36 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Copyright © 2018 E. William Horne. All Rights Reserved.

The Telecom Digest for Sat, 04 Aug 2018
Volume 37 : Issue 182 : "text" format

Table of contents
Re: Backup Power for Cox [or other] ISP [Telecom]Steve Stone
Re: Backup Power for Cox [or other] ISP [Telecom]bob prohaska
Re: Backup Power for Cox [or other] ISP [Telecom]John Levine
New Jersey gets new area codeHAncock4
Qualcomm Shouldn't Get Import Ban on Apple, Consumers Contend Bill Horne
Please send posts to telecom-digest.org, with userid set to telecomdigestsubmissions, or via Usenet to comp.dcom.telecom
---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <f5ba8328-dd60-a5a7-7a1b-bee6d8ec94db@juno.com> Date: 2 Aug 2018 07:20:02 -0400 From: "Steve Stone" <n2ubp@juno.com> Subject: Re: Backup Power for Cox [or other] ISP [Telecom] My ISP is Spectrum. When power is out in my neighborhood the gray cable boxes on the phone poles switch to battery power which is good for 2 or 3 hours. After 3 hours the batteries are depleted and everything goes out. My solution is to use a home router that fails back to a cellular service Internet tethering device. Small UPS's don't run very long on battery. They are designed to run no longer than 10 - 15 minutes tops to allow for controlled shutdown of your computer equipment. I use an older Tripplite SmartPro Net 2000 VA UPS that is connected to all the computer gear including cable modem and router in my home office. It has external battery boxes that can be plugged into the UPS in parallel and extend run time. Not a cheap solution but gives me over one hour of run time for everything in the office with a single pair of 35 amp 12v batteries wired in series for 24 volts total. Adding additional battery boxes would increase run time. Usually by the 45 minute mark I switch over to running a gasoline powered generator. Steve 73 de N2UBP ------------------------------ Message-ID: <pk0ft4$n6f$1@news.albasani.net> Date: 3 Aug 2018 02:50:12 +0000 From: "bob prohaska" <bp@www.zefox.net> Subject: Re: Backup Power for Cox [or other] ISP [Telecom] Naveen Albert <wirelessaction@outlook.com> wrote: > > On the flipside, you can always use dial-up Internet in a mains power > outage, > Do POTS lines still get power from batteries or gensets at the central office? I gather they did "once upon a time", but is that still true? Thanks for reading, bob prohaska ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20180802175824.2156A200334189@ary.qy> Date: 2 Aug 2018 13:58:23 -0400 From: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> Subject: Re: Backup Power for Cox [or other] ISP [Telecom] In article <BYAPR13MB2232A82466FE7E4833DEE26B912C0@BYAPR13MB2232.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> you write: >Burglar alarms and medical devices should not be on VoIP, period. They >should ALWAYS be on a copper landline. In fact, they should >specifically be on loop start lines. ... I agree, but even copper landlines aren't what they used to be. My landline is wired copper back to the central office, which I know because the CO is three blocks away and I can see the wire up on the poles. The CO has a large battery bank and a generator on a trailer that they can start up when the power is out for more than an hour or so. People out in the country get their service from concentrators (often called SLCs after an old Bell model) which are battery powered. The batteries don't last forever and the plans to recharge them during an outage are spotty. R's, John ***** Moderator's Note ***** Older readers might think of a "Concentrator" as an electromechanical device - a micro crossbar exchange - which could be used to select CO lines for handling by an answering service, or as a measure to postpone maintenance on outside plant by denying dialtone to customers when no pairs were available for their calls. The Subsciber Loop Carrier system, or SLC, is called a "Slick." It is a T-Carrier system, fed either by wire or fiber, which is often installed in new apartment buildings and businesses. Although it save on outside plant costs (with either a 1-to-24 or 1-to-48 fanout, depending on options), it is not a concentrator, since all subscribers are able to use it simultaneously. Bill Horne Moderator ------------------------------ Message-ID: <f37ddf74-8a4e-4d55-9430-76ee27e8decc@googlegroups.com> Date: 31 Jul 2018 15:21:32 -0700 From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> Subject: New Jersey gets new area code excerpt from NJ.COM: The new area code, 640, will overlay the current 609 area code territory in the central and southeastern parts of the state from Cape May to Trenton. Starting Sept. 17, new telephone lines in the present 609 territory may be assigned numbers with the new 640 area code. If you already have a 609 number, that won't change, but anyone getting a new number from then on may be assigned the new area code. Adding 640 means New Jersey will now have 10 different area codes, O'Brien says. Those codes are 862, 973, 201, 551, 908, 732, 848, 856, 609 and now 640. full article at: https://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2018/07/if_you_have_a_609_number_saved_in_your_phone_its_n.html Presently, area code 609 has only seven digit dialing; this will end with the overlay. Interesting, because 609 covers a wide area, even a seven digit number could be a plain local call, local toll call, or cross-LATA toll call (e.g. Trenton to Atlantic City). Years ago, parts of 609 that bordered against Pennsylvania could dial only seven digits to reach border points. While today calls are still deemed local, 10 digits are required. Originally in 1947, NJ had only 201. They quickly added 609 for the southern part of the state and that lasted for many years. Notably, 201 hosted the very first dialed direct calls, from Englewood NJ. Oct 1955 Popular Science article provides detailed explanation https://books.google.com/books?id=LCYDAAAAMBAJ&lpg=RA1-PA18&dq=englewood%20dialed%20direct&pg=RA1-PA18#v=onepage&q&f=false 1951 brief newspaper article: https://books.google.com/books?id=Hn1aAAAAIBAJ&lpg=PA2&dq=englewood%20dialed%20direct&pg=PA2#v=onepage&q&f=false ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20180802031305.GA3630@telecom.csail.mit.edu> Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2018 23:13:05 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> Subject: Qualcomm Shouldn't Get Import Ban on Apple, Consumers Contend By Susan Decker Qualcomm Inc. shouldn't be able to use a U.S. trade agency to knock out Intel Corp. as a competitor for chips inside Apple Inc.'s smartphones, a group of Apple consumers said in a court filing Thursday. Consumers in a consolidated class action lawsuit accusing Qualcomm of antitrust violations want District Court Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California, to prevent the company from pursuing any import ban that might be imposed on Apple phones using Intel chips. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-28/qualcomm-shouldn-t-get-import-ban-on-apple-consumers-contend -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly) ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Sat, 04 Aug 2018

Telecom Digest Archives