-
From: Marko Radojicic [ mailto:mar...@turnstone.com]
Sent: maandag 21 april 2003 23:48
To: 'j...@aol.com'; t...@world.std.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: RE: Lightning coordination in K.20 (2000) versus GR-1089
Joe,
I don't have much technical to add but was wondering why you
]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 2:54 PM
To: t...@world.std.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Lightning coordination in K.20 (2000) versus GR-1089
Hello All:
I have been studying the new 2000 edition of K.20, Resistibility of
Telecommunication Equipment Installed in a Telecommunication
In a message dated 4/21/2003 Marko writes:
I don't have much technical to add but was wondering why you are looking
into this standard. Have you customers that are asking for this requirement
to be met or is it simply a planning exercise? If it's customer-driven,
could you share what type of
[mailto:j...@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 12:54 PM
To: t...@world.std.com; emc-p...@majordomo.ieee.org
Subject: Lightning coordination in K.20 (2000) versus GR-1089
Hello All:
I have been studying the new 2000 edition of K.20, Resistibility of
Telecommunication Equipment Installed
In a message dated 4/17/2003, you write:
As an FYI, we see very few instances of damage on our carrier class products
due to lightning events. As such I doubt the coordination issue is really
that significant.
Hi Jim:
Thanks for your detailed discussion of the coordination problem. I
Hello All:
I have been studying the new 2000 edition of K.20, Resistibility of
Telecommunication Equipment Installed in a Telecommunication Centre to
Overvoltages and Overcurrents. There appears to be an important change from
the previous edition that will have a big impact on line interface
6 matches
Mail list logo
