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.

Reply via email to