🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <Cp7DGJ.BID@cwa.com>, Dan Murphy <dmurphy@cwa.com> wrote:
>In article <hageCow7tI.Ks@netcom.com> hage@netcom.com (Carl Hage) writes:
>=>tmh@darla.asd.sgi.com (Todd Hoff) writes:
>=>: Here's how i see the world (giving it a quick thought):
>=>: 
>=>[deleted]
>=>
>=>I think there are a number of issues which get easily mixed together.
>=>
>=>One issue is the continuous connection. There is a continuous copper
>=>wire from my house to the phone company, 
>
>Highly unlikely, these days, that you have a continuous copper loop to 
>the CO.  Your local loop probably terminates in your neighborhood, is
>digitized, and is multiplexed onto a T1 (possibly over fiber) to the CO.  
>In the future, concentration (blocking) at rates as high as 10:1 will be
>engineering into the network in the neighborhood, instead of in the CO.   
>This means if everyone went offhook simultaneously, only 10% would get
>dialtone.
On what do you base this?  It is my impression that the vast majority
of service in the bay area is in fact direct to their wire center (which
is usually a CO).  It is changing and that change is likely to accelerate
but I think its much more likely to have copper to the WC at the moment.

Keeping whatever part of a line that is dedicated to you, busy is not a problem
but since the phone company uses a circuit switching net not a pakcet switching
one, the only way to do that is to keep a path open to some other site and
that is what causes the problem.  Hopefuly future generations of switches
will be able to support both models.  It would be interesting to find if such
facilities exist in PacBells fiber/cable system.
	-jrg
-- 
internet    jrg@galloway.sj.ca.us  John R. Galloway, Jr  795 Beaver Creek Way
applelink   D3413                  CEO...receptionist    San Jose, CA   95133
                                   Galloway Research     (408) 259-2490