<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On 11/10/2011, at 7:02 PM, Solly, Matthew wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; ">I don't see how passing the responsibility to the RSPs would work unless the RSPs were allowed to charge for the UPS in a rental fashion. I think the UPS should be a "premium" service of sorts. Perhaps the RSPs could rent the UPS to users, with this cost subsidised to those where the phone line is a mission critical service (severely ill people, etc…). That would be one way to ensure the UPS was maintained. </span></blockquote></div><br><div><br></div><div>But that doesn't answer the "what happens when there's multiple RSPs" question though. I can't see how passing it onto the RSP would work based solely on that.</div></body></html>