>Maybe there are some issues I am not considering or not aware of but here
>are my thoughts...
IMHO, there a number of valid reasons for desiring 2400 (and lower) support.
On the customer side:
- The "dirt cheap 14.4K modems" aspect is irrelevant. I don't feel it
is our place to tell customers what they can and cannot run on their
end. If they want to use a 640K '286 box with 1200/2400 modem,
that's their business -- we have a number of these types, who are
quite happy just to have access to email. I don't personally want
to discriminate based on either personal choice or what might be
considered socio-economic factors.
- A significant number of our customers travel regularly, especially
in South America and various Pacific islands. Not only is line
quality highly inconsistent, but they are often using equipment such
as HP palmtops or PDAs (like our guy cycling around the world with a
Newton, filing regular reports to his web site) equipped with 2400
only. Some take our advice and open an ibm.net account for the
majority of this access; others prefer to call in direct -- again,
it's the customer's choice.
- The cellular side's already been addressed -- what might be fine for
folks such as you down in the flatlands of TX doesn't necessarily
apply here in the hilly, congested-cell Bay Area.
On the ISP side:
For the most part, it really doesn't matter, since we'll always run some
amount of legacy equipment to support the niche customers. However, as we
set up new POPs we run into various "problems".
Most of our new locations (20-50 mile distance from the NOC) are going in as
extended PRI runs -- there is no physical presence at which to place legacy
equipment. Even if there were a shelf on which to place it, we really
wouldn't want to saddle every POP with additional hardware (and the
accompanying maintenance considerations) just to service some relatively
minor percentage.
So we end up stratifying the service offerings based on the customer's
location -- something we've gone to some lengths and expense to avoid all
along -- as well as add burden to both the support staff and the customers
in order to deal with these types of issues.
Bottom line: I'd prefer to see support for all ITU-T standards, but if
there are engineering and technical considerations (such as RAM
space/processor limitations in the DSPs to add legacy modulations), then so
be it, we'll live and I'll lose little if any sleep.
My last $0.02.
William Sommers
San Francisco Online
Televolve, Inc.
sommers@sfo.com