|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Frame-relay outage: Nolo Contendere
> Date: 29 May 2001 09:53:13 -0700 > From: Sean Donelan <[email protected]> > > Intersting cover letter included with SBC's FCC Outage report on > Friday's frame-relay problems in California and Nevada. > > "Attached please find an Initial Service Disruption Report by SBC > Advanced Solutions, Inc (SBC-ASI) This report is submitted on an > informational basis, and without admission that the provisions of 47 CFR > 63.100 are appliaable to SBC-ASI or to the services provided by > SBC-ASI." [ snip hairy URL ] > I note that both Worldcom and AT&T filed FCC initial outage reports > about their frame-relay and ATM network problems, and final outage > reports without such words in their cover letter. I recently read a tariff filing by SWBT that did something similar. I'd have to dig up the filing for the exact wording, but it was something to the effect of "we're just doing this because we're nice, not because we think it applies." Yeah, right. Is this "we don't agree with the PUC, but we're just doing it because we're so nice" thing something that SBC does now? Eddy --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. EverQuick Internet Division Phone: (316) 794-8922 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <[email protected]>, or you are likely to be blocked.
|