---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <B3CA7926-1BCC-40A9-913D-64B4E58E8D9A@roscom.com> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 23:17:13 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: As More Devices Board Planes, Travelers Are Playing With Fire As More Devices Board Planes, Travelers Are Playing With Fire By Christine Negroni The batteries in phones and laptops pose fire hazards, and experts caution that the odds could catch up with the air-traveling public. The Federal Aviation Administration, citing fire hazards, has warned against using Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphones on aircraft. Three Australian airlines and the German carrier Lufthansa have outright banned their use onboard. But the threat of airliner fires is not limited to Samsung devices, which the company has offered to replace. And the hazard is far more than theoretical. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/business/as-more-devices-board-planes-travelers-are-playing-with-fire.html ------------------------------ Message-ID: <nr44it$96s$1@dont-email.me> Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 13:34:23 -0400 From: Fred Goldstein <fg_es@removeQRM.ionary.com> Subject: Re: Alternatives to AT&T DSL service On 9/9/2016 10:02 PM, bob prohaska wrote: > Fred Goldstein <fg_es@removeqrm.ionary.com> wrote: >> which is precisely why "net neutrality" is a thing. Internet service >> itself was never tariffed. Now, the DSL wire itself is treated as if it >> were Internet service, even though it isn't. > > Suppose I have a copper pair connected to a CO-powered phone. It sounds > as if my carrier (AT&T) is obliged to share this copper with any ISP I > designate. Is this correct? No. You have no rights at all. ISPs have essentially no rights to use the AT&T network either. That has been the case for over a decade, as the FCC's War on ISPs shut them down by the thousands. The wire is AT&T's to use as they wish. The fact that it was installed as a monopoly utility that was meant to be regulated and open to all is, well, just a joke to them. "Hahaha, they win." Technically, CLECs (not ISPs) have the right to lease some ILEC copper loops, which they can use to provide DSL to ISPs (usually their own). But that only works for a clean, not-too-long copper pair that homes at the CO itself. And it's fairly hard to do, though maybe a few million such Unbundled Network Element Loops still exist around the country. > If I relinquish the analog copper service, by going to U-verse or something > equivalent, do I then lose the right to ask AT&T to share the copper pair > with other ISPs? Can I get the right back, perhaps by paying for reinstallation > of an analog service line? What the rules call for and what works in practice are two different things. AT&T takes a very hard line, refusing what look like legal requests, based on their having more lawyers and infinite time and money to resist. And they are essentially never penalized for flouting the rules. In theory, a copper distribution sub-loop (the last mile starting at the subscriber end, ending somewhere in the field) is available for CLECs (not ISPs) to connect to, unbundled. But the logistics are hard. It's sort of like sending your own satellites into space on your own rocket. Yes, Elon Musk has managed to put together an operation that can do it, but it's not easy, and the financial viability of the whole scheme is questionable. And Musk didn't have to fight AT&T. ------------------------------ Message-ID: <nr4661$hs8$1@panix3.panix.com> Date: 11 Sep 2016 14:01:37 -0400 From: Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> Subject: Re: Alternatives to AT&T DSL service bob prohaska <bp@www.zefox.net> wrote: >Fred Goldstein <fg_es@removeqrm.ionary.com> wrote: >> which is precisely why "net neutrality" is a thing. Internet service >> itself was never tariffed. Now, the DSL wire itself is treated as if it >> were Internet service, even though it isn't. > >Suppose I have a copper pair connected to a CO-powered phone. It sounds >as if my carrier (AT&T) is obliged to share this copper with any ISP I >designate. Is this correct? Yes, but they are not obliged to share it with another POTS provider. >If I relinquish the analog copper service, by going to U-verse or something >equivalent, do I then lose the right to ask AT&T to share the copper pair >with other ISPs? Can I get the right back, perhaps by paying for reinstallation >of an analog service line? No. You will have traded in a tariffed service for which the telco has certain restrictions for an untariffed service for which they have no restrictions. >To put a sort of closure on my original question, after AT&T made their >changes to the "redback" edge routers in Sacramento my service has been >reasonably good. For the time being there's not enough incentive to change >to another ISP. At least, not yet.... If you change to another DSL ISP, they will be using AT&T's infrastructure, however when something goes wrong they will have to fight with AT&T on your behalf rather than leaving you to talk to the lowest grade of support representative in a desperate attempt to get them to take your problem seriously. The service itself will be the same, the hardware will be the same, but the support will not be. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Mon, 12 Sep 2016