29 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Classified Ads
TD Extra News
Add this Digest to your personal
or 
The Telecom Digest for February 07, 2011
Volume 30 : Issue 34 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
====== 29 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.
===========================
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime. Geoffrey Welsh
===========================
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 00:48:09 -0600
From: bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: New numbering rules for phones in Australia
Message-ID: <mcKdnbhWHIC02dPQnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>
In article <bb1fd4f6-b3c3-4e3b-9e2d-d1cfc6ca1df5@s3g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>On Feb 3, 2:57 am, David Clayton <dcs...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>
>> As part of the rollout of the NBN (fibre to the premises) the incumbent
>> telco is going to gradually decommission all the "copper".
>> They continually complain about the upkeep costs of such old plant anyway,
>> so it will save people money as the fibre infrastructure maintenance
>> should be a lot less over its intended life.
>
>Obviously fibre has advantages in capacity over copper, but does that
>mean existing copper plant should be abandoned?
Yes. The reason is simple economics.
1) The services that one can deliver via FTTH cannot all be delivered
over the existing copper infrastructure.
2) _everything_ that can be delivered over the existing copper can be
delivered via FTTH.
Corollary: you have to have FTTH to deliver the "can't be done on copper"
services.
Since the fibre IS going to be there for those services, and the installation
and recurring operating costs of that infrastructure are already being
paid, anything else that also rides on the fibre does it effectively 'for
free'. Since all the 'can be done on copper' services can ride the fibre,
it makes sense to put them there, since there is effectively -zero-
incremental cost for having them there. Thus, there is -no- reason to
continue to maintain the copper physical plant. It is now superfluous
to operations. In fact, you can make money by decommissioning that
infrastructure. Pull the copper and sell it for salvage.
>Why is fibre cable cheaper to maintain than existing copper cable?
Because it _is_. <grin>
Fibre simply doesn't require as much maintenance. Especially when
measured on a 'per voice circuit equivalent capacity' basis.
>I would guess that the big maintenance expense of outdoor physical
>plant would physical protection against weather and injury and access
>for maintenance. Wouldn't physical protection costs, such as durable
>outer shells, be the same for copper as fibre?
No.
The protection requirements -are- different. Especially with regard
to moisture.
That aside, how many fibre strands can you put in a, say, 1/2" ID conduit?
How big a pipe does it take to hold the number of copper pairs required
to provide the same communications capacity? Do you think that that
monster pipe is available for the same cost as the 1/2" conduit?
Yes, a 1/2" pipe costs the same whether it's protecting fibre or copper,
but the "cost per circuit" is orders of magnitude lower if there is fibre
inside that pipe.
> If say a car knocks
>down a pole carrying lines, isn't the biggest cost labor of the crew
>to replace the pole and remount the lines?
H*LL no!! When the pole got knocked down, the lines -broke-. The labor
cost for splicing umpty-hundred pairs -- probably twice (since you
probably have to insert a _replacement_ section of cable as opposed to
just re-connecting the broken ends to each other) -- probably swamps the
cost of re-setting the pole.
Needless to say, you can make a few fibre splices in far less time than
it takes to splice the equivalent umpty-hundred copper pairs.
Fiber also is much more forgiving about environmental conditions. ESPECIALLY
moisture -- You don't have to keep the cable dry,
Fiber doesn't corrode.
Fiber doesn't need 'sealing current'. It's only a 'small' current for any
single pair, but multiply that by -many- thousands of pairs in a medium-
large C.O. any you've got a non-trivial monthly recurring cost.
Date: 6 Feb 2011 20:16:54 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: New numbering rules for phones in Australia
Message-ID: <20110206201654.19956.qmail@joyce.lan>
> 2) _everything_ that can be delivered over the existing copper can be
> delivered via FTTH.
Well, other than service that continues working when the power goes
out for more than a few hours. But apparently nobody cares about that
any more.
R's,
John
***** Moderator's Note *****
Copper's leggacy will take a few years to wear off. There are a number
of services which will suffer with fiber-only local plant: burglar
alarms, which used to depend on having DC continuity, are now data
channels - until the power dies. Given that many "CEV" sites have less
than twelve hours of battery backup, any long-term power outage in an
area with fiber-only plant will leave the entire area without alarm
service.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 21:35:20 -0500
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: New numbering rules for phones in Australia
Message-ID: <MPG.27b92472b2a463f9989d1b@news.eternal-september.org>
In article
<mcKdnbhWHIC02dPQnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@posted.nuvoxcommunications>,
bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com says...
>
> In article
<bb1fd4f6-b3c3-4e3b-9e2d-d1cfc6ca1df5@s3g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
> Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 3, 2:57 am, David Clayton <dcs...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
> >
> >> As part of the rollout of the NBN (fibre to the premises) the
> >> incumbent telco is going to gradually decommission all the
> >> "copper". They continually complain about the upkeep costs of
> >> such old plant anyway, so it will save people money as the fibre
> >> infrastructure maintenance should be a lot less over its intended
> >> life.
> >
> >Obviously fibre has advantages in capacity over copper, but does
> >that mean existing copper plant should be abandoned?
>
> Yes. The reason is simple economics.
>
> 1) The services that one can deliver via FTTH cannot all be delivered
> over the existing copper infrastructure.
at&t would beg to differ with you vis a vis their uVerse service. It's
fiber out to the cabinets, but copper to the homes.
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 13:39:07 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: How a text cost two young lives
Message-ID: <pan.2011.02.07.02.39.06.742640@myrealbox.com>
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/how-a-text-cost-two-young-lives-20110206-1ain9.html
How a text cost two young lives
Nicky Phillips
February 7, 2011
WHEN the car Marcus Johnstone was driving hit a power pole, killing two
teenage girls, it was not speed or alcohol that caused the accident.
Johnstone, who was 22 at the time of the 2004 crash in Victoria, was
deleting a text message on his mobile phone.
The 24-word message asking him if he fancied one of the girls sitting in
the back seat, cost the lives of two teenagers and in 2006 left Johnstone
with a jail sentence of six years and nine months.
He was the second person in Victoria to be charged with culpable and
negligent driving for being distracted by a mobile phone.
Johnstone's lawyer Anthony Robinson said the situation was one many people
could find themselves in.
''It was a terribly sad case, you felt terribly sad for the victims, but
as his lawyer I felt terribly sad for Marcus because it's a very easy
accident to happen,'' Mr Robinson said.
A survey in 2009 found 70 per cent of Victorian drivers aged between 18
and 25 admitted text messaging while driving.
''That's a pretty huge number,'' said Kristie Young, one of the
researchers who conducted the survey for the Monash University Accident
Research Centre.
Michael Regan, a distraction researcher working in France, said: ''When
you hear a phone it sets in train a process of thinking 'who is it, could
it be important, could it be my boss, should I answer it?'''
Drivers are being distracted not just by mobile phones. The influx of
gadgets means cars are becoming mobile offices and entertainment centres.
But despite the emphasis on being able to multitask, the brain cannot pay
attention to two things at once.
Texting on a phone and driving a car required a lot of attention,
especially visual, Professor Regan said.
''When you are getting two tasks that require a lot of visual attention
that is a recipe for failure.''
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 19:39:51 -0800 (PST)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: newspaper column on sexting
Message-ID: <a4b28f5f-8fd8-44db-9436-74f188801ccf@x1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
A Phila Inqr columnist had thoughts on the subject:
"Legislators mostly want to criminalize the high-tech youthful
transgression known as sexting. Which is strange, since voters made it
abundantly clear in the fall that they want government to scale back
and stop meddling in their lives."
"Under current law in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, a cheerleader e-
mailing intimate images to a football player subjects both of them to
felony child-pornography charges."
"Legislators in Harrisburg remain hung up on whether naked pictures
sent from iPhone to Droid should be labeled a misdemeanor or a summary
offense, but a York County representative has no doubt that sexting is
a crime of the times."
For full article please see:
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/115402959.html
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Copyright (C) 2009 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
End of The Telecom Digest (5 messages)
|
Return to Archives ** Older Issues |