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