Fw: Re: Erlang?

[BOB RIESE]

  This is why I have strongly opposed
proposals for the use of standard public communication facilities as
a primary link for emergency communications.  The best that could be
done would be to have an emergency service bit or field in the ID of
certain wireless phones.  Then systems could recognize and give
immediate service to emergency communications users.  I'm not sure
that would be practical, though.  Who is going to supervise this
across all of the phone systems 


For what it is worth


The GTD 5 type of stored program switches I worked on for GTE/Verizon 
had a feature "Nailed Connections"

it wasn't discussed much but when the new switching technology was
introduced in the York Pa
area in the mid 80s , my understanding was it gave positive service for
DT . If traffic bogged
a switch down the nailed connections were guaranteed service. The idea of
a back door access by the 
government was there as well. That was not discussed at all, at least to
me . This was still the cold war days
and anything was possible. 

The real eye opener was the problems at Three Mile Island. I was working
in a small 20 K line office 
,SXS, main fuze was 500 amp.  at 48 volts and the office was at a 500 amp
load for 30 hours or so
we couldn't turn down line finders because customers would still put
their phone off hook waiting
for DT and 20 thousand small loads added up and the traffic was still
there

Bob