---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <pk3e3a$nei$1@news1.tnib.de> Date: 4 Aug 2018 07:37:46 +0200 From: "Marc Haber" <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> Subject: Re: Backup Power for Cox [or other] ISP [Telecom] "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> wrote: >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. Germany has been migrating its telephone infrastructure to outdoor cabinets ("Fiber to the curb") to allow for faster DSL on the now shorter tail ends (up to 100 Mbit downstream is in wide deployment with 400 Mbit beginning its test phase this month), and of course to be able to sell off the buildings that used to house the telephone switches and are usually located in locations that are very valuable as a property. I have put my local infrastructure on a UPS as part of overvoltage protection and witnessed a five minute power outage last week (which does happen _really_ seldomly in Germany, it's usually an item in the local paper when it happens). I was devastated to find out that the DSL went down together with the power and took two minutes longer than the power to return (DSLAMs need to boot up, too), proving that the incumbent hadn't bothered to put _any_ kind of uninterruptible power into the outdoor cabinet, not even a short period battery. And there goes the telephone network as reliable infrastructure. Greetings Marc -- -------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! ----- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834 ------------------------------ Message-ID: <BYAPR13MB2232E03E70209E69832FBE9591230@BYAPR13MB2232.namprd13.prod.outlook.com> Date: 3 Aug 2018 17:41:28 +0000 From: "Naveen Albert" <wirelessaction@outlook.com> Subject: Re: New Jersey gets new area code > Hancock4 wrote: > 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. Why do telcos. insist on doing overlays? They sound like such a pain. They are contrary to everything the Bell System desired in the PSTN. I am fortunate enough to live in the 262 area code, which was a split from 414 about 25 or so years ago. If you look in the old phone books, the older prefixes, such as (262) 542-xxxx were once (414) 542-xxxx. The numbers themselves did not change, only the area code, so there was absolutely no impact when the 262 area code since the area code you are in generally does not matter to you. Why not split area codes instead of overlay them? Everyone can keep their number and the area is still split. Geographically, area codes fail to have meaning if they are overlaid and, furthermore, they require 10 digit dialing, which is a huge pain from a rotary phone! ________________________________ ------------------------------ Message-ID: <pk3fdb$2ov$1@dont-email.me> Date: 4 Aug 2018 06:00:11 -0000 From: "Rob Warnock" <rpw3@rpw3.org> Subject: Re: Backup Power for Cox [or other] ISP [Telecom] bob prohaska <bp@www.zefox.net> wrote: +--------------- | 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? +--------------- Yes... and no. While many POTS lines are still directly connected to and powered by the CO [which usually has both batteries & backup generators], these days an increasing number of "POTS" lines are connected via remote concentrators (SLC/USLC/ISLCRCU/RLC): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subscriber_loop_carrier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_concentrator which power the "POTS" lines and in turn are powered by whatever power utility is local to the remote concentrator. Such remote concentrators (usually) contain *some* backup battery capability, but it is often woefully small compared to what is needed in a major power outage due to weather, fire, traffic accident, etc. Providing 6 hours or less of backup is not unusual. -Rob +--------------------------------------------------------------+ Rob Warnock <rpw3@rpw3.org> 627 26th Avenue <http://rpw3.org/> San Mateo, CA 94403 ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Sun, 05 Aug 2018