31 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981

Add this Digest to your personal   or  

The Telecom Digest for May 5, 2013
Volume 32 : Issue 96 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Verizon phasing out copper (Pete Cresswell)
Re: Verizon phasing out copper (Pete Cresswell)
Re: Verizon phasing out copper (David Lesher)
Re: Verizon phasing out copper (Hal Murray)
Re: Verizon phasing out copper (Doug McIntyre)
Re: Verizon phasing out copper (John R Myers)
Re: Verizon phasing out copper (Doug McIntyre)
Re: The Shame of Boston's Wireless Woes (David Lesher)
Re: The Shame of Boston's Wireless Woes (David Scheidt)

====== 31 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 that person, or email address owner.
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of that address. 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: Sat, 04 May 2013 09:28:18 -0400
From: Pete Cresswell <PeteCress@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon phasing out copper 
Message-ID: <b43ao8p0npb3n5cqpjet7dgft1inddrsvf@4ax.com>

Per Bob Hofkin:
>A VZ tech told me that the department that supports copper had been
>merged in with the FiOS department. He said their goal is to get rid
>of all copper by the end of the year.

Might be a local thing.  I know people who are far enough out in the
boonies that running fiber to them would seem highly unlikely within the
year.
-- 
Pete Cresswell




Date: Sat, 04 May 2013 09:25:35 -0400
From: Pete Cresswell <PeteCress@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon phasing out copper 
Message-ID: <6r2ao81gjnhfndag6srhgvtk1agmf5n7qt@4ax.com>

Per Tom Metro:
>Anyone else received such a letter? Other than if you're still using
>DSL, any reason to hold on to copper?

One reason that comes to mind is continuity of service in the absence of
generator backup.

Another is the nuisance value/expense of having to replace that ONT
battery every couple of years.

I've got a little generator, so continuity is not an issue. But if I did
not have a generator, "Verizon is replacing telephone wires and removing
obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service reliability for our
customers." would come across as just another example of self-serving
corporate BS.
-- 
Pete Cresswell




Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 14:38:38 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon phasing out copper 
Message-ID: <km36he$27n$1@reader1.panix.com>

On 4/30/2013 22:29, Tom Metro wrote:

> Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in
> Newton [Massachusetts] saying "Verizon is replacing telephone wires
> and removing obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service
> reliability for our customers. To avoid future service interruptions
> we'll need to move your telephone service to our new fiber
> network. This will be done at no charge to you and you will keep the
> same voice service at the exact same price you're paying now."

{Hmm, I don't see this in my spool, but extracted from the Hofkin quote}

I must wonder if this is required or they are trying to trick you.
[I know, I know....]

I suggest a letter back demanding clarification. 

        Under what authority are they doing this?
        Am {I} required to submit?
        What will my DSL or equivalent service cost?
        How will my phone/data work without local power? [& mention Sandy]
        Who pays for the local power the ONT requires?

etc. Send the letter in certified to some big cheese.  CC: the
Mass PSC or equivalent...

I just got a "Rachael from Verizon" robocall telling me the same
thing.  I ignored her/it.

As for Hofkin's note: A friend with copper was out of service
for 4+ months as they could not dispatch anyone who understood
enough to fix it. They kept sending FIOS techs who looked askew
at it and left.




Date: Sat, 04 May 2013 01:17:57 -0500
From: hal-usenet@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Hal Murray)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon phasing out copper 
Message-ID: <1OednRx0nImINRnMnZ2dnUVZ_sadnZ2d@megapath.net>

In article <51844810.9050409@horne.net>,
 Tom Metro <tmetro+blu.remove-this@and.this.too.gmail.com> writes:

>So the old advice seem to be largely obsolete. (Regarding battery
>power, the ONT has a battery that lasts, I think, 8 hours. If you use
>a cordless phone, and even if you have the base plugged into a UPS (or
>have a rare model with a built-in battery), your phone will likely die
>in less than 8 hours. So practically speaking you aren't really any
>worse off.)

Some of us still use a non-fancy line powered phone.

Even if you normally use a fancy phone, you could keep an old one
in the closet for emergencies.

-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.




Date: Sat, 04 May 2013 09:15:23 -0500
From: Doug McIntyre <merlyn@dork.geeks.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon phasing out copper 
Message-ID: <x-KdnY23XIdmihjMnZ2dnUVZ_rednZ2d@giganews.com>

Tom Metro <tmetro+blu.remove-this@and.this.too.gmail.com> writes:
....<Verizon getting rid of their copper plant>...

>It seems unlikely they are still motivated by desire to escape sharing
>their copper infrastructure with their competitors. 

I don't know any CLEC that actively goes after any residential
accounts and resells over the ILEC cable plant. They either target
business only customers, or it is the cableco selling access over
their own network. 

The ILEC copper plant is definately becoming less and less relevant.

>I'd be curious to know what it is costing them to maintain their
>copper plant. It must be a money sink...  

It my experience, the weather beats on the copper plant like nothing
else, and deteriates it, especially here in Minnesota with our 
fairly extreme weather, snow, rain, hot sun, etc. Every spring/fall
I hear lots of complaints of degraded phone lines, static, cross talk, etc. 




Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 21:23:53 -0700
From: John R Myers <jmyers@n6wuz.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon phasing out copper 
Message-ID: <20130504042353.GA1299@eleven.n6wuz.net>

Tom Metro <tmetro+blu.remove-this@and.this.too.gmail.com> wrote:
> ... still using DSL, any reason to hold on to copper?

Way back when DSL first rolled into the neighborhood I signed up with
Verizon. Bad mistake, inept service, not at all reliable.

The company 'DSL Extreme' provides service over the Verizon copper so
I switched to them. The line drops occasionally but one call to DSL
Extreme resolves the problem. As often as not their outgoing
announcement advertises "widespread service outage in the following
Verizon service areas ...".

I have a static IP address from DSL Extreme. Verizon has no competitive
FIOS service. What is the value proposition?

-- 
Jack Myers / Westminster, California, USA
 
Aibohphobia: The fear of palindromes.




Date: Sat, 04 May 2013 09:20:02 -0500
From: Doug McIntyre <merlyn@dork.geeks.org>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Verizon phasing out copper 
Message-ID: <x-KdnYy3XIePhBjMnZ2dnUVZ_rcAAAAA@giganews.com>

Jack in TN <jack.remove-this@and-this-too.coats.org> writes:
.... <snip about VZ cutting out their copper plant> ..

>Alarm systems that use 'dark copper' or other dedicated circuits might have
>an issue.  But I don't know how much that is done anymore anyway.

Dry copper current loop alarms are pretty old tech, it hasn't been
preferred for many many years. Even in the last 12-15 years, it has
been more preferable to share a regular phone line for that.  But now,
more and more alarm systems use cell-phone technology. Either SMS
alerting, or even voice alerting over a cell call. 
Cell tech means no "phone lines to cut" by burglers. 

***** Moderator's Note *****

Since cellular units are easy to jam, most high-value installations
use simple transmitters which will transmit a usable signal even if a
cell-phone jammer is turned on.

Bill Horne
Moderator




Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 17:09:16 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: The Shame of Boston's Wireless Woes 
Message-ID: <km3fbr$puf$1@reader1.panix.com>

HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> writes:

>I can't help but suspect the traditional landline network can
>better accomodate an upsurge in traffic than the cell phone
>network.  For myself, in routine snow storm rush hours I've
>found cell phone service unavailable, while landlines worked
>just fine.

Cell voice is highly brittle. But there is no denying that
SMS is far better than any other current scheme in impaired
situations: it uses very little bandwidth, queues and retries
until it succeeds, and is ubiquitous.

Of course, it fails hard when no visible cell site has both
power and backhaul. 

I wonder, does any cellphone show you when your outgoing SMS has
not yet been delivered?

-- 
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433




Date: Sat, 4 May 2013 23:54:30 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Scheidt <dscheidt@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: The Shame of Boston's Wireless Woes 
Message-ID: <km473m$g0o$1@reader1.panix.com>

David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com> wrote:

:Cell voice is highly brittle. But there is no denying that
:SMS is far better than any other current scheme in impaired
:situations: it uses very little bandwidth, queues and retries
:until it succeeds, and is ubiquitous.

:Of course, it fails hard when no visible cell site has both
:power and backhaul. 

:I wonder, does any cellphone show you when your outgoing SMS has
:not yet been delivered?

Apple's iMessages, which is an SMS replacement, does; if the
recipient has opted in, it'll tell you if the recipient has read it as
well.  I expect others of the sms replacement tools that are popping
up do the same thing.  These are not as reliable as SMS, they use
data, and not the control channel, they're still pretty reliable, and
if the client side is good, they'll keep trying.  iMessages falls back
to SMS if the recipient isn't reachable over a data connection; no
delivery confirmation is available then.  

-- 
sig 68






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
339-364-8487
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) 2013 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 (9 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues