| Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork? |
|---|
Gordon Burditt (gordonb.wvukh@burditt.org)Tue, 20 Dec 2005 00:27:10 -0000
|
|
|
> I think I remember once seeing a little circuit board that did nothing > except guarantee Part 68 compliance. (It even had its own Ringer > Equivalence Number, a whole 0.0B.) It was designed for people who > wanted to attach their own homebrew projects to the phone line but not > worry about causing problems. I don't remember where I saw it, sorry, > but you could probably find something like it wherever you buy other > bare electronic circuit thingies.
A long time ago, when they first started allowing other people to
Eventually they built these into modems, but I can still see a use for
Gordon L. Burditt |
| Post Followup Article | Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply |
| Go to Next message: Seth Breidbart: "Re: Spam (was FTC Do Not Call List)" | |
| Go to Previous message: Scott Dorsey: "Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork?" | |
| May be in reply to: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com: "Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork?" | |
| Next in thread: Al Gillis: "Re: Physically Protecting The Local Loop Metwork?" | |
| TELECOM Digest: Home Page | |