unlike the existing residential calling
option in the UK that has a per-minute fee associated with it. Perhaps they're
using a different numbering system so as to make it easier to manage the
non-billing of such calls in the same manner as 0800 calls are at no cost
to the caller?
Finally, hasn't Telecom figured out that if the 0867 system starts regularly
rejecting calls (as it did on Monday night), it's not going to be long before
Net users set up an alternative dialer to ring the ISP's regular number whenever
they find the 0867 lines congested. This is certainly something I'd be doing if
I had to use an 0867 number.
If this happened then it would make a mockery of Telecom's claims that the
0867 system will reduce network loading -- because people would just click
on the other dialer and hit the phone network just as hard. After all --
we've still got 10 hours of charge-free Net calling per month outside the
0867 network.
It strikes me that Telecom are very seriously worried about the fact that they're
facing the prospect of a new government actually questioning the veracity
of its claims and the actions based on them -- rather than just regarding the company's lawyers as
the ultimate authority.
Why else would they spend so much money flying influential journalists down
for a mental-flossing session last week and then wax lyrical about the way
the system is working -- despite the fact there are still ISPs who have had
their switch-over date deferred into the new millennium due to problems.
Survey Of The Week
Answers on the front of a
contact form please.
|
27 August 99
|
Aardvark Daily is a publication of, and is copyright to, Bruce Simpson, all rights reserved
|