Eric "ManxPower" Wieling wrote: > Jon Pounder wrote: > >> that's what "dry copper" is supposed to be, just a cross connect >> between 2 >> pairs out of the CO. ie not even battery, line test equipment, or >> anything >> else hanging off it at the CO. any restriction should be purely a >> function >> of the inductance/capacitance of the wire and the connections and >> nothing >> else - anything else and you didn't get "dry copper" in the first place. >> >> >> just out of curiousity - anyone ever hijack pairs and get away with it ? >> (do your own cross connects on the street and utilize some crossconnect >> all within one branch of F1 cable out of the CO ?) >> >> I've been tempted in the past, and know that at least around here I >> would >> probably get away with it for quite some time before anyone actually >> cared >> enough to investigate. > > > At least in Bellsouth/Louisiana they do not guarantee that the circuit > will pass DC voltage. Since it is an alarm circuit I believe they > only guarantee that it will pass short/open. If the circuit goes > between COs then I there is no reason for them to pass DC voltage. If > it is within the same CO then there is no reason I can think of that > it would not pass DC voltage, except of course to prevent people from > using xDSL tech on the line.
A little history for the youngsters: I remember when I was 7(that would be 1959), there were several false alarms sent from the fire alarm box on the nearby street corner. I watched the process of resetting the alarm box. It was much like rewinding a clock. They swept up the pieces of broken glass on the sidewalk and then installed a new glass pane in the alarm box. The basic operation was that you pulled a handle down which broke through the glass pane and triggered an unwinding of the clock spring mechanism. That mechanism was basically a telegraph pulse sender. I was standing close enough when they tested the box to hear the soft growl of a spring driven motor and the clicking of the telegraph switch. I don't know what the sending rate was for those devices. Whatever it was, compare it to the bit rates we can now get over the same dry pair. I think back then there were very few people who would believe that 40 years later(1999) over a megabit per second would be common. _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
