ISP-DSL Digest for Monday, August 07, 2000. 1. Re: Home Grown Questions 2. RE: Simple question 3. RE: Simple question 4. RE: Simple question 5. RE: Simple question 6. RE: Simple question 7. RE: Simple question 8. RE: Simple question 9. RE: Simple question 10. Re: Home Grown Questions 11. Re: Simple question 12. RE: Simple question 13. Re: Simple question 14. Re: Simple question 15. Re: Simple question 16. Re: Simple question 17. RE: Simple question 18. RE: Simple question 19. RE: Simple question 20. Re: Simple question 21. Re: Simple question 22. Re: Simple question 23. Re: Simple question 24. Re: Simple question 25. Re: Simple question 26. Re: Home Grown Questions 27. Re: Home Grown Questions 28. Re: Home Grown Questions 29. Re: Simple question 30. Re: Simple question 31. Re: Simple question 32. Re: Simple question 33. Re: Simple question 34. Re: Simple question 35. RE: Simple question 36. Re: Simple question 37. Re: Simple question 38. Re: Simple question 39. RE: Simple question 40. Resellers - simple question 41. Re: Resellers - simple question 42. Re: Simple question 43. Re: Simple question 44. Re: Simple question 45. RE: Simple question 46. Re: Simple question 47. Re: Simple question 48. RE: Simple question 49. Re: Simple question 50. RE: Simple question 51. Re: Simple question 52. Re: Simple question 53. Re: Simple question 54. Re: Simple question 55. RE: Simple question 56. Re: Simple question 57. Re: Simple question 58. RE: Simple question 59. Re: Simple question 60. RE: Simple question 61. Re: Simple question 62. Re: Simple question 63. Re: Simple question 64. Re: Simple question 65. Re: Simple question 66. Re: Simple question 67. Re: Simple question 68. Re: Simple question 69. Re: Simple question 70. RE: Simple question 71. Re: Simple question 72. RE: Simple question 73. Re: Simple question 74. Re: Simple question 75. RE: Simple question 76. Re: Simple question 77. RE: Simple question 78. Re: Simple question 79. spectrum compatibility 80. Re: spectrum compatibility 81. Re: spectrum compatibility 82. Re: spectrum compatibility 83. Re: Simple question 84. Re: Simple question 85. CNET News-DSL rivals join forces to create compatible products ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Home Grown Questions From: "Marlon K. Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 21:53:16 -0700 X-Message-Number: 1 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eagle's Lair & Web Services" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 9:22 PM Subject: Home Grown Questions > Marlon, > I have re-read your web page on your DSL application. I have a couple of > questions for you. In your description of distances, you said there is a > distance of 20K to your CO and then another 6K to the hospital for a total of > 26K feet. Is this true or am I missing something. Nope. two different circuits. I also now know a guy (Tech from this list.) getting 128k at 29k' with the pairgain. > > Currently we have deployed a DSL Max 20 (DSLAM) and are using Netopia R-7100 > (cpe gear). If the line distance is less than 18K they will sink. I have 3 > customers who are not much farther out, farthest one is 22K. I am thinking on > putting in the Net to Net. I have yet the find the gear you are using on either > site you mention (net to net or pair gain). Call Howard Fuller at www.nettonettech.com. For pairgain call a distributer.... > Since you are the home grown guru, > I am asking you. How did you configure peice of the equipment to get out of > your network into the Net. Don't you have to tell it the gateway (main router) > so it knows where to go? Nope. These are just extenders. Think of then as a really long but kinda slow ethernet cable. > > Would you be so kind as to enlighten me please. Hope that helped! Marlon IA > > Rusty Mann > Eagle's Lair & Web Services, Inc. > 541-383-1767 > www.eagleslair.net > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 00:15:39 -0500 X-Message-Number: 2 Marlon, What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in this manner? I have heard that doing this can cause problems with other services on older Telco plant. Brian Johnson Technical Support Administrator & Internet Operations Specialist Northern Valley Communications V: 605-725-1059 F: 605-725-1050 > -----Original Message----- > From: Marlon K. Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 8:02 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > www.odessaoffice.com/sdsl.htm > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "sean prouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 1:09 PM > Subject: Simple question > > > > Is it possible to set up a DSL connection between two users > with a leased > > line without the help of my phone company and a DSLAM? > > > > Some way setting up two DSL modems together? > > > > Sean > > > > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 22:21:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 3 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in this manner? Probably the same thing as they tell their own engineers when the telco themselves use dry copper for DSL. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 00:26:47 -0500 X-Message-Number: 4 That is exactly my point. It's their facilities. Putting DSL in the same cable bundle as a T-1 (using some older cable type bundles) can cause signal issues and outages. The Telco will know this and make concessions to solve the problem. If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using them for DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. Brian 8^) > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:21 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in > this manner? > > Probably the same thing as they tell their own engineers when the telco > themselves use dry copper for DSL. > > -Dan > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 22:46:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 5 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using them for > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. How so? Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this assertion? -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 00:54:38 -0500 X-Message-Number: 6 First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from your Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will set-up the circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you "could" use the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure they do. 8^) As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:47 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using them for > > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. > > How so? > > Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this assertion? > > -Dan > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 23:06:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 7 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. Thanks for confirming the 'huge lawsuit' assertion is baseless. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 01:09:40 -0500 X-Message-Number: 8 Whatever Dan. I understand now that you have no intent to discuss... just defend. Brian 8^( > -----Original Message----- > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:06 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. > > Thanks for confirming the 'huge lawsuit' assertion is baseless. > > -Dan > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 23:43:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 9 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > Whatever Dan. I understand now that you have no intent to discuss... just > defend. You are welcome to discuss, but try to use facts and real data rather than opinon and fearmongering. If you have actual experience with DSL, feel free to share it. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Home Grown Questions From: "Melvin C. Etheridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 07:06:38 -0400 X-Message-Number: 10 Rusty, I have a pair of used NetToNet 144k IDSL Boxes for sales if you need some for evaulation. Mel Eagle's Lair & Web Services wrote: > Marlon, > I have re-read your web page on your DSL application. I have a couple of > questions for you. In your description of distances, you said there is a > distance of 20K to your CO and then another 6K to the hospital for a total of > 26K feet. Is this true or am I missing something. > > Currently we have deployed a DSL Max 20 (DSLAM) and are using Netopia R-7100 > (cpe gear). If the line distance is less than 18K they will sink. I have 3 > customers who are not much farther out, farthest one is 22K. I am thinking on > putting in the Net to Net. I have yet the find the gear you are using on either > site you mention (net to net or pair gain). Since you are the home grown guru, > I am asking you. How did you configure peice of the equipment to get out of > your network into the Net. Don't you have to tell it the gateway (main router) > so it knows where to go? > > Would you be so kind as to enlighten me please. > > TIA > > Rusty Mann > Eagle's Lair & Web Services, Inc. > 541-383-1767 > www.eagleslair.net > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 07:58:28 -0400 X-Message-Number: 11 I don't think there's any lawsuit Brian, they just reserve the right to disconnect your butt if what you do interferes with anything. Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:54 AM Subject: RE: Simple question > First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from your > Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will set-up the > circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you "could" use > the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the > contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure they do. 8^) > > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. > > Brian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:47 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using them for > > > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. > > > > How so? > > > > Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this assertion? > > > > -Dan > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:30:10 -0500 X-Message-Number: 12 After barely a night of sleep and a little re-thinking, you are probably right. A law-suit probably wouldn't do much for either side. But the Telco WILL disconnect your lines and you WILL NOT have any recourse (if the contract says "Alarm circuit use only" or some other equivalent verbage). In the lightest case they will stop selling you circuits. I know because we are an ISP that has become a CLEC. I have been forced to deal with this situation with our local bell. Sorry if I came across with attitude, but I had a bad but with insomnia last night. Brian 8^) > -----Original Message----- > From: Vern Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:58 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > I don't think there's any lawsuit Brian, they just reserve the right to > disconnect > your butt if what you do interferes with anything. > > Vern > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:54 AM > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from your > > Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will set-up > the > > circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you "could" > use > > the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the > > contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure they do. > 8^) > > > > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. > > > > Brian > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:47 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using them > for > > > > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. > > > > > > How so? > > > > > > Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this assertion? > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Marlon K. Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 06:47:29 -0700 X-Message-Number: 13 FUD. Most t-1's have been run via xdsl for years anyway. Ask them some time..... marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:26 PM Subject: RE: Simple question > That is exactly my point. It's their facilities. > > Putting DSL in the same cable bundle as a T-1 (using some older cable type > bundles) can cause signal issues and outages. The Telco will know this and > make concessions to solve the problem. If you are purchasing dry copper for > "alarm circuits" and using them for DSL, you could be looking at a huge > lawsuit. > > Brian 8^) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:21 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in > > this manner? > > > > Probably the same thing as they tell their own engineers when the telco > > themselves use dry copper for DSL. > > > > -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Marlon K. Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 06:45:55 -0700 X-Message-Number: 14 Century Tel has been quite helpful (till now, they are about to roll out thier own dsl and all my orders seem to get screwed up now). I have heard that. If it's true why is telco falling all over themselves trying to get dsl of thier own rolled out????? I have 29 pots, a t-1 and two dsl circuits all in one 50pair cable. They all work great! I don't believe the interference statement. Marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:15 PM Subject: RE: Simple question > Marlon, > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in this manner? I > have heard that doing this can cause problems with other services on older > Telco plant. > > Brian Johnson > Technical Support Administrator & > Internet Operations Specialist > Northern Valley Communications > V: 605-725-1059 F: 605-725-1050 > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Marlon K. Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 8:02 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > www.odessaoffice.com/sdsl.htm > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "sean prouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 1:09 PM > > Subject: Simple question > > > > > > > Is it possible to set up a DSL connection between two users > > with a leased > > > line without the help of my phone company and a DSLAM? > > > > > > Some way setting up two DSL modems together? > > > > > > Sean > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Marlon K. Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 06:51:34 -0700 X-Message-Number: 15 This is true. They have the tariff written so that you can't run data over the circuit. They turn thier heads on it here though.... I'm working with the puc on this. It's a big screw job and everyone but the PUC knows it. They are about to retariff the dry pair. Gonna go from about $6 per direction from the CO to $35 per direction. Talk about inflation huh? My $15 to $20 circuits are about to go to $70. Telco's are crooks. Marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:54 PM Subject: RE: Simple question > First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from your > Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will set-up the > circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you "could" use > the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the > contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure they do. 8^) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "David R. Dick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 100 09:56:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Message-Number: 16 > > FUD. > > Most t-1's have been run via xdsl for years anyway. Ask them some time..... > > marlon that would be HDSL > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:26 PM > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > That is exactly my point. It's their facilities. > > > > Putting DSL in the same cable bundle as a T-1 (using some older cable type > > bundles) can cause signal issues and outages. The Telco will know this and > > make concessions to solve the problem. If you are purchasing dry copper > for > > "alarm circuits" and using them for DSL, you could be looking at a huge > > lawsuit. > > > > Brian 8^) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:21 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in > > > this manner? > > > > > > Probably the same thing as they tell their own engineers when the telco > > > themselves use dry copper for DSL. > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 10:20:24 -0500 X-Message-Number: 17 I thought HDSL and other DSL technologies were not the same (signaling, frequency ranges...) as xDSL that we use? Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: David R. Dick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, July 10, 2893 5:44 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > FUD. > > > > Most t-1's have been run via xdsl for years anyway. Ask them > some time..... > > > > marlon > > that would be HDSL > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:26 PM > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > That is exactly my point. It's their facilities. > > > > > > Putting DSL in the same cable bundle as a T-1 (using some > older cable type > > > bundles) can cause signal issues and outages. The Telco will > know this and > > > make concessions to solve the problem. If you are purchasing > dry copper > > for > > > "alarm circuits" and using them for DSL, you could be looking > at a huge > > > lawsuit. > > > > > > Brian 8^) > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:21 AM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in > > > > this manner? > > > > > > > > Probably the same thing as they tell their own engineers > when the telco > > > > themselves use dry copper for DSL. > > > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > RADWARE, Inc.: The only company offering a complete local/ > global IP load balancing solution for all Internet/intranet/ > extranet environments. http://www.radware.com > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "David V. Brenner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:21:55 -0700 X-Message-Number: 18 : I'm working with the puc on this. It's a big screw job and : everyone but the : PUC knows it. They are about to retariff the dry pair. Gonna go : from about : $6 per direction from the CO to $35 per direction. Talk about inflation : huh? My $15 to $20 circuits are about to go to $70. Telco's are crooks. Marlon: Who is the telco up there? I'd like to ask my boss about this and see what he knows. David P.S. No go on 768K. I am stuck at 384K. My boss, on the other hand, is about 20,000 feet out and is doing 768K with no problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "David V. Brenner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:25:42 -0700 X-Message-Number: 19 : I thought HDSL and other DSL technologies were not the same (signaling, : frequency ranges...) as xDSL that we use? : : Brian This is true. Each variety has its differences. This is why the lowercase x is used - to speak of multiple forms of DSL in general terms. However, HDSL is what has been used to deploy many T1's in recent years. David ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Melvin C. Etheridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 11:26:53 -0400 X-Message-Number: 20 Marlon, I have 4 Phone lines, 2 T1's to my Internet Backbone Connection, 6 Dialup CT1's, and four DSL Connections, ALL in one 50 pair cable and have not had any troubles what-so-ever, I don't buy the interference crap either!!! Mel "Marlon K. Schafer" wrote: > Century Tel has been quite helpful (till now, they are about to roll out > thier own dsl and all my orders seem to get screwed up now). > > I have heard that. If it's true why is telco falling all over themselves > trying to get dsl of thier own rolled out????? I have 29 pots, a t-1 and > two dsl circuits all in one 50pair cable. They all work great! I don't > believe the interference statement. > > Marlon > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:15 PM > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > Marlon, > > > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in this manner? > I > > have heard that doing this can cause problems with other services on older > > Telco plant. > > > > Brian Johnson > > Technical Support Administrator & > > Internet Operations Specialist > > Northern Valley Communications > > V: 605-725-1059 F: 605-725-1050 > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Marlon K. Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 8:02 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > > > > www.odessaoffice.com/sdsl.htm > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "sean prouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 1:09 PM > > > Subject: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to set up a DSL connection between two users > > > with a leased > > > > line without the help of my phone company and a DSLAM? > > > > > > > > Some way setting up two DSL modems together? > > > > > > > > Sean > > > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 08:28:53 -0700 X-Message-Number: 21 Typically alarm circuit tariff have a stated bandwidth (0-3khz). If you exceed the bandwidth then you violate the tariff. Two scenarios: 1) Your DSL circuit interferes (been known to happen) with another circuit in the same bundle. The phone company debugs the problem, disconnects your circuit and bills you for the repair. The customer sues for his down time 2) You have 500 DSL customers. The telco finds the alarms circuits and installs loading coils which effectively stops your service. 500 customers are now cutoff and you have no way of supplying them. They sue for loss of service. Brian Johnson wrote: > After barely a night of sleep and a little re-thinking, you are probably > right. A law-suit probably wouldn't do much for either side. But the Telco > WILL disconnect your lines and you WILL NOT have any recourse (if the > contract says "Alarm circuit use only" or some other equivalent verbage). > > In the lightest case they will stop selling you circuits. > > I know because we are an ISP that has become a CLEC. I have been forced to > deal with this situation with our local bell. > > Sorry if I came across with attitude, but I had a bad but with insomnia last > night. > > Brian 8^) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vern Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:58 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > I don't think there's any lawsuit Brian, they just reserve the right to > > disconnect > > your butt if what you do interferes with anything. > > > > Vern > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:54 AM > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from your > > > Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will set-up > > the > > > circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you "could" > > use > > > the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the > > > contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure they do. > > 8^) > > > > > > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:47 AM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using them > > for > > > > > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. > > > > > > > > How so? > > > > > > > > Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this assertion? > > > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "David R. Dick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 100 11:35:12 -0400 (EDT) X-Message-Number: 22 > > > > Typically alarm circuit tariff have a stated bandwidth (0-3khz). If you exceed > the bandwidth then you violate the tariff. > > Two scenarios: > > 1) Your DSL circuit interferes (been known to happen) with another circuit in > the same bundle. The phone company debugs the problem, disconnects your circuit > and bills you for the repair. The customer sues for his down time > > 2) You have 500 DSL customers. The telco finds the alarms circuits and installs > loading coils which effectively stops your service. 500 customers are now > cutoff and you have no way of supplying them. They sue for loss of service. > I think scenario 2 is highly unlikely; it's a lot of work and loading coils only get installed to alleviate problems on voice lines. The problem is getting load coils removed when they're already there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Marlon Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:40:36 -0700 X-Message-Number: 23 hdsl uses 4 wires. sdsl (what I've been using) uses 2. I don't know about the signalling issues. A bit of time in the Paradyn source book (linked to from www.odessaoffice.com/sdsl.htm) should give an answer to that. I've read the book but it's been about a year..... Marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 8:20 AM Subject: RE: Simple question > I thought HDSL and other DSL technologies were not the same (signaling, > frequency ranges...) as xDSL that we use? > > Brian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David R. Dick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, July 10, 2893 5:44 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > FUD. > > > > > > Most t-1's have been run via xdsl for years anyway. Ask them > > some time..... > > > > > > marlon > > > > that would be HDSL > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Marlon Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:43:18 -0700 X-Message-Number: 24 Century Tel. All my good (read helpful) contacts have left the company lately. (Hmmm, wonder what they know?) Might try Tom H. at (509) 235-3181. He's a sales guy so don't go wasting his time with a bunch of technical quistions.... He's a great guy and still likes me ;-). Marlon P.S. Beats the heck out of dial-up don't it! ----- Original Message ----- From: "David V. Brenner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 8:21 AM Subject: RE: Simple question > : I'm working with the puc on this. It's a big screw job and > : everyone but the > : PUC knows it. They are about to retariff the dry pair. Gonna go > : from about > : $6 per direction from the CO to $35 per direction. Talk about inflation > : huh? My $15 to $20 circuits are about to go to $70. Telco's are crooks. > > Marlon: > > Who is the telco up there? I'd like to ask my boss about this and see what > he knows. > > David > > P.S. No go on 768K. I am stuck at 384K. My boss, on the other hand, is > about 20,000 feet out and is doing 768K with no problem. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Marlon Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:47:19 -0700 X-Message-Number: 25 Both valid.... To some degree anyway. This is why we NEED to get the puc and congress (state level) involved with the telcos again. The 96 telecom act has effectively handed the attack dog his own leash. They didn't care about customers before and they still don't. Now they can not care AND abuse it with no recourse on our part. Marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Roy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 8:28 AM Subject: Re: Simple question > > > Typically alarm circuit tariff have a stated bandwidth (0-3khz). If you exceed > the bandwidth then you violate the tariff. > > Two scenarios: > > 1) Your DSL circuit interferes (been known to happen) with another circuit in > the same bundle. The phone company debugs the problem, disconnects your circuit > and bills you for the repair. The customer sues for his down time > > 2) You have 500 DSL customers. The telco finds the alarms circuits and installs > loading coils which effectively stops your service. 500 customers are now > cutoff and you have no way of supplying them. They sue for loss of service. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Home Grown Questions From: Eagle's Lair & Web Services <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 08:45:06 -0700 X-Message-Number: 26 Mel, Thank you for the offer, but I need SDSL as the customers want 256K and up in speed. Rusty "Melvin C. Etheridge" wrote: > Rusty, > > I have a pair of used NetToNet 144k IDSL Boxes for sales if you need some for > evaulation. > > Mel > > Eagle's Lair & Web Services wrote: > > > Marlon, > > I have re-read your web page on your DSL application. I have a couple of > > questions for you. In your description of distances, you said there is a > > distance of 20K to your CO and then another 6K to the hospital for a total of > > 26K feet. Is this true or am I missing something. > > > > Currently we have deployed a DSL Max 20 (DSLAM) and are using Netopia R-7100 > > (cpe gear). If the line distance is less than 18K they will sink. I have 3 > > customers who are not much farther out, farthest one is 22K. I am thinking on > > putting in the Net to Net. I have yet the find the gear you are using on either > > site you mention (net to net or pair gain). Since you are the home grown guru, > > I am asking you. How did you configure peice of the equipment to get out of > > your network into the Net. Don't you have to tell it the gateway (main router) > > so it knows where to go? > > > > Would you be so kind as to enlighten me please. > > > > TIA > > > > Rusty Mann > > Eagle's Lair & Web Services, Inc. > > 541-383-1767 > > www.eagleslair.net > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ -- Rusty Mann Eagle's Lair & Web Services, Inc. 541-383-1767 www.eagleslair.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Home Grown Questions From: "Jason Roblyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 12:57:36 -0500 X-Message-Number: 27 Rusty, Net 2 Net makes SDSL Point to Point kits as well. SN2000-S & SN2000-P Jason NCTC.NET [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eagle's Lair & Web Services" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 10:45 AM Subject: Re: Home Grown Questions > Mel, > > Thank you for the offer, but I need SDSL as the customers want 256K and up in speed. > > Rusty > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Home Grown Questions From: Eagle's Lair & Web Services <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 11:14:26 -0700 X-Message-Number: 28 Thanks Jason and all the others who have commented. I will see if I can find it on there web site. Rusty Jason Roblyer wrote: > Rusty, Net 2 Net makes SDSL Point to Point kits as well. > > SN2000-S & SN2000-P > > Jason > NCTC.NET > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Eagle's Lair & Web Services" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 10:45 AM > Subject: Re: Home Grown Questions > > > Mel, > > > > Thank you for the offer, but I need SDSL as the customers want 256K and up > in speed. > > > > Rusty > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ -- Rusty Mann Eagle's Lair & Web Services, Inc. 541-383-1767 www.eagleslair.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:31:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 29 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > I have heard that. If it's true why is telco falling all over themselves > trying to get dsl of thier own rolled out????? I have 29 pots, a t-1 and > two dsl circuits all in one 50pair cable. They all work great! I don't > believe the interference statement. Interference is possible, but in our experience we have found it is not likely. You are more likely to get a bad unconditioned pair than one that has interference. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:34:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 30 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Marlon K. Schafer wrote: > This is true. They have the tariff written so that you can't run data over > the circuit. They turn thier heads on it here though.... Our tariff only writes what service level they guarantee on the dry pair (eg:not much, basically voice grade bandwidth). The tariff doesnt forbid running DSL (or anything else) over it. It does say that if you generate interference, they can temporarily disconnect your circuit until its cleared up -- though they have to give you advance notice! > I'm working with the puc on this. It's a big screw job and everyone but the > PUC knows it. They are about to retariff the dry pair. Gonna go from about > $6 per direction from the CO to $35 per direction. Talk about inflation > huh? My $15 to $20 circuits are about to go to $70. Telco's are crooks. Thats still not too bad compared to $300 for T1. Could be worse, they could try to pull the dry pair tariff altogether. They tried that here, and the PUC kicked them in the balls though. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 11:37:39 -0700 X-Message-Number: 31 My point was that the telco could add the loading coils, not violate the tariff, and, therefore, clobber your operation. "David R. Dick" wrote: > > > > > > > > Typically alarm circuit tariff have a stated bandwidth (0-3khz). If you exceed > > the bandwidth then you violate the tariff. > > > > Two scenarios: > > > > 1) Your DSL circuit interferes (been known to happen) with another circuit in > > the same bundle. The phone company debugs the problem, disconnects your circuit > > and bills you for the repair. The customer sues for his down time > > > > 2) You have 500 DSL customers. The telco finds the alarms circuits and installs > > loading coils which effectively stops your service. 500 customers are now > > cutoff and you have no way of supplying them. They sue for loss of service. > > > > I think scenario 2 is highly unlikely; it's a lot of work and loading > coils only get installed to alleviate problems on voice lines. > > The problem is getting load coils removed when they're already there. > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:59:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 32 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Roy wrote: > Two scenarios: > 1) Your DSL circuit interferes (been known to happen) with another circuit in > the same bundle. The phone company debugs the problem, disconnects your circuit > and bills you for the repair. The customer sues for his down time Any real life examples? > 2) You have 500 DSL customers. The telco finds the alarms circuits and installs > loading coils which effectively stops your service. 500 customers are now > cutoff and you have no way of supplying them. They sue for loss of service. Any real life examples? I'd like real, hard data rather than theory and fearmongering. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:10:17 -0400 X-Message-Number: 33 You don't need real life examples. I'll quote you from both the BA white pages and the BA CLEC interconnection agreement. BA specifically says that if what you're doing with the line interferes with anything else, they reserve the right to shut your a** off. Period. Worth the risk? Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 2:59 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Roy wrote: > > Two scenarios: > > 1) Your DSL circuit interferes (been known to happen) with another circuit in > > the same bundle. The phone company debugs the problem, disconnects your circuit > > and bills you for the repair. The customer sues for his down time > > Any real life examples? > > > 2) You have 500 DSL customers. The telco finds the alarms circuits and installs > > loading coils which effectively stops your service. 500 customers are now > > cutoff and you have no way of supplying them. They sue for loss of service. > > Any real life examples? > > I'd like real, hard data rather than theory and fearmongering. > > -Dan > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:16:51 -0400 X-Message-Number: 34 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 2:31 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > > Interference is possible, but in our experience we have found it is not > likely. You are more likely to get a bad unconditioned pair than one that > has interference. In your limited experience maybe. Some forms of DSL are spectrally incompatible with traditional data lines, period.What do you think is going to happen when the phone co finds you fouling up a $1000 T line customer because you want to run DSL on a circuit not spec'd for it to save a buck? As to the other, if you aren't buying DSL spec'd pairs, there is NO guarantee any pair you get is going to work right with DSL and you have no stick to beat them to change it. You might as well flip a coin. Vern > > -Dan > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Paul Dover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:25:17 -0400 X-Message-Number: 35 -----Original Message----- From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 3:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Simple question On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Roy wrote: > Two scenarios: > 1) Your DSL circuit interferes (been known to happen) with another circuit in > the same bundle. The phone company debugs the problem, disconnects your circuit > and bills you for the repair. The customer sues for his down time Any real life examples? Well, yes, I can offer real life examples. I grew up in a large telco environment (25 years) and we were aware of the dry copper ability a number of years ago. The key was mentioned a few e-mails ago that an alarm or junk yard circuit, as defined in the tariffs, was a "metallic loop" capable of DC transmission and/or voice frequency without conditioning. Any interference generated by a metallic loop resulted in the frame lightning protectors being pulled on the CO main frame which interrupted the continuity, the customer notified, and the service was not restored until the interference was removed (regardless of source). Not only was the a legal practice, it was a mandatory practice required by the state PUC and the FCC. Lifeline service (e911, etc) was the paramount service that must be maintained and interference with lifeline is a no-no. We pulled many a circuit down.... However, I can't say that this practice hasn't been used, unjustifiably, for a point-to-point, home-grown DSL circuit... Seems like I remember a case in Michigan a few years ago... > 2) You have 500 DSL customers. The telco finds the alarms circuits and installs > loading coils which effectively stops your service. 500 customers are now > cutoff and you have no way of supplying them. They sue for loss of service. Load coils are not easy to install (expensive) and they must be installed in the field. I doubt that any telco would go that route. Much easier to slap on a bridge tap..... Any real life examples? I'd like real, hard data rather than theory and fearmongering. -Dan ______________ * The ISP-DSL Discussion List * ______________ To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:20:39 -0400 X-Message-Number: 36 > > "David R. Dick" wrote: > > > Typically alarm circuit tariff have a stated bandwidth (0-3khz). If you exceed > > > the bandwidth then you violate the tariff. Typically alarm circuits are guaranteed for DC continuity, thats ALL. Vern ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 12:45:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 37 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Roy wrote: > My point was that the telco could add the loading coils, not violate the tariff, and, > therefore, clobber your operation. It is not likely. Why would they purposely cripple pairs that they might want to use in the future for their own DSL deployment. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 13:10:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 38 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Burke wrote: > > Interference is possible, but in our experience we have found it is not > > likely. You are more likely to get a bad unconditioned pair than one that > > has interference. > In your limited experience maybe. Some forms of DSL are spectrally > incompatible with traditional data lines, period.What do you think is > going to happen when the phone co finds you fouling up a $1000 T line > customer because you want to run DSL on a circuit not spec'd for it to > save a buck? Not much -- we are the only $1000 T line customers around here :-) > As to the other, if you aren't buying DSL spec'd pairs, there is NO > guarantee any pair you get is going to work right with DSL and you have > no stick to beat them to change it. You might as well flip a coin. Did I say otherwise? -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 13:10:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 39 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Paul Dover wrote: > We pulled many a circuit down.... Any DSL ones? > However, I can't say that this practice hasn't been used, unjustifiably, for > a point-to-point, home-grown DSL circuit... Seems like I remember a case in > Michigan a few years ago... You mean pulling down a DSL circuit when it *doesnt* interfere, right? -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Resellers - simple question From: "DSL @ Biopass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:06:33 -0400 X-Message-Number: 40 Does anyone have a reseller agreement that I can take a look at? I am setting up a reseller program for software and network consultants selling DSL service for us. What is the typical commission for selling DSL service? Is it fixed or a percentage of the monthly price? Simple - Question - Dry circuits: I think the bottom line is if you a little operation running service out of an independant telephone company, the dry circuits will probably work for you. In this situaltion, you may have "inside contacts" that can help remove the load coils and bridges on your circuits. Outside of this situation, it is not going to work. The telephone company will disconnect/load your circuits once they determine you are not using them per the published tarrif. Many telephone companies are eliminating dry circuits from their tarrifs completely. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Resellers - simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:10:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 41 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, DSL @ Biopass wrote: > Many telephone companies are eliminating dry circuits from their tarrifs > completely. USWest tried that here, the PUC spanked them hard. And now with the new Qwest merger they are probably not wanting to do anything that might push the PUC's buttons... -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:33:29 -0400 X-Message-Number: 42 Because you aren't paying them to use the pairs for DSL, get it? Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 3:45 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Roy wrote: > > My point was that the telco could add the loading coils, not violate the tariff, and, > > therefore, clobber your operation. > > It is not likely. Why would they purposely cripple pairs that they might > want to use in the future for their own DSL deployment. > > -Dan > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:38:50 -0400 X-Message-Number: 43 And you know every possible combination of lines there could be out there? What works for you may NOT work for everyone. Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Melvin C. Etheridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 11:26 AM Subject: Re: Simple question > Marlon, > > I have 4 Phone lines, 2 T1's to my Internet Backbone Connection, 6 Dialup CT1's, > and four DSL Connections, ALL in one 50 pair cable and have not had any troubles > what-so-ever, > > I don't buy the interference crap either!!! > > Mel > > "Marlon K. Schafer" wrote: > > > Century Tel has been quite helpful (till now, they are about to roll out > > thier own dsl and all my orders seem to get screwed up now). > > > > I have heard that. If it's true why is telco falling all over themselves > > trying to get dsl of thier own rolled out????? I have 29 pots, a t-1 and > > two dsl circuits all in one 50pair cable. They all work great! I don't > > believe the interference statement. > > > > Marlon > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:15 PM > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > Marlon, > > > > > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in this manner? > > I > > > have heard that doing this can cause problems with other services on older > > > Telco plant. > > > > > > Brian Johnson > > > Technical Support Administrator & > > > Internet Operations Specialist > > > Northern Valley Communications > > > V: 605-725-1059 F: 605-725-1050 > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Marlon K. Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 8:02 PM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > www.odessaoffice.com/sdsl.htm > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "sean prouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 1:09 PM > > > > Subject: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to set up a DSL connection between two users > > > > with a leased > > > > > line without the help of my phone company and a DSLAM? > > > > > > > > > > Some way setting up two DSL modems together? > > > > > > > > > > Sean > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:47:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 44 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > Because you aren't paying them to use the pairs for DSL, get it? It would help to know of an actual case where the telco installed load coils on a line that didn't already have them, in order to specifically disrupt DSL service. Quick note to those who are running dry pair dsl as we are - the ILEC installers are your best friend. Take them out to lunch. Give them freebies. Let them know theyre appreciated. Get a good relationship with your installers and they will bend over backwards to get you pairs that will do what you want. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:48:23 -0500 X-Message-Number: 45 Is the cable drop new? Newer facilities are less susceptible to these problems due to better insulation and shielding. Brian 8^) > -----Original Message----- > From: Vern Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 4:39 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > And you know every possible combination of lines there could be > out there? What works for you may NOT work for everyone. > > Vern > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Melvin C. Etheridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 11:26 AM > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > Marlon, > > > > I have 4 Phone lines, 2 T1's to my Internet Backbone > Connection, 6 Dialup > CT1's, > > and four DSL Connections, ALL in one 50 pair cable and have not had any > troubles > > what-so-ever, > > > > I don't buy the interference crap either!!! > > > > Mel > > > > "Marlon K. Schafer" wrote: > > > > > Century Tel has been quite helpful (till now, they are about > to roll out > > > thier own dsl and all my orders seem to get screwed up now). > > > > > > I have heard that. If it's true why is telco falling all over > themselves > > > trying to get dsl of thier own rolled out????? I have 29 pots, a t-1 > and > > > two dsl circuits all in one 50pair cable. They all work > great! I don't > > > believe the interference statement. > > > > > > Marlon > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:15 PM > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > Marlon, > > > > > > > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in this > manner? > > > I > > > > have heard that doing this can cause problems with other services on > older > > > > Telco plant. > > > > > > > > Brian Johnson > > > > Technical Support Administrator & > > > > Internet Operations Specialist > > > > Northern Valley Communications > > > > V: 605-725-1059 F: 605-725-1050 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Marlon K. Schafer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 8:02 PM > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > www.odessaoffice.com/sdsl.htm > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "sean prouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 1:09 PM > > > > > Subject: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to set up a DSL connection between two users > > > > > with a leased > > > > > > line without the help of my phone company and a DSLAM? > > > > > > > > > > > > Some way setting up two DSL modems together? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sean > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Marlon Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:57:15 -0700 X-Message-Number: 46 Bull. Not up to them what you put over the circuit. Just like it's not up to them what you put over your t-1. This is all about locking out any sort of effective competition. Marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 2:33 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > Because you aren't paying them to use the pairs for DSL, > get it? > > Vern > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 3:45 PM > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Roy wrote: > > > My point was that the telco could add the loading coils, not violate the > tariff, and, > > > therefore, clobber your operation. > > > > It is not likely. Why would they purposely cripple pairs that they might > > want to use in the future for their own DSL deployment. > > > > -Dan > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:56:25 -0400 X-Message-Number: 47 Thats correct, however they KNOW the HDSL is there and they assign the cable pairs with that in mind. And when they KNOW ADSL is there, they take that into account. ADSL and HDSL are NOT the same encoding, so you can't say just because one doesn't have a problem, the other won't either. Say it again with me boys and girls , "spectral compatibility". I KNEW you could! Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marlon K. Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 9:47 AM Subject: Re: Simple question > FUD. > > Most t-1's have been run via xdsl for years anyway. Ask them some time..... > > marlon > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 10:26 PM > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > That is exactly my point. It's their facilities. > > > > Putting DSL in the same cable bundle as a T-1 (using some older cable type > > bundles) can cause signal issues and outages. The Telco will know this and > > make concessions to solve the problem. If you are purchasing dry copper > for > > "alarm circuits" and using them for DSL, you could be looking at a huge > > lawsuit. > > > > Brian 8^) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:21 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > What has your Telco said to you about using the dry copper in > > > this manner? > > > > > > Probably the same thing as they tell their own engineers when the telco > > > themselves use dry copper for DSL. > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Frank Angel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:59:55 -0400 X-Message-Number: 48 >> > > Typically alarm circuit tariff have a stated bandwidth >(0-3khz). If >you exceed >> > > the bandwidth then you violate the tariff. A tariff is simply a schedule of merchandise and associated prices, so you can't "violate the tariff". Only the ILEC can violate it by charging a price for a listed service that is different than that in the tariff. Has anyone ever actually read the applicable tariffs? In Bell Atlantic (NJ) territory, I believe that what's being discussed here is "Special Access Service - Metallic Service". You can read the tariff here: http://www.bellatlantic.com/tariffs_info/intra/efftar/nj/access/njas7/pdf/e_ sec7-2.pdf "Special Access Service" is defined as "provides a transmission path to directly connect an IC terminal location and an end user premises. Special Access Service includes all exchange access not utilizing Telephone Company end office switches. This type of Access Service is used, for example, by IC's for the provision of private line service. The connections provided by Special Access Service can be either analog or digital. Analog connections are differentiated by spectrum and bandwidth...." "Metallic service" is described as "an unconditioned two-wire channel capable of transmitting low speed varying signals at rates up to 30 baud. This channel is provided by metallic or equivalent facilities. Metallic channels are provided between customer-designated premises or between a customer-designated premises and a Telephone Company Hub where bridging functions are performed. Interoffice metallic facilities will be limited in length to a total of five miles per channel." The technical description goes into more specific detail regarding DC resistance, etc. BA has curiously left out an "Obligations of the Customer" section from the Special Access Service section of the tariff, so you have to look back to the General Regulations for this information. There, Section 2.2.2 describes the remedies for "Interference or Impairment" of the Telco facilities. Paragraph B in this Section basically states that the Telco will notify the customer if there is any interference or impairment, optionally (and temporarily) disconnect the service, and give the customer the opportunity to correct the condition that gave rise to the interference or impairment. Now, I'm not a lawyer, but I can read, and I believe that all of the above says that you can provision "metallic service" and use it for anything you like (including xDSL). If it causes interference, the Telco must notify you, may optionally disconnect the service, and you have the opportunity to fix the problem. However, you should also read Section 2.3 of the General Regulations, especially paragraph 2.3.1, Damages. It specifies what the Telco expects of the customer in regard to damages caused to Telco facilities by the "negligence or willful act of the customer resulting from the customer's improper use of the Telephone Company facilities", blah, blah, blah. Here's where a lawyer's advice is required - any sage advice out there? What's the legal exposure to Telco customers for any Telco service as defined in the tariff? Is John Q. Public expected to be familiar with each and every Telco service as defined in the tariff, or is it the responsibility of the Telco to advise the customer of proper use when subscribing to service? I'm sure some lawyers could argue over this for days.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:58:14 -0400 X-Message-Number: 49 I hear that Brian, it's an occupational hazard. Vern (another ISP turned CLEC) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 9:30 AM Subject: RE: Simple question > After barely a night of sleep and a little re-thinking, you are probably > right. A law-suit probably wouldn't do much for either side. But the Telco > WILL disconnect your lines and you WILL NOT have any recourse (if the > contract says "Alarm circuit use only" or some other equivalent verbage). > > In the lightest case they will stop selling you circuits. > > I know because we are an ISP that has become a CLEC. I have been forced to > deal with this situation with our local bell. > > Sorry if I came across with attitude, but I had a bad but with insomnia last > night. > > Brian 8^) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vern Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:58 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > I don't think there's any lawsuit Brian, they just reserve the right to > > disconnect > > your butt if what you do interferes with anything. > > > > Vern > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:54 AM > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from your > > > Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will set-up > > the > > > circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you "could" > > use > > > the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the > > > contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure they do. > > 8^) > > > > > > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:47 AM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using them > > for > > > > > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. > > > > > > > > How so? > > > > > > > > Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this assertion? > > > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "David Brenner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:59:48 -0700 X-Message-Number: 50 : one doesn't have a problem, the other won't either. Say it again with me : boys and girls : , "spectral compatibility". I KNEW you could! ..sniff sniff.. Smells like there's a flame war developing. ;-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "David R. Dick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 100 18:02:43 -0400 (EDT) X-Message-Number: 51 > > > > > "David R. Dick" wrote: > > > > Typically alarm circuit tariff have a stated bandwidth (0-3khz). If > you exceed > > > > the bandwidth then you violate the tariff. > > Typically alarm circuits are guaranteed for DC continuity, thats ALL. > > > Vern > > Careful with your quoting there! I didn't write the above which seems to be attributed to me. A tariff says what the telco will do, not what a customer may do. There may be other reasons not to put DSL on dry copper, but because you would "violate the tariff" is not one of them. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:03:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 52 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Marlon Schafer wrote: > Bull. Not up to them what you put over the circuit. Just like it's not up > to them what you put over your t-1. Well, you cant put 240VAC over your T1 :-) > This is all about locking out any sort of effective competition. If it *doesnt* cause interference, I dont think the telco has any recourse. The way our tariff is written, it doesn't appear they can do anything if it doesn't interfere. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "DSL @ Biopass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:05:03 -0400 X-Message-Number: 53 There you go, no problem!!!! Just keep it under 30 baud! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Melvin C. Etheridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 18:06:18 -0400 X-Message-Number: 54 No...Another CLEC turning into another money grubbing Telco! Vern Burke wrote: > I hear that Brian, it's an occupational hazard. > > Vern (another ISP turned CLEC) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 9:30 AM > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > After barely a night of sleep and a little re-thinking, you are probably > > right. A law-suit probably wouldn't do much for either side. But the Telco > > WILL disconnect your lines and you WILL NOT have any recourse (if the > > contract says "Alarm circuit use only" or some other equivalent verbage). > > > > In the lightest case they will stop selling you circuits. > > > > I know because we are an ISP that has become a CLEC. I have been forced to > > deal with this situation with our local bell. > > > > Sorry if I came across with attitude, but I had a bad but with insomnia > last > > night. > > > > Brian 8^) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Vern Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:58 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > > > > I don't think there's any lawsuit Brian, they just reserve the right to > > > disconnect > > > your butt if what you do interferes with anything. > > > > > > Vern > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:54 AM > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from > your > > > > Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will > set-up > > > the > > > > circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you > "could" > > > use > > > > the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the > > > > contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure they > do. > > > 8^) > > > > > > > > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. > > > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:47 AM > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > > > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using > them > > > for > > > > > > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. > > > > > > > > > > How so? > > > > > > > > > > Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this > assertion? > > > > > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > > > > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > > > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > > > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > > > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "David Brenner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:07:44 -0700 X-Message-Number: 55 : There you go, no problem!!!! Just keep it under 30 baud! Perfect speed for telecommuting! "Uh, sorry I didn't get much done, boss, but the tariff says..." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:12:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 56 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > Thats correct, however they KNOW the HDSL is there and they assign the cable > pairs with that in mind. And when they KNOW ADSL is there, they take that > into account. But they *dont* know what's there. They ALWAYS test pairs and simply reassign new pairs if it doesn't work. Their records are useless, as the installer, CO tech, and provisioning engineer have all told me. Apparently, this is a nationwide problem (as reported on other telco MLs) -- ILEC wire records are junk. -DAn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:18:30 -0400 X-Message-Number: 57 > Bull. Not up to them what you put over the circuit Sheesh, get a clue Marlon. The phone company has the right and obligation to set and enforce the technical specifiations of anything running over their facility. >Just like it's not up > to them what you put over your t-1. When the phone company sells you a T1, they sell you a line that meets certain known electrical and signalling requirements. It's not about what you carry OVER the line, it's about what you electrically CONNECT to the physical line. You're mixing up Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marlon Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 5:57 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > Bull. Not up to them what you put over the circuit. Just like it's not up > to them what you put over your t-1. > > This is all about locking out any sort of effective competition. > > Marlon > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 2:33 PM > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > Because you aren't paying them to use the pairs for DSL, > > get it? > > > > Vern > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 3:45 PM > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Roy wrote: > > > > My point was that the telco could add the loading coils, not violate > the > > tariff, and, > > > > therefore, clobber your operation. > > > > > > It is not likely. Why would they purposely cripple pairs that they might > > > want to use in the future for their own DSL deployment. > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "Frank Angel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:22:11 -0400 X-Message-Number: 58 >After barely a night of sleep and a little re-thinking, you >are probably >right. A law-suit probably wouldn't do much for either side. >But the Telco >WILL disconnect your lines and you WILL NOT have any recourse (if the >contract says "Alarm circuit use only" or some other >equivalent verbage). > >In the lightest case they will stop selling you circuits. Not to argue, but our BA tariff in NJ says they can disconnect, but they also have to give you the opportunity to "correct the condition". At last, a reason to like New Jersey !!! Has anyone actually provisioned "metallic service" from BA in NJ? If it's like any of their other services (ISDN, POTS) there is no contract, just a phone order and an invoice. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:21:17 -0400 X-Message-Number: 59 <sigh> Unsubstantiated rumor, the final defense. Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:12 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > > Thats correct, however they KNOW the HDSL is there and they assign the cable > > pairs with that in mind. And when they KNOW ADSL is there, they take that > > into account. > > But they *dont* know what's there. They ALWAYS test pairs and simply > reassign new pairs if it doesn't work. Their records are useless, as the > installer, CO tech, and provisioning engineer have all told me. > > Apparently, this is a nationwide problem (as reported on other telco > MLs) -- ILEC wire records are junk. > > -DAn > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:25:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 60 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Frank Angel wrote: > Not to argue, but our BA tariff in NJ says they can disconnect, but they > also have to give you the opportunity to "correct the condition". At last, > a reason to like New Jersey !!! I suspect most tariff language is very similar across the country. > Has anyone actually provisioned "metallic service" from BA in NJ? If it's > like any of their other services (ISDN, POTS) there is no contract, just a > phone order and an invoice. Apparently some people are using dry copper in NY. Not sure about NJ. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:28:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 61 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > <sigh> Unsubstantiated rumor, the final defense. Hearsay, sure. But i've got it from multiple sources -- the ILEC, the engineers, the installers, and various unrelated mailing lists. There is something called 'convergence of evidence'. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:30:06 -0400 X-Message-Number: 62 Money grubbing telco? I pay for the services I use and charge a fair rate (substantially lower than anyone else in the area). I play the game by the rules and the phone company CAN be beaten with their own rules without me whining about why I'm not allowed to break them. Vern PS, if I'm money grubbing, I don't know why I don't have a yacht and a mansion yet. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Melvin C. Etheridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:06 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > No...Another CLEC turning into another money grubbing Telco! > > Vern Burke wrote: > > > I hear that Brian, it's an occupational hazard. > > > > Vern (another ISP turned CLEC) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 9:30 AM > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > After barely a night of sleep and a little re-thinking, you are probably > > > right. A law-suit probably wouldn't do much for either side. But the Telco > > > WILL disconnect your lines and you WILL NOT have any recourse (if the > > > contract says "Alarm circuit use only" or some other equivalent verbage). > > > > > > In the lightest case they will stop selling you circuits. > > > > > > I know because we are an ISP that has become a CLEC. I have been forced to > > > deal with this situation with our local bell. > > > > > > Sorry if I came across with attitude, but I had a bad but with insomnia > > last > > > night. > > > > > > Brian 8^) > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Vern Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:58 AM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think there's any lawsuit Brian, they just reserve the right to > > > > disconnect > > > > your butt if what you do interferes with anything. > > > > > > > > Vern > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:54 AM > > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from > > your > > > > > Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will > > set-up > > > > the > > > > > circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you > > "could" > > > > use > > > > > the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the > > > > > contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure they > > do. > > > > 8^) > > > > > > > > > > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. > > > > > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:47 AM > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > > > > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and using > > them > > > > for > > > > > > > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. > > > > > > > > > > > > How so? > > > > > > > > > > > > Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this > > assertion? > > > > > > > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > > > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > > > > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > > > > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > > > > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:34:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 63 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > I play the game by the rules and the phone company CAN be beaten with > their own rules without me whining about why I'm not allowed to break > them. How can you beat the phone co when they can undercut by selling services that dont cost them anything (eg, how they can sell DSL *with* IP for *less* than what ISPs *pay for DSL alone* for?) Kind of hard to beat the telco when the playing field is tilted so far (nearly 90 degrees in the ILEC's favor in this case). -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Melvin C. Etheridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 18:35:29 -0400 X-Message-Number: 64 hehehe.... Vern Burke wrote: > Money grubbing telco? I pay for the services I use and charge a fair rate > (substantially lower than anyone else in the area). I play the game by the > rules > and the phone company CAN be beaten with their own rules without me > whining about why I'm not allowed to break them. > > Vern > > PS, if I'm money grubbing, I don't know why I don't have a yacht > and a mansion yet. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Melvin C. Etheridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:06 PM > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > No...Another CLEC turning into another money grubbing Telco! > > > > Vern Burke wrote: > > > > > I hear that Brian, it's an occupational hazard. > > > > > > Vern (another ISP turned CLEC) > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 9:30 AM > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > After barely a night of sleep and a little re-thinking, you are > probably > > > > right. A law-suit probably wouldn't do much for either side. But the > Telco > > > > WILL disconnect your lines and you WILL NOT have any recourse (if the > > > > contract says "Alarm circuit use only" or some other equivalent > verbage). > > > > > > > > In the lightest case they will stop selling you circuits. > > > > > > > > I know because we are an ISP that has become a CLEC. I have been > forced to > > > > deal with this situation with our local bell. > > > > > > > > Sorry if I came across with attitude, but I had a bad but with > insomnia > > > last > > > > night. > > > > > > > > Brian 8^) > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Vern Burke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:58 AM > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think there's any lawsuit Brian, they just reserve the right > to > > > > > disconnect > > > > > your butt if what you do interferes with anything. > > > > > > > > > > Vern > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Brian Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 1:54 AM > > > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First...IANAL. It just seems to me that if you buy a circuit from > > > your > > > > > > Telco with a certain purpose (i.e. Alarm Circuit), the Telco will > > > set-up > > > > > the > > > > > > circuit for the use specified. I'm sure the Telco knows what you > > > "could" > > > > > use > > > > > > the copper for, and if they don't write the specific use into the > > > > > > contract...agreement...whatever, then you are OK. But I'm sure > they > > > do. > > > > > 8^) > > > > > > > > > > > > As for legal precedent... read a freshmen level business law book. > > > > > > > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 12:47 AM > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > Subject: RE: Simple question > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Brian Johnson wrote: > > > > > > > > If you are purchasing dry copper for "alarm circuits" and > using > > > them > > > > > for > > > > > > > > DSL, you could be looking at a huge lawsuit. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How so? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Better yet, how about quoting some legal precedent for this > > > assertion? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > > > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > > > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________ The ISP-DSL Discussion List ______________ > > > > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > > > > > > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > > > > > > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > > > > > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > > > > > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > > > > > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > ______________ • The ISP-DSL Discussion List • ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Marlon Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:50:44 -0700 X-Message-Number: 65 Not unsubstantiated. I've gotten hundreds of emails and phone calls (I'm not hard to find, sigh...) due to my homebrew page. Almost EVERYONE is having cooperation trouble (notice I didn't say technical) with thier telco. Many on this list are isp's. We've all talked to the poor sap sent out to actually INSTALL our orders. They constantly complain about the need to reengineer the orders cause what's in the field isn't whats in the computers. I waited 10 months for a t-1 partly cause of this. Marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 3:21 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > <sigh> Unsubstantiated rumor, the final defense. > > Vern > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:12 PM > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > > > Thats correct, however they KNOW the HDSL is there and they assign the > cable > > > pairs with that in mind. And when they KNOW ADSL is there, they take > that > > > into account. > > > > But they *dont* know what's there. They ALWAYS test pairs and simply > > reassign new pairs if it doesn't work. Their records are useless, as the > > installer, CO tech, and provisioning engineer have all told me. > > > > Apparently, this is a nationwide problem (as reported on other telco > > MLs) -- ILEC wire records are junk. > > > > -DAn > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:02:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 66 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Marlon Schafer wrote: > I waited 10 months for a t-1 partly cause of this. We waited 12 months for a t1, fortunately we were compensated for the delay (the PUC imposes stiff penalties on the ILEC for delays longer than ~90 days). -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 19:06:20 -0400 X-Message-Number: 67 The difference is between reselling the ILEC's DSL and becoming a CLEC. I havn't seen an ILEC DSL resale plan that was even close to being economically feasible. Sure, it's easy if you don't want to bother becoming a CLEC/DLEC, but it's not where the money is. Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 6:34 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > > I play the game by the rules and the phone company CAN be beaten with > > their own rules without me whining about why I'm not allowed to break > > them. > > How can you beat the phone co when they can undercut by selling services > that dont cost them anything (eg, how they can sell DSL *with* IP for > *less* than what ISPs *pay for DSL alone* for?) > > Kind of hard to beat the telco when the playing field is tilted so far > (nearly 90 degrees in the ILEC's favor in this case). > > > -Dan > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:17:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 68 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > The difference is between reselling the ILEC's DSL and becoming a CLEC. > I havn't seen an ILEC DSL resale plan that was even close to being > economically feasible. Sure, it's easy if you don't want to bother > becoming a CLEC/DLEC, but it's not where the money is. The model becomes more feasible if you go CLEC and colo equipment, as long as you don't get dicked $30,000/mo rack fees. At those rates you would have to sell several thousands of DSL lines to be profitable. There are many "CLEC"s for this area but none of them are facilities based -- they are all resale -- and the $30k/mo rack fee may be part of that :-) I have heard of people colo'ing on the cheap by sharing other CLEC rack space in the CO. What DSL are you doing, specifically? Have you purchased your DSLAM and core routers yet? Hired your network engineers, and got your multihomed upstreams with BGP peering yet? -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 19:23:39 -0400 X-Message-Number: 69 Then you guys have a REALLY pathetic ILEC. Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 7:02 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Marlon Schafer wrote: > > I waited 10 months for a t-1 partly cause of this. > > We waited 12 months for a t1, fortunately we were compensated for the > delay (the PUC imposes stiff penalties on the ILEC for delays longer than > ~90 days). > > -Dan > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: "David Brenner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:26:48 -0700 X-Message-Number: 70 : Then you guys have a REALLY pathetic ILEC. : : Vern Yep. That describes US West all right. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:28:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 71 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > Then you guys have a REALLY pathetic ILEC. US West (now Qwest). Yes, incompetence reigns supreme. But then again, a friend has been waiting a year for T1 from Bell Atlantic in new jersey as well. So its not a case of "which is the best ILEC" but "which ILEC sucks the least" -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:28:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 72 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, David Brenner wrote: > : Then you guys have a REALLY pathetic ILEC. > Yep. That describes US West all right. Doesnt it describe all of them? -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 19:33:37 -0400 X-Message-Number: 73 Well, there is that. I find it hard to believe any ILEC is actually charging that much per rack. I bet anything that's full caged colocation, which is WAY overkill for the average small CLEC. Usually the ones that go with resale are just looking for the path of least resistance. We're doing SDSL, IDSL, and G.lite, DSLAM will be Copper Mountain. We don't need no steenkin network engineers :) Working with an IP based DSLAM simplifies things a great deal. We were all planned out for growth in our internal network design anyways a long time ago. Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 7:17 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > > The difference is between reselling the ILEC's DSL and becoming a CLEC. > > I havn't seen an ILEC DSL resale plan that was even close to being > > economically feasible. Sure, it's easy if you don't want to bother > > becoming a CLEC/DLEC, but it's not where the money is. > > The model becomes more feasible if you go CLEC and colo equipment, as long > as you don't get dicked $30,000/mo rack fees. At those rates you would > have to sell several thousands of DSL lines to be profitable. There are > many "CLEC"s for this area but none of them are facilities based -- they > are all resale -- and the $30k/mo rack fee may be part of that :-) > > I have heard of people colo'ing on the cheap by sharing other CLEC rack > space in the CO. > > What DSL are you doing, specifically? Have you purchased your DSLAM and > core routers yet? Hired your network engineers, and got your multihomed > upstreams with BGP peering yet? > > -Dan > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! > Give small business customers the redundancy they require. > http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 19:40:20 -0400 X-Message-Number: 74 In 6 years here in BA North territory, I've never had a T1 take longer than 20 days, more often I've been able to get them to expedite even that. Out of the dozen or so T1/PRI/DDS lines I've had in here I've only seen once when BA assigned a pair that wouldn't work because it had load coils on it and apparently they didn't know it. I'm going on 2 years with 0 downtime on my 3 CT1's and 2 PRI's. My main data T1 to UUNet via MCI and BA has been down only twice in 2 years for a total of about 3 hours. I must just live right :) Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 7:28 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > > Then you guys have a REALLY pathetic ILEC. > > US West (now Qwest). > > Yes, incompetence reigns supreme. > > But then again, a friend has been waiting a year for T1 from Bell Atlantic > in new jersey as well. > > So its not a case of "which is the best ILEC" but "which ILEC sucks the > least" > > -Dan > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Bob Shuman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:42:31 -0700 X-Message-Number: 75 Looking at a Washington rates table, if the rates are $2.75/sqft/mo and cabling numbers are small, where does the $30k come from? (honest question!, and ISP trying to read the documents). Bob -----Original Message----- From: Dan Hollis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 4:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Simple question On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > The difference is between reselling the ILEC's DSL and becoming a CLEC. > I havn't seen an ILEC DSL resale plan that was even close to being > economically feasible. Sure, it's easy if you don't want to bother > becoming a CLEC/DLEC, but it's not where the money is. The model becomes more feasible if you go CLEC and colo equipment, as long as you don't get dicked $30,000/mo rack fees. At those rates you would have to sell several thousands of DSL lines to be profitable. There are many "CLEC"s for this area but none of them are facilities based -- they are all resale -- and the $30k/mo rack fee may be part of that :-) I have heard of people colo'ing on the cheap by sharing other CLEC rack space in the CO. What DSL are you doing, specifically? Have you purchased your DSLAM and core routers yet? Hired your network engineers, and got your multihomed upstreams with BGP peering yet? -Dan ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ SAVE 65% ON NETOPIA DSL ROUTERS WITH V.90 or ISDN BACKUP! Give small business customers the redundancy they require. http://www.netopia.com/equipment/offers/grow/index.html ______________ * The ISP-DSL Discussion List * ______________ To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:50:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 76 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > We're doing SDSL, IDSL, and G.lite, DSLAM will be Copper Mountain. > We don't need no steenkin network engineers :) Working with an IP based > DSLAM simplifies things a great deal. What? You mean you havent been brainwashed by the "ATM everywhere" salesdroids? They want ATM all the way to the desktop. Be afraid. Be very afraid. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: Simple question From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:58:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 77 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Bob Shuman wrote: > Looking at a Washington rates table, if the rates are $2.75/sqft/mo and > cabling numbers are small, where does the $30k come from? (honest question!, > and ISP trying to read the documents). The $30k was an extreme case I have heard quoted from a CLEC. There is more than just the square footage fee though. Probably depends on the ILEC and the part of the country you are in, and how much rack space the CO has (if any) There are entrance fees, power fees, cable fees, engineering fees, etc. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:42:24 -0400 X-Message-Number: 78 Why screw with ATM. Just more expense and complication. Vern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 7:50 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > > We're doing SDSL, IDSL, and G.lite, DSLAM will be Copper Mountain. > > We don't need no steenkin network engineers :) Working with an IP based > > DSLAM simplifies things a great deal. > > What? You mean you havent been brainwashed by the "ATM everywhere" > salesdroids? They want ATM all the way to the desktop. > Be afraid. Be very afraid. > > -Dan > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: spectrum compatibility From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:47:49 -0400 X-Message-Number: 79 For those of you who don't believe spectrum compatibility and interference are any issue with DSL, take a look at http://www.bt.com/world/corpfin/regulatory/response/bandwidth/file6.htm . "Each Access Network requires a single frequency plan to govern all use of the DSL frequency bands if the broadband capacity of the network is to be protected for the benefit of all users. Forming and policing a frequency plan is a technically complex task that requires detailed understanding of the Access Network." "The consequence of failure to ensure spectral control would be pollution of the network with potential performance degradation or service failure of DSL services and drastic and perhaps irreversible reduction in network capacity. " "Like radio communications, a frequency plan is essential for an access network to ensure mutual compatibility of different transmission systems and to maximise the capacity of the access network. " Vern ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: spectrum compatibility From: Dan Hollis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:10:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Message-Number: 80 On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Vern Burke wrote: > For those of you who don't believe spectrum compatibility and interference > are any issue with DSL, take a look at > http://www.bt.com/world/corpfin/regulatory/response/bandwidth/file6.htm . We didnt say it wasnt an issue, simply that it was often overstated and overblown, and sometimes used in scare tactics. Still, there is no reason DSL-conditioned loops can't be offered as a tariffed service exactly the same as ISDN or T1, which is mostly deployed over HDSL anyway. After all the ILEC does conditioning and spectrum management when they deploy HDSL delivered T1 loops. They can do the same for SDSL and ADSL. Oddly enough DSL-certified conditioned spectrum managed loops are available to facilities-based CLECs, but not directly to end users. Does this make sense to you? Some ISPs have become CLECs simply to gain access to these conditioned DSL loops, and for no other reason. Isnt BT a UK based ILEC? Or do they operate local loop in the USA? -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: spectrum compatibility From: "Marlon Schafer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:16:17 -0700 X-Message-Number: 81 ARRRGGGGHHHH. How can you use a Telco to bolster your argument for the telco? We've been saying that they are (as a rule) a bunch of lying cheating scumbags and you want us to go by thier marketing pr as a basis for this? OK, lets assume that this is a good idea (I happen to agree with it in principal). What is the transmit power levels of these systems? I can get 8 miles out of a total of 2 WATTS on my wireless radio system and it has to ride through the air (a really bad medium for rf). The dsl radios won't even go half that far (not at any usable speed just yet, I'm sure that they'll get there though). The power levels that the dsl radios transmit on have to be (admitting ignorance here) far lower yet. I know that cross talk can be an issue but there is certainly much MORE interference likely from the harmonics setup from other high power transmition systems (radio in general). Marlon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 5:47 PM Subject: spectrum compatibility > For those of you who don't believe spectrum compatibility and interference > are any issue with DSL, take a look at > http://www.bt.com/world/corpfin/regulatory/response/bandwidth/file6.htm . > > "Each Access Network requires a single frequency plan to govern all use > of the DSL frequency bands if the broadband capacity of the network is to be > protected for the benefit of all users. Forming and policing a frequency > plan > is a technically complex task that requires detailed understanding of the > Access > Network." > > "The consequence of failure to ensure spectral control would be pollution of > the > network with potential performance degradation or service failure of DSL > services > and drastic and perhaps irreversible reduction in network capacity. " > > "Like radio communications, a frequency plan is essential for an access > network to > ensure mutual compatibility of different transmission systems and to > maximise the > capacity of the access network. " > > Vern ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: spectrum compatibility From: "Vern Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:49:51 -0400 X-Message-Number: 82 Ok, how about http://www.elecdesign.com/magazine/1998/oct2298/comtech/1022ct1.shtml "Finally, there's concern that ADSL lines sharing the same cable bundle with T1, ISDN, HDSL, or possibly other ADSL wire pairs will experience some level of crosstalk. Spectral compatibility with T1 services isn't a big issue in suburban and rural America, but many metropolitan subscribers may be sharing a wire bundle with a nearby business that has a T1 or ISDN line. " or http://www.agcs.com/techpapers/dsl_inf.htm "Spectral compatibility may be one of the most important issues facing DSL. DSL devices deliver on the order of 10 to 100 times more power into the loop than existing network-delivered services. When multiple DSL lines are put into a 24-pair bundle, there is crosstalk between the DSL lines. The more power that is put in (which is directly related to loop length and speed), the more chance there is of crosstalk. When these lines are put next to an ISDN service or a switched 56-kbps service, which is running at one or two orders of magnitude less power in the loop, it is very easy to have service crosstalk. " Vern ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "ISP_Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:11:37 -0500 X-Message-Number: 83 That is a standard boiler plate type of statement. So, don't interfere with other circuits. Cary ----- Original Message ----- From: Burke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 2:10 PM Subject: Re: Simple question > You don't need real life examples. I'll quote you from both the BA white > pages > and the BA CLEC interconnection agreement. BA specifically says that if what > you're doing with the line interferes with anything else, they reserve the > right to > shut your a** off. Period. Worth the risk? > > > Vern > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dan Hollis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 2:59 PM > Subject: Re: Simple question > > > > On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Roy wrote: > > > Two scenarios: > > > 1) Your DSL circuit interferes (been known to happen) with another > circuit in > > > the same bundle. The phone company debugs the problem, disconnects your > circuit > > > and bills you for the repair. The customer sues for his down time > > > > Any real life examples? > > > > > 2) You have 500 DSL customers. The telco finds the alarms circuits and > installs > > > loading coils which effectively stops your service. 500 customers are > now > > > cutoff and you have no way of supplying them. They sue for loss of > service. > > > > Any real life examples? > > > > I'd like real, hard data rather than theory and fearmongering. > > > > -Dan > > > > > > > > > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ > > > > > ^^^^ http://www.genuity.com/dmail/ispoffers/e33.htm ^^^^^ > At Genuity, formerly GTE Internetworking and BBN, we give > ISP's Tier 1 access through two innovative services > Click the above link to learn more and get free research. > > ______________ . The ISP-DSL Discussion List . ______________ > To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-dsl/archives/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Simple question From: "ISP_Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:13:29 -0500 X-Message-Number: 84 The ones I get lately don't even have that... No joke. > > Typically alarm circuits are guaranteed for DC continuity, thats ALL. > > > Vern > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: CNET News-DSL rivals join forces to create compatible products From: "Gene Patino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 19:23:05 -0700 X-Message-Number: 85 http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1004-200-2456897.html?tag=st.ne.1004.sndstry.ni Anyone see this article? any comments? -Gene --- END OF DIGEST --- You are currently subscribed to isp-dsl as: archive@jab.org
