Vonage vs. Verizon [was: Anyone had experience with Comcast SMC modem/router? ]

Tom Buskey tom at buskey.name
Thu Jan 18 09:05:16 EST 2007


On 1/17/07, Ben Scott <dragonhawk at gmail.com> wrote:

>   To say nothing of the redundancies in conventional POTS design
> (which really is, in general, some of the most robust engineering I've
> ever seen in the public sector).  (Emphisis POTS here -- anything more
> than -48 VDC talk battery and the whole story changes.)    Redundant
> in-building power wiring, redundant battery banks, generator backup
> for the batteries, dedicated line for each and every subscriber (pair
> gain not withstanding), no electronics anywhere for outside plant,
> auto failover for trunk routing, etc.  The infrastructure I've seen in
> most Internet provider systems can't hold a candle to it.  Obviously,
> any system can still fail, but for the most part, *none* of this
> exists for Internet service -- especially home Internet service.


Sadly, I doubt there are many systems engineered as well as the POTS
system.  Bell labs did a study on the effect of lightening on buried lines
even.  Now, they just bury the lines and deal with the consequences.

When I was at Genuity, I heard that the GTE phone switches in the basement
of one of the towers on 9/11 *kept working* until the batteries went dead.
Much of Manhatten's phone lines went through there.

Can your network survive the collapse of a building on top of it?

What other system is engineered for failure as well as the POTS stuff?
Railroad signaling?  Lunar Lander life support?  Fighter aircraft?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/private/gnhlug-discuss/attachments/20070118/99841eec/attachment.html


More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list