[Gllug] [slightly ot] ADSL config fun

[Chris Bell]

On Fri 20 Sep, Mark Lowes wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 09:01, John Winters wrote:
> > It's always puzzled me why they don't go the whole hog and just make the
> > connection ADSL, then piggy-back any required voice circuits over it.  I
> > have a point-to-point DSL connection and each of the DSL boxes has a
> > telephone socket on it in addition to the Ethernet one.  When I use the
> > telephone circuit it just steals about 48k from the data connection. 
> > You could easily piggy-back one permanent ISDN D channel over the ADSL
> > connection, then snaffle bearer channels as needed.
> 
> Possibly because ADSL is not 'reliable' yet, certainly based on the
> number of faults we get which require an engineer to either kick the
> DSLAM or go to the customer site to poke that end of things.  Whereas
> it's rare to hear of faults on the standard BT damp bits of copper
> service.
> 
>     Mark
> 
   I understand that one of the reasons why BT appear to have dragged their
feet in the past was the requirement that any telephone should work in an
emergency without any local power as long as the wires were still intact.
This is still true with most analogue phones even if they are normally mains
powered.
   Many of the lines I worked on were just that, a chain of bits of wire
joined together for a few days, often without line power or repeaters, so we
had to supply our own line power and ringer supplies, and needed to shout if
we were some distance from the other end. If we were very lucky there might
be some spare capacity at the local exchange to give us a standard phone as
well, but that cost a 1 year rental each time. We often had to search for
the end of the cable, left in a convenient hedge or tree. We usually have
our own PBX now, linked with a mobile phone unit, with the main output going
by satellite because it is cheaper to set up each time.

-- 
Chris Bell


-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug