IP: Vin[t] Cerf Article on Second Lines

[David Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

From: LinkHoe () aol com
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 07:35:22 -0400 (EDT)
To: farber () cis upenn edu


Subject: Vin Cerf Article on Second Lines


Dave:


I read Vin Cerf's article on second lines.  His suppositions and conspiracy
theory arguments are way off base.  


Bell Atlantic and NYNEX, in our joint filing, made a pretty strong argument
that applying a higher SLC on second lines did not make sense.  It is
administratively complex and difficult to apply, especially today.  So many
people are living in group arrangements and so many people have second and
third lines that are billed to other members of a family that we would not
have a clue whether a line is truly a second one used by the same person or
not. If such a SLC were to be applied, it would not take people long in a
household long to figure out that all they would have to do to get around the
charge is to list each line they have under another member of the family.


I believe that Sprint, among others, made the strongest argument for a higher
second line SLC.  I don't know whether any of the other RBOCs did or not but
I think many of them feel as we do.


Vin should realize that while there may be some true conspiracies in the
world, this ain't one of them.  We never pushed for any sort of "modem tax."


Regards.


LINK HOEWING
Bell Atlantic External Affairs