Date: 08 Nov 92 06:19:24 EST
From: Alfredo E. Cotroneo <100020.1013@CompuServe.COM>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Compuserve/MCI Email
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 828, Message 2 of 7

Our Association has subscribed to CompuServe (CSI) in order (mainly)
to have Internet access. Another use of the CSI account is to forward
mail to US addresses. Mail is edited in Milano, Italy, and uploaded
via modem to Compuserve via an Infonet node in Milano. CSI assures
almost next day US mail delivery in the US at a very competitive cost
(more or less the cost of an Airmail stamp from Italy, that's one or
two days delivery versus ten or more days from Milano).
 
Another use we make of the CSI account is to forward mail to MCI
users. CSI does charge quite a lot for mail gated to MCI (ca.  US$ 1,
per message). Access to MCI from CSI's Internet gateway
(INTERNET: user@mci.com) is blocked by CSI, so we have to use the CSI
to MCI direct gateway at a higher price.  Although expensive, sometime
we also use CSI to MCI mail for urgent and important messages. At an
extra cost and for any kind of destination, CSI also notify us of
delivery/receipt of messages. This is an option that sometimes we also
use.
 
Recently we suspected that all mail previously sent to at least one
MCI's address was not delivered by CSI, and we were NOT been advised
(no message returned as undeliverable). Since we were indeed charged
for all CSI to MCI mail delivery, we assumed that all of these
messages were indeed delivered on time to MCI, but apparently they
were not. About a month ago we filed a request to CSI customer
Service, but no reply has been received so far, except a series of "we
are sorry for the delay in answering you, we are investigating the
matter" like messages.
 
The content of some of these messages consisted of a "Notice of usage
of HF frequencies" by our SW Station. These notifications usually try
to avoid interferences between broadcasters when a seasonal HF
frequency changes is due. A few weeks ago one station who was the
receipient of one of such notifications started interfering heavily
with our station. After a few notes of complain from us (sent via
fax!), they stated that they have not received our notifications sent
via CSI->MCI.
 
If it really proves that messages were not delivered by CSI, what
would be the responsability of CompuServe or MCI? Would it be possible
to obtain any compensation for what the losss of this mail caused, and
is still causing? Again, probably if the messages would have been
carried thru Internet, there would be no guarantee they would be
delivered/received (?), but since this is a direct CSI->MCI gateway
(and service charged) I must assume that delivery must be guaranteed
by both CSI and MCI.
 
I know the US has a tradition in service and satisfaction -- something
we are still missing overhere in Europe, I am afraid.  But still it
seems that we are at a standstill with CSI.  Any help/hint/suggestion
in this matter from the US readers will be greatly appreciated. Is
there any federal body I should also contact at this regard?
 
Do not forget that we are based in Milano, Italy, and are not a US
company. Please email directly to: 100020.1013@CompuServe.com, and I
will summarize if there is interest. Thank you.
 
 
Alfredo E. Cotroneo   President
NEXUS-International Broadcasting Association
PO BOX 10980, I-20110 Milano, Italy
NEXUS-IBA is a non profit-Association chartered according to the
Italian law and operates IRRS-Shortwave on Shortwave to Europe.


[Moderator's Note: Actually, the fault may very well be with MCI Mail.
They routinely dump huge amounts of mail from the Internet undelivered.
The sender may or may not get notice of non-delivery, depending on the
way things occured.  Consider this Digest for example: I have several
dozen subscribers who receive their copies via MCI Mail -- or at least
they are supposed to. About once every two weeks, I get back notice
that they did NOT deliver one or more issues. As often as not, I find
out when several subscribers from MCI Mail write me at the same time
and say one or more issues never arrived. Their complaint is that a
single address in the envelope is bad; someone quit subscribing to MCI
Mail but never told me to remove their name. The mail gets there, MCI
sees one bad address and dumps it all. Maybe the Reston gateway sends
it back to me, maybe not. I suspect MCI does not always give it back
to Reston, otherwise I'd get a mailer daemon from there. MCI Mail has
never seen any need apparently to follow Internet mail standards which
provide for handling multiple addressees with one bad address in the
midst of it. Naturally, I have to then remail the missing issues. It
is quite a nuisance that MCI Mail seems unwilling to correct.   PAT]