Just a minute here. NEBs are requirements for Network Equipment
formulated by what was the Bell Operating Companies' research
arm Bellcore. (They have now been cast adrift as Telecordia).
The Operating Companies have done a good job of making sure
that the requirements for their equipment were
Message text written by Roger Magnuson
As you know, the current Directive took much too long
to implement in certain countries (no names...) and I guess this is the
reason for this unusal
approach.
Roger,
the approach is not unusual under the terms of the Treaty of Maastricht
which no longer
I haven't checked the WEBsite (I avoid visiting WEBsites unless there is a
terrible need to know) so I don't know what exactly is there. However,
quite
often, the useful information to have is what the permissable variations in
the Electrical supply are in various parts of the world. At one time
And than to think that all those people operating random number generators
are not even mentioned.
Ciao,
Vic
We have a new engineer learning Part 68/IC CS-03 that we would like to
enroll in a seminar or training course. Is anyone aware of any seminars or
training courses for Part 68/IC CS-03.
Best Regards,
Jody Leber
jle...@ustech-lab.com
http://www.ustech-lab.com
U. S. Technologies
3505 Francis
I'd better start reading my UL1950/CSA950 again than. They are supposed to
be identical documents
and CSA does not have to satisfy OSHA, hence, it must be in the
deviations for UL ???
Thanks and regards,
Vic
PS Is it only me, or is everybody getting these messges two or three times
??? V
I'd better start reading my UL1950/CSA950 again than. They are supposed to
be identical documents
and CSA does not have to satisfy OSHA, hence, it must be in the
deviations for UL ???
Thanks and regards,
Vic
PS Is it only me, or is everybody getting these messges two or three times
??? V
Message text written by INTERNET:t...@world.std.com
A computer security device such as a logic circuit that could be
connected to the machine (i.e. via a printer port) which, when
interrogated, returns a unique logic code.
Live and learn. We're all grateful for this bit of new information.
My
Mirko,
this is all getting very muddy now that there is an APEC MRA on Telecom
requirements
and an APEC MRA on Product Safety in the offing. Combine that with Korea
in the throes
of changing over to a program that is more like the FCC program (before the
FCC launches
a Notice of Inquiry on
Message text written by INTERNET:t...@world.std.com
I have to agree that there shouldn't be another US (UL) standard for
network
equipment when the equipment can be incorporated into UL1950. UL1950 can be
revised
to clarify the network equipment requirements, perhaps as a deviation or
an
appendix
Message text written by INTERNET:t...@world.std.com
In my view, these exemptions are specifically targeted at equipment such
as
PBXs and network equipment that are typically installed by service
personnel
and include hardwired grounding.
When Telecom equipment (of the non-network equipment
Message text written by INTERNET:t...@world.std.com
On December 17 FCC took another big step towards getting itself out of the
telecommunications equipment approval business, in order to allocate
resources to enforcement of its regulations. Docket 98-68 covers both
wired and wireless telecom
Anybody willing to help Peter
-- Forwarded Message --
From: AIKAT Peter -EAS, INTERNET:peter.b.ai...@extott14.x400.gc.ca
TO: Vic Boersma, 102126,156
DATE: 15/05/97 20:08
RE: Blowing steam
Excerpt from Pressure Vessels chat group:
Tom,
for me, you are asking the wrong questions, but than that is for me.
I am interested only in general regulatory and compliance issues, which is a
field
of its own in our global community. I don't have time to read all the good
stuff from
the techies on how they diddle modems to pass the
As a founding member of the bi-national committee, I have objected to ANY and
ALL deviations from IEC-950 in the BiNet. Obviously, not very succesfully. I
believe that
if I still were a member of that illustrious group, I would object to there
being a national committee in any country that
My comments are the rock in the big pond. YES.
However, just back from INTER COMM 97.
Anybody who thinks that in three years from now, when PCS is taking hold, when
CATV companies offer dial tone and telcos are offering TV, we will be operating
the old T1 pipe infrastructure, is ready for a
Just received notice that Amendment 4 to IEC Publication 950 was published in
August 1996.
It was prepared by IEC TC 74 which prepares requirements for the safety and
energy efficiency of information technology equipment, including electrical
business and telecommunications equipment. Price is
You need to do some mouth rinsing.
At one time it was the CE Mark. However, fundamentalists in the
EU Parliament objected to that terminology because it was
reminiscent of the mark of the beast. Hence, it was changed
to CE-marking.
CE-Stamp, my Lord
Vic Boersma
To join this club,
Don't think so Roger.
IEC 950 = EN 60 950, was meant for Information Technology Equipment, including
Electrical Business Equipment.
EN 41 003 has a checkered history, but was mainly intended to provide additional
requirements for any type of equipment that connects to a Telecom network. That
You should have come to the seminar we gave last week in Toronto and San Jose as
it was stimulated by the proposed new CTE (Connected Telecommunications
Equipment)
Directive. The proposal is still being worked and if there is a draft text, it
is not out yet.
However, one of the facets of the new
For Information Technology Equipment and Telecommunications
Equipment, the responsible standards organization in Mexico is
NYCE (Normalizacion y Certificacion Electronica).
The VP in charge of Certification is Victor-Hugo Perez-Salinas,
the operating manager is Julio Nunez. Victor-Hugo is
This whole debate points to a lack in the standards development
world that I have lamented for many years (and done something
about whenever I could).
THERE IS NO RATIONALE STATEMENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS
Time and again, one butts up against a wall, when one wants to change
something, that
At the EU seminar we were provided with copies of a new CENELEC
document Information on the Links Between Products, Directives
and Standards in the Electrotechnical Field.
The document comes in 3 parts
Part 1, in golden rod, Directive - Product - Standard
Part 2, in green, Standard - Product -
EU authorities prefer if the file is held by a European entity, but
donot insist on that. However, there appears to be an unwritten law
that expects you to be able to produce the darn thing with 24 hour
notice. There is genberal unhappiness with the fact that some
manufacturers don't seem to be
I believe there is a confusion factor creeping into this debate.
Neither AUSTEL, OFTEL in the UK, the FCC in the US or Industry Canada
have any business accepting IECEE CB certificates. IECEE CB
certificates pertain only to Electrical Safety. The agreement to
accept such certificates is
The IECEE CB scheme is very much alive and well and more countries
are joining every year. The scheme recently has been expanded to
include not only a CB scheme, but as well, an EX and a FC scheme.
Not all that familiar with the EX scheme as that is intended for
equipment used in explosive
Large Corporations indeed do have their in-house standards, so do any number
of
small corporations.
Those standards are the result of years of study on failed products, an
investment that often
is far from trivial.
Those standards are what gives those corporations their competitive edge in the
I don't know from what perspective you are asking the question, BUT, in the
final analysis,
the only things that count (assuming that the product is covered under one or
more of the
New Approach Directives is:
Was the product subjected to the Conformity Assessment procedures prescribed in
the
You're asking an unaswerable question, in my opinion.
(1) Many buildings are prewired and can't handle any more wire, you've got to
make do with
what is there, or make rewiring part of the contract. You're not likely going
to be the lowest bidder on the job, if you do.
(2) If the people who do
In response to Nick Rouse's comments:
I stand to be corrected. Indeed, Member States may thwart the intent of the
Directives
by doing weird and wonderful things when they transpose/approximate. At times
their
reasons me not be the purest, but in the UK case, it is clear to the rest of the
world
There has been a spate of comments on this channel lately about the problems
encountered
when a product is an integration of several other products.
Doug Probstfeld of INTEL in Hillsboro, OR, has produced a white paper on the
topic and makes some recommendations on how to deal with it.
Not
Mark Montrose wrote:
RE:European Power Cords
This question relates to the use and application of power cords
provided into the EU when shipped from the USA.
A company builds one version of a highly configurable product. The
user chooses any combination of optional pwbs (over 20
Alan,
We know what is excluded from needing a CE mark:
(1) Products for which there are no legal requirements as to their technical
characteristics
(2) Products for which there only exist national requirements as to their
technical
characteristics
(3) Products for which the requirements
I hate to disagree with my customers BUT:
In Canada and the USA, the CSA certification and UL listing do NOT
constitute APPROVAL.
The Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJs), for our purposes the
electrical inspection authorities in the States or Provinces do
the approving.
They normally do that
I attended a conference in Amsterdam on March 18th (had to dump my
poor wife in a motel on Cocoa Beach for the week-end to do it) where
Mr. Joergen Richter of DG XIII introduced a draft for the new
Connected Telecommunications Directive (CTE). The gist of the
story is that the Commission is
Hi Jon,
Perhaps this is a very good time to remind all and sundry that
most of the Directives have been modified at one time or another
by other Directives. To the best of my knowledge, one is expected
to cut out relevant parts of new Directives and glue them into
the old Directives. I know
In the grey past, we obtained certification/listing from our
friendly certification houses. If we thought that something
was wrong with the application of an old standard to a new product,
we would have a heart-to-heart talk with our certification
organization. If we had a good, solid and
RON,
There are three Directives you may want to look at:
85/374/EEC The Product Liability Directive
92/59 /EEC The Product Safety Directive
91/C 12/11 The proposed Services Liability Directive
regards,
Vic
-- Forwarded Message --
From: Bjorn Hansen,
There are a number of private enterprisers that will provide you with copies
of various directives on CD ROM or Floppies and provide updates every
three months on a subscription basis. I know of at least one but there are
probably more (Cost about $350 per year). If you need to me, drop me
a
39 matches
Mail list logo
