🚀 go-pugleaf

David <drscott@accesscomms.com.au> wrote in message
news:3cd8f4fa$0$2523$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Nick Andrew <nick@zeta.org.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> writes

>>>> Fraid not. RJ11 usually called 6P4C, 6 positions, 4 conductors.
>>>> RJ12 is 6P6C, all 6 pins with wires connected to them.

>>> I think you're right here (after I did a google search...).

>> Yeah, the RJ numbering system is yet another example of something
>> thats completely outgrown its origins and the number itself leaves a
>> hell of a lot to be desired now. Thats why the 6P4C style system is
>> used now, much more useful. With RJ11 and RJ45 still used to
>> loosely describe 6 wide and 8 wide physical bodys.

> In the 1970's, AT&T and the FCC developed a system called
> USOC (Universal System Ordering Codes) which was/is a
> set of wiring specifications for terminating telephone lines.
> The USOC system uses RJ (Registered Jack) numbers to
> specify the WIRING of a jack/plug, not the actual jack type.

Yeah, thats what I meant, spelling out the detail more.

> Telecom Australia (now Telstra) developed a similar system
> (Specification 1222) of various MODES which refered to the WIRING
> of either 610 telephone sockets or 611 auxillary equipment sockets.

> Through common misuse, the RJ numbers became defacto names for
> the various US modular plug variants.  For example, using an RJ number to
> describe an actual plug variant is often confusing because different people
> use RJ11 to describe 4P4C, 6P2C and 6P4C plugs... none are correct!

Thats going too far. You cant claim that only the original is correct now.

> Same problem with Australian sockets, the 611 socket
> is often incorrectly refered to as a MODE-3 socket.

Sure.