I understand the negatives and I agree that this is still a valuable approach. If Brad wins the fight with GP over WD packets so much the better, but I think GP is one of many providers that do not support WD packets, and the proposed solution is obviously in use elsewhere. This would remove some (if not all) of the reliance we have on the providers.
Ramsey
At 04:47 PM 5/20/2004, Steven Bastardi wrote:
Ramsey,* * * C O N F I D E N T I A L I T Y S T A T E M E N T * * * This E-MAIL message and any accompanying documents contain confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose. The information contained within is private and protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by return e-mail or by telephone at 419-661-1233 so that we can prevent a reoccurrence. Thank you in advance for your strict compliance and assistance.
Sylvain is investigating this concept as a possible solution. The negative comments I've heard so far are as follows:
- It would not work if the user has their caller id blocked.
It would clean up ghost users allowing the actual user online, however, connect time reports would be incorrect since there would be no way to know when the user had actually disconnected. The way I see it this solution would still solve the majority of my problems.
Steven Bastardi
The Home Town Network Inc.
