|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 72 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: To Bury or Not to Bury
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
OMG What happened to 800-555-1212?
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
under-sea power transmission cables
Re: under-sea power transmission cables
Phone company asks payment delay
Re: Phone company asks payment delay
Re: To Bury or Not to Bury
Re: To Bury or Not to Bury
Re: To Bury or Not to Bury
Google Voice: A push to rewire your phone service
[Fwd: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT) ]
Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Re: Steam Railroads, was: Telex
ISDN (was Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT))
====== 27 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.
===========================
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime. Geoffrey Welsh
===========================
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:33:14 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: To Bury or Not to Bury
Message-ID: <pan.2009.03.12.06.33.13.225984@myrealbox.com>
On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:02:20 -0400, Neal McLain wrote:
> David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
> > Vehicles can't crash into power poles that aren't there, winds can't
> > affect power lines that are underground, and the visual pollution of
> > underground power distribution is limited to the access ports on the
> > pavement.
>
> Are "access ports" in Australia the same things that we call "manhole
> covers" here in the USA -- round steel plates about a meter in diameter?
>
In the street near me which was converted to underground a few years ago,
the circular power covers (concrete) are only about 0.5 metre dia.
Actually that street is "almost" converted as there is one property who
must have refused to pay their share of the costs of conversion and they
are served by an overhead feed from the single remaining pole in the whole
street (apart from the street lights). The one remaining pole highlights
how ugly it is in comparison to the cleaner and far more open street-scape
where they have been removed.
> Where are equipment enclosures (transformers and switchgear) located?
> Are they also underground?
I know a lot of power infrastructure is underground in the city here, out
in the 'burbs a lot is still up on poles.
The city ones are usually covered by large rectangular covers that pop up
to create barriers when work is done in them (as do a lot of the telco
pits).
........
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:40:12 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <pan.2009.03.12.06.40.11.121390@myrealbox.com>
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:10:36 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote: .........
> For the most part the primary users of ISDN in the US are people who
> have realtime data and need fixed latency connections, like radio
> stations doing remote broadcasts. Odds are when you tune into a radio
> broadcast of a sports event, the connection from the stadium to the
> radio station is an ISDN link carrying MUSCAM-compressed audio. It is a
> switched service... the engineer plugs a codec unit into the line at the
> stadium, and dials the ISDN circuit at the station.
........
Where I work we use a specialist ISDN service where the D-channel is used
for a low volume data link for POS transaction to a bank.
The data goes up to D-channel from our site to our local exchange, from
there is goes into an old packet-switched network that terminates (along
with many other identical services) at our bank. It is a reasonably
cost-efficient way of moving small quantities of data in a secure
point-to-point (virtual) circuit.
We also use the B-channels for normal telephony as it costs us the same as
two POTS lines anyway.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:03:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <577748.97556.qm@web52703.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:01:13 -0700 hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
<<This was discussed in the past, but I remain confused over the
difference between "ISDN" and "DSL". In the past, ISDN was supposed
to be the big wave of the future, but then DSL came out and we heard
little about ISDN after that. Could someone explain the differences,
and why DSL replaced it?>>
My impression of DSL vs. ISDN is that if you were too far from the CO
for DSL sometimes ISDN (@128 Kbps) was often available, and not very
cheaply either.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 01:55:26 -0600
From: Michael Grigoni <michael.grigoni@cybertheque.org>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <49B8BFEE.6080909@cybertheque.org>
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>***** Moderator's Note *****
>>3. Switch to ISDN service, which can provide two separate call paths
>> on a single pair. It tends to be pricey, but you'll have full use of
>> both lines at your new location. I don't know if this will work
>> with ADSL.
The following excerpt is from the Wikipedia article on ISDN:
<quote>
In Germany, ISDN is very popular with an installed base of 25 million
channels (29% of all subscriber lines in Germany as of 2003 and 20%
of all ISDN channels worldwide). Due to the success of ISDN, the number
of installed analog lines is decreasing. Deutsche Telekom (DTAG) offers
both BRI and PRI. Competing phone companies often offer ISDN only and
no analog lines. Because of the widespread availability of ADSL services,
ISDN is today primarily used for voice and fax traffic, but is still
very popular thanks to the pricing policy of German telecommunication
providers. Today ISDN (BRI) and ADSL/VDSL are often bundled on the same
line, mainly because the combination of ADSL with an analog line has no
cost advantage over a combined ISDN-ADSL line.
</quote>
Other replies to this thread seemed to rule-out the ADSL/ISDN combination;
could someone please elaborate?
Michael
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:43:05 +0000 (UTC)
From: Koos van den Hout <koos+newsposting@kzdoos.xs4all.nl>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <gpbhj9$s99$7@kzdoos.xs4all.nl>
Michael Grigoni <michael.grigoni@cybertheque.org> wrote in <49B8BFEE.6080909@cybertheque.org>:
> Other replies to this thread seemed to rule-out the ADSL/ISDN combination;
> could someone please elaborate?
I am typing this over an ADSL+ISDN line, so that combination is available,
in the Netherlands.
The difference is that ADSL over POTS lines is known as 'Annex A' and has a
slightly higher theoretical upstream rate than ADSL over ISDN lines which
is 'Annex B'. Because of the higher bandwidth of an ISDN line (it is in
theory a 144 kilobit baseband line) more frequency space is reserved.
Annex A versus Annex B requires different types of ADSL modems and
different types of DSLAMs (the equipment in the central office). I can
imagine certain places which have very low rates of ISDN adaptation to not
offer ISDN+ADSL over one copper pair because of the high cost of the
special DSLAM with very few customers actually using the service.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADSL has more.
Koos van den Hout
--
Koos van den Hout, PGP keyid DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263 via keyservers
koos@kzdoos.xs4all.nl or RSA/1024 0xCA845CB5 -?)
Visit the site about books with reviews /\\
http://idefix.net/~koos/ http://www.virtualbookcase.com/ _\_V
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:02:46 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <gpbio6$ki6$3@reader1.panix.com>
Michael Grigoni <michael.grigoni@cybertheque.org> writes:
>Other replies to this thread seemed to rule-out the ADSL/ISDN combination;
>could someone please elaborate?
EuroISDN is different protocol-wise from US; and they wanted DSL to work
over ISDN, so they did it.
In the US, Ma's bastard stepchildren had enough issues with ISDN at all
so they didn't care to try adding DSL...
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:26:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <a16578a2-63bf-45ee-9d44-ada81af4fd9b@h5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 11, 5:55 pm, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> This was discussed in the past, but I remain confused over the
> difference between "ISDN" and "DSL". In the past, ISDN was supposed
> to be the big wave of the future, but then DSL came out and we heard
> little about ISDN after that. Could someone explain the differences,
> and why DSL replaced it?
Thanks to all for their explanations.
One comment . . . several posters used the term "Ma Bell" to refer to
the phone company. IMHO, that term is obsolete in that it only
referred to the old unified Bell System prior to divesture. Once
divesture occured each individual Baby Bell as well as the long-
distance AT&T went their own way. Further, the advent of
"competition" resulted in cost cutting and reduced service quality.
The days where a service and equipment in Florida matched to that in
Oregon are gone. (Indeed, even before divesture the Operating
Companies had variations in service offerings and service quality).
I point this out because problems one Baby Bell might have in one city
won't necessarily occur in other cities, even of the same Baby Bell.
For example, Verizon today is a merger of multiple companies, each
with their own personality--GTE, Bell Atlantic, Nynex, and various
cellular units. Those units in turn are made up of various companies
each with their own personality (e.g. NY Telephone was different than
New England Bell, and GTE contained various Independents of different
heritages.) Remember also each state has its own level of regulation
and history of services. And as we know, today's at&t is a entirely
different company, having been bought out.
I do wish the various telephone providers would be consistent in their
naming of special services. Some services are consistent, such as
Call Waiting. But others have varying names, such as the special ring
associated with a number.
Unfortunately, due to the pressures of marketing, services and their
names and costs are purposely changed frequently. (At home I have
flat rate national long distance, and every month they change the name
of the service as it appears on the bill.)
***** Moderator's Note *****
Ma Bell has set her minions to the task of convincing the public and
the regulators that she no longer exists. I'll talk to her later this
week, and I'll let her know the plan is still on track.
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <db38b100-6dc5-4926-b2f6-9ac4171d92dd@v19g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> Ma Bell has set her minions to the task of convincing the public and
> the regulators that she no longer exists. I'll talk to her later this
> week, and I'll let her know the plan is still on track.
I don't understand . . .
For better or worse, what was Ma Bell--the old unified Bell System--no
longer exists.
While the old Bell System wasn't perfect, it's main objective was
excellent service at a good price, and [it] strove to [provide that].
After divesture it became a mostly unregulated competitive environment
of multiple companies and the main objectives were profit and market-
share, which do not at all necessarily tie to service quality. If any
customer's request is too difficult to fulfill, they won't bother and
[they'll] allow the customer to go elsewhere--because the
competitors--who compete by lower prices--are all doing the same thing
or much worse. The public no longer deals with a highly trained and
carefully recruited Service Representative, but a salesperson on
commission. Outside of Western Electric, the Bell System tried very
hard not to lay people off in lean times, even when converting manual
exchanges to dial service. But today--as we saw in the AT&T article--
employees come and go in a revolving door.
As to the competition, when my neighbor switched to cable phone
service, the installer left and her phone didn't work for three days
until they sent someone out to fix their errors; and that's typical.
***** Moderator's Note *****
The Unified New Bell System is now run by a secret cabal of former
Bell System employees. We^h^hThey control the current executives via
the Instrument of Obedience which was implanted shortly after they
were recruited. Coded messages are sent to them as super-audible tones
that can only be heard through the IOO implants. Everything is under
control.
Bill "Where's my medication?" Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 14:42:21 -0500
From: "Who Me?" <hitchhiker@dont.panic>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <Dxdul.3384$Lr6.1903@flpi143.ffdc.sbc.com>
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote
> I don't understand . . .
>
> For better or worse, what was Ma Bell--the old unified Bell System--no
> longer exists.
>
Lighten up Lisa.
He is pulling your chain........or maybe that should be "ringing your Bell".
;-)
***** Moderator's Note *****
Well, sort of ... but not always.
Ma Bell is dead, but her ghost haunts the minions of the Baby Bells,
and the attitudes that led to rise and fall of the world's biggest
paramilitary organization are still deeply ingrained and still being
put into practice by (thankfully, a few) of the orphans: arrogance,
intractability, and (most damaging of all) the deeply set notion that
the way "we" do things is the only way that matters.
The old whore knows everybody's secrets, and is therefore untouchable:
our leaders are literally incapable of thinking of a society without
universal phone service, or (by extension) without the cacaphony of
constant background noise that passes for entertainment, masquerades
as education, and represents itself as being All American. It is an
idea as far-fetched as people doing without mortgages or cars; the
very concept that it's possible would not register unless a million
people marched up to Washington and demanded it. The fact that almost
everyone who reads this will wonder why I would even think of it is
proof that's it's true, yet the supposed benefits of being constantly
connected to the electronic world have often been offset by serious
problems that we, as a society, are unable to discuss or even to
comprehend.
Winston Smith has done his job too well: we can't think of "freedom"
as being a right to choose _not_ to be bothered. Our children are
bombarded by advertisements before they can control their bowels, let
alone their minds; our teenagers are incapable of conceiving of a
world where "tomorrow" or "next week" is soon enough, or where the
etiquette of civil behavior included the notion of private spaces or
even of private time. The economic underclass grows up believing that
the TV actors who flash cell phones at every dramatic plot twist are
real; that the tall white guy makes all the decisions and that
everybody but them has new cars, new clothes, new ideas, and the
privilege of being in charge of their own lives.
To me, "Ma Bell" was not a corporation based on the Prussian Army, but
rather a set of attitudes - notions, beliefs, and habits which snuck
into our collective consciousness as if from poison in our wells:
worst amoung them the notion that someone else decides how we should
spend our time and what we should believe is right.
To paraphrase Mark Antony: The good Ma Bell did was interred with her
bones, but the evils that she allowed have survived and festered in
the society that created and then abandoned her.
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:35:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <a6a8cf2a-b258-44d8-98d1-2f9fc0ca01af@w35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> Well, sort of ... but not always.
>
> Ma Bell is dead, but her ghost haunts the minions of the Baby Bells,
> and the attitudes that led to rise and fall of the world's biggest
> paramilitary organization are still deeply ingrained and still being
> put into practice by (thankfully, a few) of the orphans: arrogance,
> intractability, and (most damaging of all) the deeply set notion that
> the way "we" do things is the only way that matters.
But there also some employees who have the legacy spirit of service
who work hard to take care of the subscribers--to properly do an
installation, debug a problem, patiently explain complex rates and
services, etc.
[snip]
> To paraphrase Mark Antony: The good Ma Bell did was interred with her
> bones, but the evils that she allowed have survived and festered in
> the society that created and then abandoned her.
If we attempted to connect today's typical customer provided equipment
to the Bell System of old, the old system would've crashed and burned
for a variety of reasons.
The old Bell System was geared toward full responsibility end-to-end.
Long Distance was a toll charge and they'd always credit you if a call
failed. Lousy telephones and PBX networks cause me constant
disconects these days*, but since I don't pay for calls I don't care
as much. Back then people would flood the company with complaints
about cutoff calls and demands for credit if using today's equipment.
(*Cheap switchhooks, bad PBX consoles/operators, cordless phones, poor
customer wiring.)
Further, the old electro mechanical gear was very expensive and the
system was engineered with much less capacity. Constant redialing,
false offhooks, etc., from today's phones would cause problems back
then.
> To me, "Ma Bell" was not a corporation based on the Prussian Army, but
> rather a set of attitudes - notions, beliefs, and habits which snuck
> into our collective consciousness as if from poison in our wells:
> worst amoung them the notion that someone else decides how we should
> spend our time and what we should believe is right.
I'm afraid I don't agree with that. The old Bell System provided
telephone service for us, no more, no less. It's attitudes were
internal only, other companies generally did not do business the same
way and Bell's attitudes didn't, IMHO, seep into the overall social
conscious (other than as a source for jokes for Lily Tomlin and Alan
King).
As to technical issues, back in the heydey of the Bell System the rest
of the general population didn't have a clue about technology (with
few exceptions of engineers). Remember that years ago society's
overall educational level was less and technology wasn't in offices.
In a separate thread in alt.folklore. we're discussing a high school
computer in 1973 and how at that time so few people knew anything
about computers as compared to today. Remember how terrified so many
people were in the old days of the C:> prompt?
If you took a typical office worker from 1973 and plopped them down
today, they'd freak out and be completely lost. We forgot about the
days before technology was so common; we take it for granted.
The old Bell System designed equipment, quite carefully, to be as user
friendly as possible and to be as economically maintainable as
possible. In the past that required rigid standardization and that
"Prussian" model for things to work well, given the realities of
times.
Let's be clear that even without divesture, the Bell System and its
relations with subscribers today would be very different, to reflect
the changes in technology that have come along. Cheap electronics of
the 1980s allowed them to switch to ESS and advanced carrier (ie
fibre) in a big way and that changed everything. Even without
divesture the idea of renting phones to customers was dead, it was no
longer economically justified.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:00:57 -0400
From: Carl Navarro <cnavarro@wcnet.org>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: OMG What happened to 800-555-1212?
Message-ID: <qcfir4dp0id854g81nvna9pr231j32b1j5@4ax.com>
I guess I'm the last one to know, but AT&T no longer maintains the
Toll-Free Directory :-)
Shows you how much I call it. Apparently Tellme administers it. I
found this out because the company I'm an agent for gave me $35 setup,
$3/month recurring charges AND $1.25 for every listing given out!!!
My question is How do I get into the Tellme database? Their web site
is pretty vague about listings.
I already covered Switchboard and inter800.com.
Carl
------------------------------
Date: 12 Mar 2009 15:30:17 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <20090312153017.3612.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
> In the past, ISDN was supposed to be the big wave of the future, but
> then DSL came out and we heard little about ISDN after that.
Beyond the political issues, there's technical botches in the North
American version of ISDN that makes it painful to install, with
careful configuration of both ends of the line needed. In Europe and
Asia, it's plug and play, not much harder than an analog phone.
ISDN comes in two speeds, BRI which is two 64K "bearer" (voice or
data) channels and a 16K data control channel on a regular twisted
pair, and PRI which is 23B and 1D on a T1. BRI is pretty much dead,
but PRI is quite popular as a way to provide trunks to a PBX since it
has perfect voice quality and flexible control that can handle all of
the stuff that a PBX needs to do, e.g. direct inward dialing and
providing per-extension caller-id on outbound calls, and unlike a
plain T1 lets you dynamically assign channels rather than having fixed
assignments to inbound and outbound.
R's,
John
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:58:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <7f3abf5f-f59c-40e1-a3be-f4e3bcda4291@s20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 12, 12:40 pm, John Levine <jo...@iecc.com> wrote:
> Beyond the political issues, there's technical botches in the North
> American version of ISDN that makes it painful to install, with
> careful configuration of both ends of the line needed. In Europe and
> Asia, it's plug and play, not much harder than an analog phone.
Just an observation--before divesture it was the U.S. that had the
best telephone plant and Europe and Asia much weaker infrastructure.
Now today the situation is reversed.
------------------------------
Date: 12 Mar 2009 18:09:05 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <20090312180905.50581.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
>> Beyond the political issues, there's technical botches in the North
>> American version of ISDN that makes it painful to install, with
>> careful configuration of both ends of the line needed. In Europe and
>> Asia, it's plug and play, not much harder than an analog phone.
>
>Just an observation--before divesture it was the U.S. that had the
>best telephone plant and Europe and Asia much weaker infrastructure.
>Now today the situation is reversed.
The screwups with ISDN predate the breakup. You can't blame them on
Judge Greene. Also keep in mind that other countries have telecom
markets as competitive if not more so than the US. To me the problem
is primarily one of poor regulation by the FCC and states and
short-term thinking by the telcos.
R's,
John
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:34:35 -0700
From: Steven Lichter <diespammers@ikillspammers.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <zleul.22115$Ws1.16037@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com>
John Levine wrote:
>>> Beyond the political issues, there's technical botches in the North
>>> American version of ISDN that makes it painful to install, with
>>> careful configuration of both ends of the line needed. In Europe and
>>> Asia, it's plug and play, not much harder than an analog phone.
>> Just an observation--before divesture it was the U.S. that had the
>> best telephone plant and Europe and Asia much weaker infrastructure.
>> Now today the situation is reversed.
>
> The screwups with ISDN predate the breakup. You can't blame them on
> Judge Greene. Also keep in mind that other countries have telecom
> markets as competitive if not more so than the US. To me the problem
> is primarily one of poor regulation by the FCC and states and
> short-term thinking by the telcos.
>
> R's,
> John
>
>
>
The biggest problem is the lack of and or trained maintainers to work on
this equipment. I worked on a project in Washington state a few years
ago as a contractor and had to train Verizon people to work on the
equipment I installed, years ago before I retired from GTE we had many
schools, we also learned from older more experienced people; t hat is
were I leaned most o what I know, but now it seem that they count more
on contractors for everything. The California company had its own CO
Installers back before I retired, but from what I can tell there are
less then 10 left and they just handle the working contractors.
Maintainers are covers many offices so there maybe no one there at times
and at&t is the same way.
--
The Only Good Spammer is a Dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2009 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Co.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:02:35 -0400
From: Will Roberts <oldbear@arctos.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: under-sea power transmission cables
Message-ID: <0MKp8S-1LhkYa1OIo-000fmk@mrelay.perfora.net>
Following up on the discussion of underground high-voltage power
transmission lines, it's worth noting a project which was under
consideration in Hawaii.
Most of the state's population lives on Oahu while there are
abundant geothermal resources on the big island of Hawaii. The
problem is getting energy from where it is to where it is needed:
Interisland Cable
-----------------
From 1982 through early 1990, a large-scale 500 megawatt
geothermal/interisland submarine cable project was under
consideration. About $26 million (Federal and State
funding) was expended in studies, design, engineering,
fabrication, and testing for the Hawaii Deep Water Cable
Project.
The design criteria stated that the cable(s) would have
to be able to withstand the stresses of at-sea deployment
(including strong currents, large waves, and stong winds),
the undersea environment (including corrosion and abrasion),
and be able to reliably conduct electricity for thirty years.
Since the Alenuihaha Channel is nearly 2,000 meters deep,
both deployment (laying of the cables) and operating
environment posed unique engineering challenges. Over 251
different cable designs were considered. Tests included
laboratory and at-sea cable deployment tests.
The cable, while shown to be technically feasible through
the research project, did not prove to be economical. Cost
proposals for commercial installation of the cable
demonstrated that the project could not be supported without
significant government subsidies, which were not possible at
the time.
source: http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/energy/renewable/geothermal
Like so many things, the technology is possible but just too
expensive. And, unfortunately, overhead transmission lines are
not an option. ;)
Regards,
Will
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:49:13 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: under-sea power transmission cables
Message-ID: <pan.2009.03.12.23.49.11.597091@myrealbox.com>
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:07:10 -0400, Will Roberts wrote:
>
> Following up on the discussion of underground high-voltage power
> transmission lines, it's worth noting a project which was under
> consideration in Hawaii.
>
> Most of the state's population lives on Oahu while there are abundant
> geothermal resources on the big island of Hawaii. The problem is getting
> energy from where it is to where it is needed:
.......
> Like so many things, the technology is possible but just too expensive.
> And, unfortunately, overhead transmission lines are not an option. ;)
That may seem like an application for a massive Hydrogen generating plant
where the power is, and shipping it across the gap to where the people
actually are.
They call aluminium "frozen electricity" (except you can't unfreeze it back
into electricity), maybe in this century hydrogen may one day be named
"bottled electricity"?
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Phone company asks payment delay
Message-ID: <832815.37891.qm@web52708.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
(PORTLAND, Maine) FairPoint Communications wants to delay a scheduled
$11.25 million debt payment that's due at the end of March.
FairPoint, which operates about 1.6 million customer lines in Maine,
New Ha= mpshire and Vermont, is asking Maine's Public Utilities
Commission to appro= ve the payment delay until June. It's pledging to
resume regular quarterly payments after that.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/maine/articles/2009/03/12/phone_company_asks_payment_delay/?rss_id=Boston.com+--+Maine+news
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:58:24 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Phone company asks payment delay
Message-ID: <MPG.2423417d9399bd4d98994b@reader.motzarella.org>
In article <832815.37891.qm@web52708.mail.re2.yahoo.com>,
joeofseattle@yahoo.com says...
>
> (PORTLAND, Maine) FairPoint Communications wants to delay a scheduled
> $11.25 million debt payment that's due at the end of March.
>
> FairPoint, which operates about 1.6 million customer lines in Maine,
> New Ha= mpshire and Vermont, is asking Maine's Public Utilities
> Commission to appro= ve the payment delay until June. It's pledging to
> resume regular quarterly payments after that.
>
> phone_company_asks_payment_delay
Hmmm. I wonder what happen if they default. Does Verizon move in to
snatch it back up again at a discount?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:22:32 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: To Bury or Not to Bury
Message-ID: <122e9a88-a789-4a0f-89c0-19a12ee8a759@d19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 11, 6:02 pm, Neal McLain <nmcl...@annsgarden.com> wrote:
> > I've also read reports that indicate trouble shooting and repairing
> > underground power lines near the end of their life is very expensive.
> To the extent that repair work is required near the end of life, it's
> usually caused by failure of the insulation. This is a slow process,
> more likely to occur after a period of years. Reasons include corrosion
> caused by water (and whatever chemicals are dissolved in it); rodent and
> tree-root damage; and (in the case of power lines) conductor heating
> caused by I-squared-R heating.
We were told our 40 year old power distribution lines, which were not
buried in conduit, would "wear" from the power line heating and
cooling and expanding and contracting against the earth. Apparently
conduit lines are better protected from that. We had to replace the
lines. $$$
I saw in a new community how they built underground lines, as you
describe. So much better than what we originally had. (Thank
goodness telephone and cable aren't our problem.)
> Construction in established residential neighborhoods costs a lot more.
> Even if utility easements already exist, explaining that to homeowners
> can be a challenge. Actual construction can be a nightmare -- see my
> earlier post about the problems cable TV companies face in such
> situations at http://tinyurl.com/cm29d.
The local water company had an easement through our community. They
needed to build a high volume new water line. Technically the
easement ran under our driveway, it was to mutual advantage for them
to run it under a wild growth area (so our driveway wouldn't be
disrupted and they could dig in soil instead of concrete). We had a
problem afterwards in that they wouldn't restore as many trees as
existed before, as they promised. Of course we screwed up by not
getting the agreement in writing in advance.
> Or try running it down a congested city street, working your way around
> sewer pipes, catch basins, water mains, gas mains, steam pipes, telco
> conduits, telco manholes, abandoned coal bins, abandoned streetcar
> rails, colonial-era cobblestones....
Constructing a few miles of street running track for a new light rail
line cost more than building 25 miles in open area, due to all the
stuff you describe in an old industrial city. Don't forget telegraph
lines, too.
> Then there's the problem of finding space for transformers, splices,
> and switchgear. In suburban areas, you can put this stuff in big steel
> boxes above ground and hope that nobody complains. But in congested
> urban centers, there's no place for it above ground. So you either
> have to construct manholes or put it in the basement of a nearby
> building. You can imagine the difficulties these options would
> encounter.
When the cable company upgraded to fibre from coax, they needed to
install "steamer trunk" boxes at frequent intervals. In our community
we arranged to locate such boxes behind shrubs. But in other
communities, they just put them along sidewalks. Suburban homeowners
are VERY fussy about their lawns and screamed like crazy. (A big
cable rate increase at the time didn't help.)
In our community, the building transformers were originally
underground. As they expired (sometimes violently) we replaced them
with aboveground boxes. The community objected to them but we were
told below ground transformers were no longer available and had
shorter lifespans. Due to PCB fears, we had to replace all of them. $
$$
> > NYC is probably the worst case example, where the city is built on a
> > slab of rock, and digging the tunnels involves jackhammers and
> > blasting. They flood, too. But given the density of wires there,
> > overhead simply stopped being practical in the heart of the city,
> > although there's still plenty of overhead in the outer boroughs.
In Chicago, they built a tunnel network to handle phone lines. But
then they used the tunnels to move freight around. Eventually the
freight system was retired, but then the tunnels reverted to their
original goal--utility lines were installed in them.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:22:56 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: To Bury or Not to Bury
Message-ID: <MPG.24233926f6aedbe1989949@reader.motzarella.org>
In article <0MKpCa-1LgjQo1Oze-000czW@mrelay.perfora.net>,
oldbear@arctos.com says...
> Several of the major transmission lines feeding the City of Boston
> have been placed underground in the last few years:
How very interesting. Is Boston served by National Grid now?
I know here in RI it was like pulling teeth to get them to bury the HV
wires that ran over India Point Park. The only way they'd do it was if
they could pass off costs to the rate base.
BTW, our per kWH cost has doubled since National Grid took over.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 16:26:04 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: To Bury or Not to Bury
Message-ID: <MPG.242339e46e6c745798994a@reader.motzarella.org>
In article <49B824AB.2080409@annsgarden.com>, nmclain@annsgarden.com
says...
>
> David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
> > Vehicles can't crash into power poles that aren't there, winds can't
> > affect power lines that are underground, and the visual pollution of
> > underground power distribution is limited to the access ports on the
> > pavement.
>
> Are "access ports" in Australia the same things that we call "manhole
> covers" here in the USA -- round steel plates about a meter in diameter?
>
> Where are equipment enclosures (transformers and switchgear) located?
> Are they also underground?
Access ports can be manholes but they can also be metal doors about 6x8
feet. There are several of those in downtown Providence.
Not to mention the vent stacks that stick up occasionally. That's what
happens when you build a city on a site that was once called the Great
Swamp.
> "Tony Toews \[MVP\]" <ttoews@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>
> > I've also read reports that indicate trouble shooting and repairing
> > underground power lines near the end of their life is very expensive.
>
> Troubleshooting and repairing any kind of underground cables -- power,
> telco, or CATV -- is expensive at any point during the life of the
> cables. Physical damage due to excavation work can occur at any time.
Which is why you run inexpensive nylon lines through the ducting in
order to pull through new cable.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 12:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joseph Singer <joeofseattle@yahoo.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Google Voice: A push to rewire your phone service
Message-ID: <27157.14252.qm@web52706.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
SAN FRANCISCO--Google plans to unveil a service called Google Voice on
Thursday that indicates Google wants to do with your telephone
communications what companies such as Yahoo have done with e-mail.
Google Voice, the new version of the GrandCentral technology Google
acquired in July 2007, has the potential to make the search giant a
middleman in an important part of people's lives, telephone
communications. With the service, people can pick a new phone number
from Google Voice; when others call it, Google can ring all the actual
phones a person uses and handle voice mail.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10194446-2.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:15:07 -0600
From: Michael Grigoni <michael.grigoni@cybertheque.org>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: [Fwd: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT) ]
Message-ID: <49B95F3B.5010905@cybertheque.org>
From: merlyn@dork.geeks.org (Doug McIntyre)
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
To: michael.grigoni@cybertheque.org
Doug McIntyre says:
> My newsserver doesn't seem to post correctly to this usenet group.
Original Message:
==================
In comp.dcom.telecom you write:
>hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>>***** Moderator's Note *****
>>>3. Switch to ISDN service, which can provide two separate call paths
>>> on a single pair. It tends to be pricey, but you'll have full use of
>>> both lines at your new location. I don't know if this will work
>>> with ADSL.
>The following excerpt is from the Wikipedia article on ISDN:
><quote>
>In Germany, ISDN is very popular with an installed base of 25 million
>channels (29% of all subscriber lines in Germany as of 2003 and 20%
>of all ISDN channels worldwide). Due to the success of ISDN, the number
>of installed analog lines is decreasing. Deutsche Telekom (DTAG) offers
>both BRI and PRI. Competing phone companies often offer ISDN only and
>no analog lines. Because of the widespread availability of ADSL services,
>ISDN is today primarily used for voice and fax traffic, but is still
>very popular thanks to the pricing policy of German telecommunication
>providers. Today ISDN (BRI) and ADSL/VDSL are often bundled on the same
>line, mainly because the combination of ADSL with an analog line has no
>cost advantage over a combined ISDN-ADSL line.
></quote>
>Other replies to this thread seemed to rule-out the ADSL/ISDN combination;
>could someone please elaborate?
There are two widely used parts of the ADSL standards, one for use of
ADSL riding an analog POTS line for use in the US, and many other areas.
And another part for using ADSL over ISDN, mainly for use in Germany,
and other parts of Europe where ISDN BRI is also popular.
Many people believe that ADSL over ISDN isn't possible, because its
not offered in the US, and the equipment required for it is different,
and they think that two digital services over the same wire would conflict.
But it is widely deployed in Germany and other European countries
where ISDN BRI is widely installed.
If you look through popular vendors, you'll find many products for
ADSLoISDN (ie. the Cisco 876 router). vs ADSLoPOTS (ie. the Cisco 877
router).
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:05:22 GMT
From: "Gary" <fake-email-address@bogus.hotmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT)
Message-ID: <6rhul.2775$gm6.172@nwrddc02.gnilink.net>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I have always been puzzled by Ma Bell's distaste for ISDN: if there's
> someone reading this that knows The Real Truth(tm), PLEASE tell us
> why.
While you've gotten "The Real Truth(tm)" about the service, you haven't
gotten it about the name. No, ISDN does NOT stand for "Integrated Services
Digital Network." It really stands for (take your pick):
I See Dollars Now
I Still Don't Know
It Still Does Nothing
Innovation Subscribers Don't Need
and I'm sure there are more that I can't recall....
-Gary
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:09:59 -0600
From: Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Steam Railroads, was: Telex
Message-ID: <49B9B267.1010306@annsgarden.com>
Bill Horne wrote:
> OhMyGhod! A real railroad guy! I've been a railfan for
> years.
>
> OK, totally unrelated, Moderator's privilege, etc.
Hey, this gives me a chance to put in a plug for one of my
must-see television programs: "Trains & Locomotives" on
RFD-TV. It's a glorious hodgepodge of the old and the new:
old 16mm B&W films of narrow-gauge steam from the 30s and
50s to coverage of railfan weekends in the 90s and 00s.
Most programs feature U.S. railroads, but there have been
episodes about railroads in Canada, Germany, China, Russia,
and South Africa.
T&L runs three times a week. A new episode premiers at
6:00 pm Eastern on Monday, and repeats at 4:00 am Tuesday
and sometime on Saturday (the Saturday schedule changes
depending on other programming).
This week's program features D&RGW narrow-gauge in New
Mexico and Colorado. Several shots of the Durango &
Silverton, and a few shots of the Galloping Goose. Your
last chance to see it: Saturday, March 14, at 12:00 EDT.
RFD-TV launched in 2000. It's a non-profit company based
in rural Nebraska, with studio operations in Nashville. It
claims to be "Rural America's Most Important Network" which
is probably a safe claim since it's rural America's only
network. It's on DirecTV (Channel 379) and Dish (Channel
231), and numerous cable TV systems. Comcast has a
contract to carry it, although only some of its systems
actually carry it. Don't know if Boston-area systems carry
it.
Neal McLain
***** Moderator's Note *****
I'll have to pass: I use rabbit ears and I've just gotten a DTV
converter so that my ~5 year old tv can keep chugging along.
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:08:28 -0400
From: Fred Goldstein <fgoldstein.SeeSigSpambait@wn2.wn.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: ISDN (was Re: 2 phone numers on one landline? (Slightly OT))
Message-ID: <20090313020734.1CEB048141@mailout.easydns.com>
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 05:02:28 +0000 (UTC), David Lesher wrote,
> >I have always been puzzled by Ma Bell's distaste for ISDN: if there's
> >someone reading this that knows The Real Truth(tm), PLEASE tell us why.
>
>[I bet Fred Goldstein has some comments as well...]
Well, since you asked politely... ;-)
To answer Lisa's question, ISDN is basically The Telephone Network
(PSTN), with the subscriber connections digital rather than analog.
The guts of the network are 64000 bps digital, so why use analog at
the edges? And if it's digital, why use ancient signaling techniques
(tones) which were designed to run over analog circuits? It's
computers at both ends, so it makes more sense to use computer-type
signaling protocols. That's ISDN in a nutshell, 64000 bps circuit
switched telephony. You can use it for voice or data calls. In
Europe, ISDN became very common for ordinary phones. And the T1/E1
speed ISDN PRI is common for PBXs, again more in Europe than the US
but pretty common here.
DSL is not the PSTN at all. It is simply using the old copper wire
to carry faster data. ADSL can run "atop" an analog line (high
frequency), and in Europe, it runs atop ISDN. (The splitters in
Europe have a higher split frequency.) For good measure, there's a
rare flavor of DSL (MVL) that runs *in* the ISDN frequency range
(20-160 kHz) *and* can run atop analog phones.
ISDN was conceived in the early 1980s as a way to complete the
digitization of the PSTN, a logical evolution. And 64000 bps (both
ways) beats the crap out of modems. (The retail BRI has two B
channels so you can combine them to get 128,000 bps.)
But then we got the RBOCs. They were born in 1984, just after a
failed and long-forgotten boomlet in "integrated voice-data
terminals", which basically were dumb timesharing terminals with
handsets. Bellcore and some RBOCs got the idea that ISDN was built
for that, so the two B channels had to be one voice and one data
channel. Of course it took years for ISDN to be available, by which
time IVDTs were no more common than Hupmobiles, but instead of
positioning it as a modem substitute, they positioned it as a LAN
substitute (yeah, right, dial-up 64000 instead of Ethernet). BOCs
rhymes with rocks, as in "dumb as"...
So while ISDN trials began in 1987 or so and it was commercially ready
for volume deployment in the US by 1990 or so, the RBOCs screwed up.
Bell Atlantic in particular was fanatical about Centrex, and ISDN
provided them with a standardized Centrex featurephone, so ISDN was
made available for Centrex, period.
A couple of years later, Internet went commercial, and ISDN was way
better than the 28 kbps modems of the day, so it became the "killer
app". BUT the Bells *hated* Internet with a purple passion (and still
do). So while demand for ISDN soared, for Internet use, they
associated ISDN demand with Internet demand and treated it as an evil
to be stomped out. One way was to tariff it as measured-service only,
or, in BA's case, sometimes flat rate for $240/month. In NYNEXland,
it was hard to order, and "loop qualified" only about half the time.
At least BA would clean up the loop if they decided to take the order;
NYNEX used lousy plant as a way to avoid it.
Eventually modems got faster and the Internet caught on even
bigger. Modems actually cost the Bells more to support than ISDN,
but since POTS lines were also used for voice, they accepted
them. And once DSL caught on, ISDN declined. I switched from ISDN
to a cable modem about a decade ago, after putting in cable telephone
service, so I've been Bell-free since then.
In most places ISDN BRI has been de-tariffed (grandfathered) so you
can't even order it. Modern US-market switches don't even support
it; only the ILECs have it in their "legacy" (antique) 5ESS and
DMS-100 switches. PRI is however very common, especially from CLECs;
many VoIP networks use CLEC PRI to connect their gateways to the
PSTN. That has recycled many of the PRIs formerly used for modems.
--
Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
+1 617 795 2701
------------------------------
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.
The Telecom Digest is currently being moderated by Bill Horne while
Pat Townson recovers from a stroke.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
(or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)
RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
For syndication examples see http://feeds.feedburner.com/telecomDigest
Copyright (C) 2008 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
************************
---------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
End of The Telecom digest (27 messages)
******************************
|
or 