🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4blbh1$2rk@dec-alpha.fred.net>,
daleg@fred.net (Dale Ghent) wrote:

  > Doug Humphrey (doug@ss2.digex.net) wrote:
  > : >What is the determining factor as to whether or not incoming lines
are
  > : >analog or multiplexed and require a SLC96?
  > 
  > : The telephone company is the sole determining factor - the customer
  > : orders "a phone line" and not "a phone line on copper" or "a phone 
  > : line on SLC96/fiber".  The telephone company then provisions the 
  > : line however they wish, and the customer has absolutely no say in 
  > : this.
  > 
  > Doug is right. With the experience I have had with BA so far, they
choose 
  > the most practical route for them to install 2000 phone lines. If BA
had 
  > to install anything over 100 lines like they do in a house, adding the 
  > lines wire by wire, then it would basically turn into a big copper
mess. 
  > It is far more easier to bring in a few single-mode fibre lines than it

  > is to bring in thousands of copper lines to a customer such as Digex
and 
  > other ISPs for that matter. Think about it.  Besides, an OWC-3 fibre 
  > cabinet more flexable then anything else IMHO.

Way cool, but not right.  As Paul Heller just mentioned, he had 200 new
lines brought in and they (TPC) elected to bring in copper, not fiber.  The
deciding factor was that the nearest fiber connection was over a mile or
two away, and they didn't want to string new fiber into his neighborhood
just to give him a within-a-mile connection point.

He had his problems with the connections, but it wasn't "a big copper
mess," it was more of a "big silicon mess," as I understand it, with TPC
mis-connecting a lot of lines, mis-administering the billing, and doing
some screwy things with rollover.  I think that was all central office
SNAFU, and that the actual cabling process went (within limits) acceptable.



    "Nobody has a 'Bruce Ediger' quote in their .sig - not even me."
            -- Bruce Ediger