🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5een2q$5q6@milkwort.bri.st.com>
           des@bristol.st.com "David Shepherd" writes:

> Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> : ANOTHER FARCE: Telewest Communications claim that "any call made between
> : two modems is exempt from the free local call scheme". (Made by a Customer
> : services representative to me on the phone). This BLATANTLY CONTRADICTS
> : their small print on brochures, etc, which says something like "not
> : including ISP's PoPs".

> No - the issue is that modem-modem calls of any nature tend to have 
> a much longer connect time - and if they are free there is no incentive
> to hang up. This skews all the usage patterns and is the problem that
> many US telcos (especially in the Bay Area) are having to deal with with
> long free local modem-modem calls taking a significant proportion of the
> local switching capacity. Note that the press release that announces
> it states
> 
> "Excludes .... and calls to Internet services"
> 
> Sadly the main answer to this may well be "caveat emptor".

Here it is definitely caveat vendor.  If Telewest writes that the 
exclusion is just for "Internet services" then they can be made to 
bear full responsibility for the correctness of that choice of 
words.  To say that these words mean all modem calls is bizarre and 
would also imply that fax's were excluded.  Just give them fair 
warning in writing and then go to the county court and request the 
form to file a Summons for a money damages.  When you fill in the 
form, make it clear that their bill is a breach of the agreement 
which *they* wrote and which you had accepted.

Regards,
-- 
   Tony - G3SKR / W2TG                   email: tgold@panix.com
                                                tgold@microvst.demon.co.uk
                                        packet: g3skr@n0ary.#nocal.ca.usa.na

Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

: HYPE: Telewest Communications claim they offer "free local calls to
: other Telewest Numbers [within certain hours, not including calls to ISP
: PoP's]".

: WHAT I DID: Changed my package to Teleplus 4 (free local calls, yeah!;
: bought a second line; teleworked from home when it was convenience to do so
: via Edinburgh University's dialup service, always making my calls during
: the "free call" times.

: FACT: Telewest Communications landed me a bill consisting of over 60
: POUNDS OF "FREE" CALLS. Another 60 POUNDS OF "FREE" CALLS waits for me on
: my next bill.

: WHY THE HELL?: Unbeknown to me, Telewest policy is only to add the
: Teleplus services (the free calls, etc) onto THE ORIGINAL LINE. The fact
: that Telewest FAILED UTTERLY to tell me this is completely arbitrary, it
: seems. (This was found out when I phoned up Telewest after receiving the
: bill.)

: SHOULDN'T YOU HAVE READ THE DETAILS ON THESE SERVICES?: They failed
: utterly to send me one scrap of paper which detailed how the Teleplus
: services worked, and what phone lines they applied to.

Not sure what you received but the letter introducing TelePlus that I 
received seemed to make it fairly clear that the free cable-cable calls
were a part of the combined TV+telephone package. You could argue that
they should have informed you that your second line was not covered
by this contract (effectively you will have one teleplus contract
which provides TV + 1 phone line and a second one for the other phone
line)

Also, arguably dialling into the the University is the sort of call
that they are trying to exclude from the free calls. The press release
on TelePlus states that the free calls excludes calls to "Internet
Services" and not just to a POP - i.e. if you used internet from your
dialin line then they may claim that that was not a qualifying call.

BTW, search for TelePlus on the telewest web site and read the
August 18th '96 press release that details the tarrifs. You say
you are on TelePlus 4 - TelePlus 5 is only GBP 5 per month more and
that includes a 2nd line which is almost certainly cheaper than
TelePlus 4 + 2nd line. You could take the line that you have clearly
been sold the wrong package.

: FACT: I have submitted a complaint in writing to Telewest Communications,
: Edinburgh. I await a response.

When I had problems with my original connection I found sending a 
lengthy fax provoked a response.

: ANOTHER FARCE: Telewest Communications claim that "any call made between
: two modems is exempt from the free local call scheme". (Made by a Customer
: services representative to me on the phone). This BLATANTLY CONTRADICTS
: their small print on brochures, etc, which says something like "not
: including ISP's PoPs".

: Apparently if you phone up a friend's computer, this call will be charged,
: even if you are eligible for free local calls, and your friend is too.
: What utter nonsense! This fails to be the case at the moment.

: For a COMMUNICATIONS company, Telewest seem to fail to realise the
: difference between a 14.4K modem bolted onto a 486 PC, and a full-blown T3
: modem-dialup Internet Service Provider!!! (This is the impression I get.)

No - the issue is that modem-modem calls of any nature tend to have 
a much longer connect time - and if they are free there is no incentive
to hang up. This skews all the usage patterns and is the problem that
many US telcos (especially in the Bay Area) are having to deal with with
long free local modem-modem calls taking a significant proportion of the
local switching capacity. Note that the press release that announces
it states

"Excludes .... and calls to Internet services"

Sadly the main answer to this may well be "caveat emptor".

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              david shepherd
 SGS-THOMSON Microelectronics Ltd, 1000 aztec west, bristol bs12 4sq, u.k.
        tel/fax: +44 1454 611522/617910  email: des@bristol.st.com      
      "whatever you don't want, you don't want negative advertising"

In article <Pine.SUN.3.95.970218210422.12679B-100000@k9.tardis.ed.ac.uk>,
Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

|> 
|> Apparently if you phone up a friend's computer, this call will be charged,
|> even if you are eligible for free local calls, and your friend is too.
|> What utter nonsense! This fails to be the case at the moment.
|> 
|> For a COMMUNICATIONS company, Telewest seem to fail to realise the
|> difference between a 14.4K modem bolted onto a 486 PC, and a full-blown T3
|> modem-dialup Internet Service Provider!!! (This is the impression I get.)

I'd have thought that it was 'calls to an ISP's PoP', in which case Embra
Yooni is your ISP and their dial-up service is the PoP. The modem speed,
type or protocol is irrelevant, you're making a call to an ISP's PoP.

In article <dam-1902971353310001@kerrera.dcs.gla.ac.uk>,
The Nit Nurse <dam@kerrera.dcs.gla.ac.uk> wrote:
>I'd have thought that it was 'calls to an ISP's PoP', in which case Embra
>Yooni is your ISP and their dial-up service is the PoP. The modem speed,
>type or protocol is irrelevant, you're making a call to an ISP's PoP.

So all the fine Edinburgh BBSi are now Internet providers now...
For sure!

-- 
(    _________________________________________
 \__/   lkindnes@csl.co.uk  2:259/7@fidonet   \_
 /  \_)-cultchy-nultchy-multhy-nithy-notlee-(_/

On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Kate Galloway wrote:

> On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, The Nit Nurse wrote:
> 
> > I'd have thought that it was 'calls to an ISP's PoP', in which case Embra
> > Yooni is your ISP and their dial-up service is the PoP. The modem speed,
> > type or protocol is irrelevant, you're making a call to an ISP's PoP.
> > 
> > 
> Telewest are unaware what is and what isn't a PoP.  Their records are out
> of date / inaccurate.  The know it is the Uni, they count it as a free
> call though.
> 

For a *telecommunications* company, who are trying to move into the
so-called information age by introducing cable networks, internet access,
cable-modems, etc, etc, etc, it is quite ironic that these people fail to
understand the technology involved. If anybody should understand these
things, it should be Telewest!

--
+=================================================+
| Alastair Roberts  ---  abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk      |
+=================================================+

Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

: On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Kate Galloway wrote:

: > On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, The Nit Nurse wrote:
: > 
: > > I'd have thought that it was 'calls to an ISP's PoP', in which case Embra
: > > Yooni is your ISP and their dial-up service is the PoP. The modem speed,
: > > type or protocol is irrelevant, you're making a call to an ISP's PoP.
: > > 
: > > 
: > Telewest are unaware what is and what isn't a PoP.  Their records are out
: > of date / inaccurate.  The know it is the Uni, they count it as a free
: > call though.
: > 

: For a *telecommunications* company, who are trying to move into the
: so-called information age by introducing cable networks, internet access,
: cable-modems, etc, etc, etc, it is quite ironic that these people fail to
: understand the technology involved. If anybody should understand these
: things, it should be Telewest!

The problem is not the technology (i,e. whether its ISP with internet
router at the other end or just a humble modem) the problem remains is
that modem connections do remain open for much longer than normal calls
*especially* if the call is free. In fact as it requires no action on
your part to keep a line open there is even probably an incentive not
to drop the line. Telcos in the US are having to spend millions of
dollars at the moment to increase their switching capacity because of
this.

The problem is that TW may have used a term that they thought people
might understand in adverts (i.e. "calls to internet services") and
which covers the bulk of this sort of call - however I suspect that in
the actual contract it may say something along the lines of the free
calls applying to voice calls only and not data.

BTW, the other tactic that some telcos have used in the US, I gather, is
to reduce the bandwidth on normal lines to something around 9600 rate
(which appears to be hardly noticeable on voice calls) and then require
people to upgrade to a data line which won't have free local calls if
they want to get a decent rate with a 28.8 modem etc.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              david shepherd
 SGS-THOMSON Microelectronics Ltd, 1000 aztec west, bristol bs12 4sq, u.k.
        tel/fax: +44 1454 611522/617910  email: des@bristol.st.com      
      "whatever you don't want, you don't want negative advertising"

In article <Pine.SUN.3.95.970220121654.24605B-100000@tardis.tardis.ed.ac.uk>, Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> writes:
> 
> For a *telecommunications* company, who are trying to move into the
> so-called information age by introducing cable networks, internet access,
> cable-modems, etc, etc, etc, it is quite ironic that these people fail to
> understand the technology involved. If anybody should understand these
> things, it should be Telewest!

Sorry for asking a quick spoddy question on what is a rather good rant-thread, but:

Speaking of cable modems and the like, I was wondering if anyone could explain
something to me.  I have heard that the telewest cable network is not completely
fibre optic (i.e. parts of it are made up of copper wire).  Now if parts of the
network are made of copper, how do Telewest plan to offer faster access speeds than
64kbps which is the theoretical maximum throughput on a copper wire?

-- 
Richard Morrell - CS Undergraduate, University of Edinburgh
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|Email: rcm@dcs.ed.ac.uk | WWW: http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/rcm/ |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------

On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:01:45 GMT, rcm@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Richard Morrell)
wrote:
<snip>

> Now if parts of the
>network are made of copper, how do Telewest plan to offer faster access speeds than
>64kbps which is the theoretical maximum throughput on a copper wire?

An aside: xDSL technologies can put 2-8Mb/s down copper.

However, cable modems won't be on the end of copper.

see: http://www.cablemodems.com/

        http://www.cablelabs.com/

for background info on cable modems.


-- 
________________________________________________________
phil henry ...

Richard Morrell wrote:
> 
> In article <Pine.SUN.3.95.970220121654.24605B-100000@tardis.tardis.ed.ac.uk>, Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> writes:
> >
> > For a *telecommunications* company, who are trying to move into the
> > so-called information age by introducing cable networks, internet access,
> > cable-modems, etc, etc, etc, it is quite ironic that these people fail to
> > understand the technology involved. If anybody should understand these
> > things, it should be Telewest!
> 
> Sorry for asking a quick spoddy question on what is a rather good rant-thread, but:
> 
> Speaking of cable modems and the like, I was wondering if anyone could explain
> something to me.  I have heard that the telewest cable network is not completely
> fibre optic (i.e. parts of it are made up of copper wire).  Now if parts of the
> network are made of copper, how do Telewest plan to offer faster access speeds than
> 64kbps which is the theoretical maximum throughput on a copper wire?

64kbps is not a magic physical limit for copper cables: it is the
quantum of digitisation inside the phone network. I.e. when you
call is converted to digital at the central office, it is done
at 64kbps, hence any attempt to drive signals faster than 64k
through the switched network will fail.

Copper can support much faster than 64k using xDSL technologies,
as can coax networks. The details differ (e.g. cable modems
modulate the digital signal onto a broadband carrier), but the
principles are similar: use the local cabling to carry a
high speed digital signal directly to an IP router bypassing
the switched phone network altogether.

Martin

P.S. It can get more confusing if you try to think about
the digital transmission network (SDH or PDH), as often
the same wires/fibres might be carrying the IP traffic
and the switched voice traffic!
-- 
Martin Baines - Telecommunications Market Consultant
Silicon Graphics, Arlington Business Park, Reading, RG7 4SB, UK

email:  martinb@reading.sgi.com     SGI vmail:  6-788-7842
phone:  +44 118 925 7842 fax: +44 118 925 7545
URL:    http://reality.sgi.com/martinb_reading/
Silicon Surf: http://www.sgi.com/International/UK/

In article <E5wMyy.I7w.0.staffin.dcs.ed.ac.uk@dcs.ed.ac.uk>,
rcm@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Richard Morrell) wrote:

|> In article
<Pine.SUN.3.95.970220121654.24605B-100000@tardis.tardis.ed.ac.uk>,
Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> writes:
|> > 
|> > For a *telecommunications* company, who are trying to move into the
|> > so-called information age by introducing cable networks, internet access,
|> > cable-modems, etc, etc, etc, it is quite ironic that these people fail to
|> > understand the technology involved. If anybody should understand these
|> > things, it should be Telewest!
|> 
|> Sorry for asking a quick spoddy question on what is a rather good
rant-thread, but:
|> 
|> Speaking of cable modems and the like, I was wondering if anyone could
explain
|> something to me.  I have heard that the telewest cable network is not
completely
|> fibre optic (i.e. parts of it are made up of copper wire).  Now if
parts of the
|> network are made of copper, how do Telewest plan to offer faster access
speeds than
|> 64kbps which is the theoretical maximum throughput on a copper wire?

64K isn't the maximum for copper. We're running ATM down Cat 5 UTP copper 
which has tested to in excess of 135Mbs and is currently running continuous
at 100Mbs. You're probably thinking of ISDN

On 20 Feb 1997, David Shepherd wrote:

> Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> 
> : On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Kate Galloway wrote:
> 
> : > On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, The Nit Nurse wrote:
> : > 
> : > > I'd have thought that it was 'calls to an ISP's PoP', in which case Embra
> : > > Yooni is your ISP and their dial-up service is the PoP. The modem speed,
> : > > type or protocol is irrelevant, you're making a call to an ISP's PoP.
> : > > 
> : > > 
> : > Telewest are unaware what is and what isn't a PoP.  Their records are out
> : > of date / inaccurate.  The know it is the Uni, they count it as a free
> : > call though.
> : > 
> 
> : For a *telecommunications* company, who are trying to move into the
> : so-called information age by introducing cable networks, internet access,
> : cable-modems, etc, etc, etc, it is quite ironic that these people fail to
> : understand the technology involved. If anybody should understand these
> : things, it should be Telewest!
> 
[snip]
> which covers the bulk of this sort of call - however I suspect that in
> the actual contract it may say something along the lines of the free
> calls applying to voice calls only and not data.

This is what started this entire farce: I don't have a contract which
mentions the new services, i.e. terms of conditions of free local calls,
etc!

--
+=================================================+
| Alastair Roberts  ---  abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk      |
+=================================================+

On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:01:45 GMT, rcm@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Richard Morrell)
wrote:

> 64kbps which is the theoretical maximum throughput on a copper wire?

Oh, according to *whose* *theory*?

-- 
Peter G. Strangman              | Wer weiss was die wohl glauben,
Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk      | Die uns zum Glauben schrauben?
http://www.adelheid.demon.co.uk |     (Friedrich von Logau)
XLIV-DCCCII-CCXII-DCCCXXXI      |

On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:43:23 GMT, phil.henry@telcore.demon.co.uk (phil
henry) wrote:

> An aside: xDSL technologies can put 2-8Mb/s down copper.
> 
> However, cable modems won't be on the end of copper.

Eh? What will they be on then?

All this talk of super-fast access is really  rather
amusing. Unless the cable co is going cache and/or
mirror *everything* that *any* user might wish to
access there is NO WAY that users are going to see
any benefit whatsoever.

In my office I have my own (unshared) 10 Mb link to
wherever it happens at our place, which in turn has
umpty-ump Mb's to the world.
Typical download speeds, using a WWW browser, are in
the hundreds of bytes per second and, more often than
not, in the low hundreds. 8-(

-- 
Peter G. Strangman              | Leser, wie gefall ich dir?
Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk      | Leser, wie gefaellst du mir?
http://www.adelheid.demon.co.uk |     (Friedrich von Logau)
XLIV-DCCCII-CCXII-DCCCXXXI      |

On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 21:34:35 GMT, mitre@netcomuk.co.uk (Mitre) wrote:

<snip>
>This same company will however be trying in the next year or so to
>sell cable modem lines running at 1-10MB/s. However if they can't
>withstand the traffic from 28.8 modems with their fibre optic lines
>then they shouldn't be in business.

But cable modem traffic is not switched through a PSTN switch.
<snip>

-- 
________________________________________________________
phil henry ...

On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 19:24:41 GMT, Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk (Peter G.
Strangman) wrote:

>On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:43:23 GMT, phil.henry@telcore.demon.co.uk (phil
>henry) wrote:
>
>> An aside: xDSL technologies can put 2-8Mb/s down copper.
>> 
>> However, cable modems won't be on the end of copper.
>
>Eh? What will they be on then?

Not copper pairs. I believe they will use coax although fibre is
possible.


-- 
________________________________________________________
phil henry ...

phil henry wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 19:24:41 GMT, Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk (Peter G.
> Strangman) wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:43:23 GMT, phil.henry@telcore.demon.co.uk (phil
> >henry) wrote:
> >
> >> An aside: xDSL technologies can put 2-8Mb/s down copper.
> >>
> >> However, cable modems won't be on the end of copper.
> >
> >Eh? What will they be on then?
> 
> Not copper pairs. I believe they will use coax although fibre is
> possible.
> 
> --
> ________________________________________________________
> phil henry ...

The whole point of ADSL is that it does use the existing copper 
pairs that the telcos have already installed.  This means that 
to roll out ADSL they don't have to relay all the cables to your 
home, just stick an ADSL modem on each end of the cable (one in 
your home and one in the local exchange).  The other thing to note
is that it is Aysmetric, i.e ~6Meg down stream (depending on 
cable quality/length) for all those lovely web pages and 640k 
upstream for control information. Asymetric signalling gives you
better bandwidth because you have reduced crosstalk between the 
pairs.

if you want more info on this check out 
http://www.adsl.com/adsl_tutorial.html

stu

--
In case you haven't guessed the opinions expressed here are my own
and have no reflection on my employer.

Mitre <mitre@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
: >The problem is not the technology (i,e. whether its ISP with internet
: >router at the other end or just a humble modem) the problem remains is
: >that modem connections do remain open for much longer than normal calls
: >*especially* if the call is free. In fact as it requires no action on
: >your part to keep a line open there is even probably an incentive not
: >to drop the line. Telcos in the US are having to spend millions of
: >dollars at the moment to increase their switching capacity because of
: >this.

: This same company will however be trying in the next year or so to
: sell cable modem lines running at 1-10MB/s. However if they can't
: withstand the traffic from 28.8 modems with their fibre optic lines
: then they shouldn't be in business.

Cable modems, I believe, use the the cable rather like an ethernet with
the total bandwidth being shared by whoever is connected. This will be
connected at the cable head end by dedicated equipment installed for
this. Also a cable modem session will, I think, only be using bandwidth
when actually transfering data - and any bandwidth problems will be
limited to this and not affect normal telephony calls.

Modem connections route out into the same switching infrastructure as
used by normal telephone calls. A modem session ties up one line 
through that switch for the entirity of the connection. This is the key
difference.

I expect that TW would be quite happy for someone to leave a cable
modem connection up semi-permantently which was idle for most of the
time as it is not consuming any resources. However keeping a modem
connection open semi-permanently is definitely reducing the swicthing
bandwidth by 1 line.

People switching the cable for phone services expect that when they
pick up their phone they get a dial tone and can make a call. There are
areas in the US where, I've read, this is now no longer always  the
case as the increase in calls and call durations due to  people having
long modem sessions on free local calls means that the switching
capacity that was sufficient for call patterns 2 or 3 years ago is no
longer sufficient. As a result millions are being spent increasing this
and this cost clearly will be passed on to the consumer.



-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              david shepherd
 SGS-THOMSON Microelectronics Ltd, 1000 aztec west, bristol bs12 4sq, u.k.
        tel/fax: +44 1454 611522/617910  email: des@bristol.st.com      
      "whatever you don't want, you don't want negative advertising"

Peter G. Strangman <Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:43:23 GMT, phil.henry@telcore.demon.co.uk (phil
: henry) wrote:

: > An aside: xDSL technologies can put 2-8Mb/s down copper.
: > 
: > However, cable modems won't be on the end of copper.

: Eh? What will they be on then?

: All this talk of super-fast access is really  rather
: amusing. Unless the cable co is going cache and/or
: mirror *everything* that *any* user might wish to
: access there is NO WAY that users are going to see
: any benefit whatsoever.

I think this (and the general commercialisation of the internet) will
lead to the growth of "content providers" who will push info etc directly
to the cable modem operators server allowing access to be done at
the cable modem speed. I.e. while there will be access to the full
interent there will be fast access to say news services etc with
the content providers probably being paid by the cable company out
of modem rental. In fact it will probably end up like the front end
of something like CompuServe or AOL with a set of "local" forums etc
+ a gateway into the rest of the internet however it will probably be
more seamless as everything will be part of the internet - just some
bits will be considerably closer than others.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              david shepherd
 SGS-THOMSON Microelectronics Ltd, 1000 aztec west, bristol bs12 4sq, u.k.
        tel/fax: +44 1454 611522/617910  email: des@bristol.st.com      
      "whatever you don't want, you don't want negative advertising"

On Fri, 21 Feb 1997 07:13:19 GMT, phil.henry@telcore.demon.co.uk (phil
henry) wrote:

> But cable modem traffic is not switched through a PSTN switch.
> <snip>

But it will go to the same cabinet and thence via the
same fibre which carries *all* the traffic to that
cabinet.

-- 
Peter G. Strangman              | Wer weiss was die wohl glauben,
Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk      | Die uns zum Glauben schrauben?
http://www.adelheid.demon.co.uk |     (Friedrich von Logau)
XLIV-DCCCII-CCXII-DCCCXXXI      |

On Fri, 21 Feb 1997 09:35:14 +0000, Stuart Carmichael
<stuartc@europe.shiva.com> wrote:

>phil henry wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 19:24:41 GMT, Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk (Peter G.
>> Strangman) wrote:
>> 
>> >On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:43:23 GMT, phil.henry@telcore.demon.co.uk (phil
>> >henry) wrote:
>> >
>> >> An aside: xDSL technologies can put 2-8Mb/s down copper.
>> >>
>> >> However, cable modems won't be on the end of copper.
>> >
>> >Eh? What will they be on then?
>> 
>> Not copper pairs. I believe they will use coax although fibre is
>> possible.
>> 
>> --
>> ________________________________________________________
>> phil henry ...
>
>The whole point of ADSL is that it does use the existing copper 
>pairs that the telcos have already installed.  This means that 
>to roll out ADSL they don't have to relay all the cables to your 
>home, just stick an ADSL modem on each end of the cable (one in 
>your home and one in the local exchange).  The other thing to note
>is that it is Aysmetric, i.e ~6Meg down stream (depending on 
>cable quality/length) for all those lovely web pages and 640k 
>upstream for control information.
>
>if you want more info on this check out 
>http://www.adsl.com/adsl_tutorial.html

The main topic was cable operators and cable modems.

However, there seems to be little news of ADSL work
in the UK. I believe a number of US telcos are trialling
ADSL and US West (?) and SBC are rolling it out this year.
As ever, 'telecomms words' are full of dreams, or
marketing hype. 

I believe ADSL is posing all kinds of problems for telcos
related to cost, wrong kind of pairs already deployed,
network management, business processes,
network archtitecture,  accommodation etc.   



-- 
________________________________________________________
phil henry ...

On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:01:45 GMT, rcm@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Richard Morrell)
happened to mention:


>Speaking of cable modems and the like, I was wondering if anyone could explain
>something to me.  I have heard that the telewest cable network is not completely
>fibre optic (i.e. parts of it are made up of copper wire).  Now if parts of the
>network are made of copper, how do Telewest plan to offer faster access speeds than
>64kbps which is the theoretical maximum throughput on a copper wire?
>
Bzzzzzt!  What about 10BaseT Ethernet, that's 10Mbps.  Copper will
happily go to 100Mbps (TPDDI, 100BaseTX and FX etc.,) and engineers
are near completing Gigabit-per-second transmission speeds for
commercial use.  Distances can be a bit limited but for use
in-building it is no problem. BT have been delivering E1 (2Mbps) down
copper for over a decade!    Also, inevitably, a signal travelling
over fibre will eventually end up on copper (albeit of the plated on a
PCB variety).

Rgds

| Danny Thompson                                                  |
|              It's a Bird, innit!. It's a bloody sea bird......  |
|              .. it's not any bloody Flavour.   Albatross!       |
| http://www.bantam.demon.co.uk                                   |

In article <33113552.94400560@news.demon.co.uk>,
dat@bantam.demon.co.uk (Danny Thompson) wrote:

>Copper will
>happily go to 100Mbps (TPDDI, 100BaseTX and FX etc.,) 

Firewire takes that up to 300Mb/s...

David Shepherd (des@bristol.st.com) wrote:
: Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
: 
: : On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, Kate Galloway wrote:
: 
: : > On Wed, 19 Feb 1997, The Nit Nurse wrote:
: : > 
: : > > I'd have thought that it was 'calls to an ISP's PoP', in which case Embra
: : > > Yooni is your ISP and their dial-up service is the PoP. The modem speed,
: : > > type or protocol is irrelevant, you're making a call to an ISP's PoP.
: : > > 
: : > > 
: : > Telewest are unaware what is and what isn't a PoP.  Their records are out
: : > of date / inaccurate.  The know it is the Uni, they count it as a free
: : > call though.
: : > 
: 
: : For a *telecommunications* company, who are trying to move into the
: : so-called information age by introducing cable networks, internet access,
: : cable-modems, etc, etc, etc, it is quite ironic that these people fail to
: : understand the technology involved. If anybody should understand these
: : things, it should be Telewest!
: 
: The problem is not the technology (i,e. whether its ISP with internet
: router at the other end or just a humble modem) the problem remains is
: that modem connections do remain open for much longer than normal calls
: *especially* if the call is free. In fact as it requires no action on

Actually it's especially if the call is FIXED rate, or there is a 
minimum cost.

: your part to keep a line open there is even probably an incentive not
: to drop the line. Telcos in the US are having to spend millions of
: dollars at the moment to increase their switching capacity because of
: this.

In article <33113552.94400560@news.demon.co.uk>, Danny Thompson
<dat@bantam.demon.co.uk> writes
>On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:01:45 GMT, rcm@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Richard Morrell)
Think about it do you own a TV,what frequencys come down your co-ax?
between 650 & 800 meg.copper can carry up to 2gig.as my scanner
demonstrates.
waving
-- 
M Wright

The Nit Nurse wrote:
> 
> |> something to me.  I have heard that the telewest cable network is not
> completely
> |> fibre optic (i.e. parts of it are made up of copper wire).  Now if
> parts of the
> |> network are made of copper, how do Telewest plan to offer faster access
> speeds than
> |> 64kbps which is the theoretical maximum throughput on a copper wire?
> 
> 64K isn't the maximum for copper. We're running ATM down Cat 5 UTP copper
> which has tested to in excess of 135Mbs and is currently running continuous
> at 100Mbs. You're probably thinking of ISDN

Or, maybe, he's thinking of the ordinary PSTN line? Because that would
roughly be the limit on a PSTN line...

-- 
Predrag Balorda
BSc. Hons Computer Science Student at the University of North London. 

e-mail:
	University:
	piazza@soc.unl.ac.uk
	pb1@soc.unl.ac.uk
	hqc8balordp@unl.ac.uk
	Work:
	pele@redsnapper.net
	Home:
	pele@ezun123.ds.ulcc.ac.uk
	
voice/fax/data:
       (+44) 181 342 8653 (8N1)

On Tue, 25 Feb 1997 21:48:52 +0000, "0000 - Admin(000)"
<root@ezun123.ds.ulcc.ac.uk> wrote:

>The Nit Nurse wrote:

>> 64K isn't the maximum for copper. We're running ATM down Cat 5 UTP copper
>> which has tested to in excess of 135Mbs and is currently running continuous
>> at 100Mbs. You're probably thinking of ISDN
>
>Or, maybe, he's thinking of the ordinary PSTN line? Because that would
>roughly be the limit on a PSTN line...
 
This misconception is adequately corrected elsewhere in the thread.

From a pedantic standpoint: there is no such thing as a PSTN line.
There is a service called PSTN which runs over a line. Other services
can also run over the line.


-- 
________________________________________________________
phil henry ...

On Tue, 25 Feb 1997 21:48:52 +0000, "0000 - Admin(000)"
<root@ezun123.ds.ulcc.ac.uk> wrote:

> Or, maybe, he's thinking of the ordinary PSTN line? Because that would
> roughly be the limit on a PSTN line...

Perhaps you would care to justify that hypthesis 
> -- 
> Predrag Balorda
> BSc. Hons Computer Science Student at the University of North London. 

Obviously no comms related elements in the obtaining of
that degree.

-- 
Peter G. Strangman              | Wer weiss was die wohl glauben,
Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk      | Die uns zum Glauben schrauben?
http://www.adelheid.demon.co.uk |     (Friedrich von Logau)
XLIV-DCCCII-CCXII-DCCCXXXI      |

0000 - Admin(000) wrote:
> 
> The Nit Nurse wrote:

> > 64K isn't the maximum for copper. We're running ATM down Cat 5 UTP copper
> > which has tested to in excess of 135Mbs and is currently running continuous
> > at 100Mbs. You're probably thinking of ISDN
> 
> Or, maybe, he's thinking of the ordinary PSTN line? Because that would
> roughly be the limit on a PSTN line...

It depends on the technology.  ADSL will let you run 7 MB/sec.
over 75%+ of North American loops, and probably even a higher
percentage in Europe.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer   Technical Marketing Manager, Diamond Lane
Communications
email: cramer@dlcc.com web page: http://www.cs.sonoma.edu/~cramerc
Opinions are strictly my own; DLCC doesn't pay me for non-technical
opinions.

On Mon, 24 Feb 1997 15:25:50 +0000, M Wright
<martin@dellman.demon.co.uk>  happened to mention:

>In article <33113552.94400560@news.demon.co.uk>, Danny Thompson
><dat@bantam.demon.co.uk> writes
>>On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:01:45 GMT, rcm@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Richard Morrell)
>Think about it do you own a TV,what frequencys come down your co-ax?
>between 650 & 800 meg.copper can carry up to 2gig.as my scanner
>demonstrates.
>
That's analogue and that's cheating :-)


| Danny Thompson                                                  |
|              It's a Bird, innit!. It's a bloody sea bird......  |
|              .. it's not any bloody Flavour.   Albatross!       |
| http://www.bantam.demon.co.uk                                   |

phil henry wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 21 Feb 1997 09:35:14 +0000, Stuart Carmichael
> <stuartc@europe.shiva.com> wrote:
> 
> >phil henry wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 19:24:41 GMT, Peter@adelheid.demon.co.uk (Peter G.
> >> Strangman) wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:43:23 GMT, phil.henry@telcore.demon.co.uk (phil
> >> >henry) wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> An aside: xDSL technologies can put 2-8Mb/s down copper.
> >> >>
> >> >> However, cable modems won't be on the end of copper.
> >> >
> >> >Eh? What will they be on then?
> >>
> >> Not copper pairs. I believe they will use coax although fibre is
> >> possible.
> >>
> >> --
> >> ________________________________________________________
> >> phil henry ...
> >
> >The whole point of ADSL is that it does use the existing copper
> >pairs that the telcos have already installed.  This means that
> >to roll out ADSL they don't have to relay all the cables to your
> >home, just stick an ADSL modem on each end of the cable (one in
> >your home and one in the local exchange).  The other thing to note
> >is that it is Aysmetric, i.e ~6Meg down stream (depending on
> >cable quality/length) for all those lovely web pages and 640k
> >upstream for control information.
> >
> >if you want more info on this check out
> >http://www.adsl.com/adsl_tutorial.html
> 
> The main topic was cable operators and cable modems.
> 
> However, there seems to be little news of ADSL work
> in the UK. I believe a number of US telcos are trialling
> ADSL and US West (?) and SBC are rolling it out this year.
> As ever, 'telecomms words' are full of dreams, or
> marketing hype.
> 
> I believe ADSL is posing all kinds of problems for telcos
> related to cost, wrong kind of pairs already deployed,
> network management, business processes,
> network archtitecture,  accommodation etc.
> 
> --
> ________________________________________________________
> phil henry ...

I read somewhere that ADSL will also be virtually impossible in the UK
until BT allows people access to its cables to put the ADSL signal onto
the line (as I understand it ADSL stuff is added onto the line before
the POT exchange gets hold of it, and so the ADSL signal doesn't
penetrate the old LOT exchange.

-- 
Andrew J. Pattison
app@dcs.ed.ac.uk
WWW: www.ed.ac.uk/~app

In article
<Pine.SUN.3.95.970220121654.24605B-100000@tardis.tardis.ed.ac.uk>,
Alastair B Roberts <abr@tardis.ed.ac.uk> writes:
>
> ...something to me.  I have heard that the telewest cable network is not completely
> fibre optic (i.e. parts of it are made up of copper wire).  Now if parts of the
> network are made of copper, how do Telewest plan to offer faster access speeds than
> 64kbps which is the theoretical maximum throughput on a copper wire?

I think what you don't understand is that this limit assumes a simple
keyed digital signal.  Modern modems split the bandwidth into a
collection of channels with different combinations of amplitude and
phase differences, and the signal is sent down these channels in
parallel, and each channel can be filtered out at the other end.  This
enables them to transmit at much higher bit rates than your 'theoretical
maximum'.

Dave.

Ive got a Big  brown sofa for sale. Its in good nick and comes with two 
big brown seats of the same style. In fact I've just realised its a 3 
piece suite. If you need such an item please come and see and then make 
me an offer.

Callum Gray
12 Viewforth top right 
Bruntsfield 
Edinburgh
0131 622 0023

Optical Flow Systems <ga86@dial.pipex.com> wrote:

> Ive got a Big  brown sofa for sale. Its in good nick and comes with two 
> big brown seats of the same style. In fact I've just realised its a 3 
> piece suite. If you need such an item please come and see and then make 
> me an offer.

Is it analogue or digital, and does it come with a connection?

Jon (from uk.telecom)
-- 
Work: jonsg@harlequin_co_uk << CHANGE '_'s | http://www.harlequin.co.uk/
Private: jonsg@pobox_com    << TO '.'s!    |    http://pobox.com/~jonsg/
PGP key available on request -=- Opinions stated may not be Harlequin's! 
Junk email utterly unwelcome.  See http://pobox.com/~jonsg/junkmail.html

Dear Jon S Green 

I had alook underneath it to see if it had a connector or some sort but 
all there was was a dessicated apple and an ancient used prophylactic. 

Its quite old so I imagine its analogue.

On Fri, 21 Mar 1997 12:46:44 -0800, Optical Flow Systems
<ga86@dial.pipex.com> wrote:

>Dear Jon S Green 
>
>I had alook underneath it to see if it had a connector or some sort but 
>all there was was a dessicated apple and an ancient used prophylactic. 
>
>Its quite old so I imagine its analogue.

Probably Vodafone.

-- 
________________________________________________________
phil henry ...

Optical Flow Systems <ga86@dial.pipex.com> wrote:

> Dear Jon S Green 
> 
> I had alook underneath it to see if it had a connector or some sort but 
> all there was was a dessicated apple and an ancient used prophylactic. 

So what you're telling me is, it used to have an active connection at
one time, but the connection was withdrawn after it expired, and you got
your deposit back.

Jon (from uk.telecom)
-- 
Work: jonsg@harlequin_co_uk << CHANGE '_'s | http://www.harlequin.co.uk/
Private: jonsg@pobox_com    << TO '.'s!    |    http://pobox.com/~jonsg/
PGP key available on request -=- Opinions stated may not be Harlequin's! 
Junk email utterly unwelcome.  See http://pobox.com/~jonsg/junkmail.html

Optical Flow Systems wrote:
> 
> Dear Jon S Green
> 
> I had alook underneath it to see if it had a connector or some sort but
> all there was was a dessicated apple and an ancient used prophylactic.
> 
> Its quite old so I imagine its analogue.

Which is analogue?  The sofa or the prophylactic?