The Telecom Digest for September 24, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 256 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
====== 28 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 Patrick Townson 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: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 22:26:55 -0400
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Verizon now demanding surcharges to pay them...
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.64.1009212225410.1825@panix5.panix.com>
[Broadband reports]
FiOS users in our Verizon forums note that Verizon is now
charging users a $3.50 fee if they want to pay their bill
online with a credit card.
--------
http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/Verizon-Charges-350-Fee-To-Pay-Them-110433
- per the posters, the fee applies if you make a "once off"
payment. If you give VZ access to an autopay process,
they won't charge it.
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
***** Moderator's Note *****
Isn't Verizon still obligated to accept cash? If enough customers get
fed up and drop off their payments at the company, the surcharge will
stop.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: 22 Sep 2010 04:09:22 GMT
From: Doug McIntyre <merlyn@geeks.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: E1 alarms (LOS, LOF, AIS, RAI)
Message-ID: <4c998172$0$24411$8046368a@newsreader.iphouse.net>
Raph <raphael.benedet@netaxis.be> writes:
>I looked for a clear explanation of E1 alarms such as LOS, LOF, AIS &
>RAI on the Web but could not come up with anything detailed enough.
>Could anyone clearly explain me these 4 alarms? What they mean and
>when they are sent?
I'm not quite sure how to answer.
Doing a google on them would have given you what the acronyms stand
for in 1000's of places. Mostly its self-explanitory.
ie.
LOS = Loss of Signal. You aren't getting signal.
LOF = Loss of Framing. Your packets aren't getting through framed correctly.
AIS = receiving Alarm Indicator Signal. The far end isn't getting
things through framed correctly, and is indicating that back to you.
RAI = Remote Alarm Indicator. The far end is getting an error and is
signalling that back to you.
There's really not much more to it than that.
To solve almost all of them, mostly involve the telco, because most
CPE type gear is so reliable now-a-days. You can reboot the CPE and
see if it clears it. If not, its most likely in the telco or the line
somewhere.
Ie. if you get a LOS, check the cabling from the hand off. Possibly
put a hard loop at the CPE back to the telco. Ask the telco if they
see it. If not, have them come out to fix it.
If you are getting a LOF, check to make sure your framing
configuration is the same on both sides. If so, ask the telco to come
out and fix it. AIS, same thing (although I remember the olden days
when CSU/DSU's wedged up and gave blue alarms from time to time).
RAI can be considered the same as the AIS alarm.
Basicly, check to make sure your parameters are correct and involve
the telco to fix it. Verify the parameters with them, they should be
able to help you.
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 22:06:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: "www.Queensbridge.us" <NOTvalid@Queensbridge.us>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Verizon to add another surcharge on some bills
Message-ID: <ee614a16-1545-4b4e-b1dd-737ca13042b1@i17g2000vbq.googlegroups.com>
While on-line with Verizon to pay [my] bill with a credit card, I saw a
notice that there will soon be a $3.50 SURCHARGE for [using] a credit
card to pay bills on [the] VZ site.
I find it strange that I can buy items on-line for 99¢, pay with
Paypal, and pay PayPal using a credit card, without a surcharge, and
now VZ wants a surcharge.
Also their DSL, formerly listed as "up to 3 MBps", now says "1.5-3
MBps".
For people with a low monthly cellular bill, this could be a hefty per
centage of the bill.
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 06:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Heath Roberts <htroberts@gmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Outside plant standards (for transient protection on a consumer NID)
Message-ID: <e428dfc2-d754-4262-af75-b35508ac5450@q9g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>
So, I have a CAC 7600 NID on my house. The house was built in 2001, so
the NID is whatever vintage was common at the time.
I started getting bursts [of] noticable noise on the line about a
month ago, but not enough that I called to complain. When the line
stopped working entirely, though, I tried to determine whether [my
wiring was causing it]. This was confusing, because every time I
plugged into the RJ, my phone line (I have 3, but only one was bad)
worked, but when I connected the inside wiring, it stopped working. I
eventually realized that if I connected my inside wiring to the RJ in
the NID, things worked, but if I used the screw terminals, they
didn't.
I think the customer module in the NID--the little block of
electronics with a RJ-type disconnection mechanism that actually
terminates the wires coming from inside--was poorly designed, and
there were brass ring terminals crimped to the wires going from the
modular plug to the screws for the inside wiring. Those ring terminals
corroded through. I looked at the other two modules, and their
terminals were green with corrosion, too, but not yet actually broken.
So I called the phone company and explained the situation. The sent a
repair guy, but he showed up at 8:30am instead of his 1:00-4:00pm
'appointment' time, so I wasn't home to talk to him.
When I got home, I found a new NID, about five feet away from the
old one, with a few clamps holding some inside station wire from the
old to the new. All the modules had been removed from the old NID,
with UY2s connecting the buried wire to the station wire going to the
new NID. Inside the new NID was a single protector block. The other
two lines were just spliced to the inside wiring. The telco has closed
the repair order, so it's not a temporary thing until he can come back
for a permanent repair.
So, I was less than happy that he had drilled a bunch of new holes in
a stone foundation, but I'm even less happy that he left two lines
without transient protectors. I plan to call and to ask for whoever
manages outside plant in this area whether this meets their quality
standards, but I expect to get a run-around.
Is there some regulatory or industry standard that requires protectors
on every line?
Thanks,
Heath
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 (4 messages)
|
| |
or 