On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 12:46 PM, <valdis.kletni...@vt.edu> wrote: > On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 15:11:36 -0000, Rod Beck said: > > > Landing stations can be 10 to 30 kilometers from the beach manhole. I > don't > > think it is big concern. Hibernia Atlantic dublin landing station is a > good > > example. > > So 100% of those beach manholes are watertight and safe from flooding, and > don't contain any gear that will get upset if it does in fact end up with > salt water in there? > > This listing for landing points in Japan seems to call out a hell of a lot > of > specific buildings that are nowhere near 10 to 30 km inland: > https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1Siy5qBMoFyBUlSFNHdHDpGAkIR0 > > Singapore: Right on the water. > http://www.streetdirectory.com/sg/singapore-cable- > landing-station/1-changi-north-rise-498817/8118_79569.html > > Hong Kong: More of same (though with its hills, some of the 8 sites may > actually be a bit above sea level even though they're 2 blocks from water) > http://www.ofca.gov.hk/en/industry_focus/telecommunications/facility_ > based/infrastructures/submarine_cables/index.html > > Cryptome has a bunch of older images that tend to indicate that a lot of > buildings right on the water in New Jersey and Long Island are involved: > https://cryptome.org/eyeball/cable/cable-eyeball.htm > > is this a case of 'wherer the cable gets dry' vs 'where the electronics doing cable things lives' ? aren't (normally) the dry equipment locations a bit inland and then have last-mile services from the consortium members headed inland to their respective network pops?
> And that's just in the first 3 pages returned by Google for "cable landing > station > map". > > The experience of the Manhattan phone system when the conduits and > basements > flooded during Sandy tends to indicate that we *are* in for similar > surprises over the coming decades. >