Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 00:12:05 -0700 From: jallen@muddcs.cs.hmc.edu (Jeff R. Allen) Subject: Another Datapoint on 800 Debate Reply-To: Jeff Allen I have no firm opinion on the 800 thing, though it seems a pity to lose the attractive value of guaranteed-free numbers, but here's another datapoint: Apparently the 800 charging has been going on long enough for our college to get burned by it. We use ATT ACUS, a campus long-distance system where we dial a number a bit like a calling-card number after every billable call to make it go through. This way, two roommates don't need to figure out who's call is who's, and you can call long-distance from any phone on campus, even semi-public ones, like ones in labs. Anyway, beginning this year, all numbers to area code 800 (which used to go through with no difficulty) require an access code, just like long-distance has always been. This is so that in the cases where there is a charge, an account can be charged. It was explained to us that this was as a result of our college and others like ours taking baths for several thousands of dollars in the last year. _Someone_ had to pay the bills, and without an account number to bill, the school is left holding the bag. Jeff R. Allen semi-Senior CS major (fnord) South 351d, x4940 ------------------------------ From: tyton@crl.com (William M Davis) Subject: What is Cloud Management System? Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 14:13:06 GMT Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access I am wondering if anyone has a definition for the term Cloud system as it pertains to tel/data communications? This term was mentioned, as I was told, by AT&T negotiators in meeting with CSX (railroad) as the system by which they would manage CSX's communication needs. Anyone got any ideas? Mike Davis tyton@crl.com ------------------------------ From: davidt4044@aol.com (DavidT4044) Subject: DSU/CSU Survey Date: 19 Dec 1994 22:05:21 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Has anyone got any hands on experience with any of the following DSUs/CSUs: 1) ADC Kentrox T1 IDSU, 2) AT&T Paradyne 3161 or 3160 integrated DSU/CSU, 3) TxPort 3000 or 3001 integrated DSU/CSU? I've done a desk-top market survey on about 16 DSUs/CSUs and theses come out the best for the features and capabilities I need. I'd be interested in knowing if anyone has used these or a combination and how well they work together. I'm also interetsed on how well the SMNP feature works and if these DSUs/CSUs are easy to configure and set up. Thanks, Dave Thaggard DavidT4044@aol.com ------------------------------ From: kwright@evansville.net (J Kirk Wright) Subject: Looking For a Home System Date: 19 Dec 1994 23:42:44 GMT Organization: World Connection Services I am interested in a home system that will page & intercom w/ hands free reply. I want a fairly attractive phone, not one that looks like in belongs in an office. So far I have found a Panasonic KXT2180 -- one line, spearkerphone, max eight extensions, one touch intercom buttons - - for about $120 per phone. Does anyone know anything about this phone? Does anyone have any other options? J Kirk Wright ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 15:37:00 GMT From: Paul A. Lee Organization: Woolworth Corporation Subject: Re: T1 + Ethernet -> Fiber In TELECOM Digest Volume 14 Issue 457, Joseph H Allen wrote (in part): > In article , John Rice > wrote: >> In article , jhallen@world.std.com >> (Joseph H Allen) writes: >>> ... we are installing a cable between two sites. Currently, this cable >>> will contain a fiber pair for linking two lans together and 75- pairs of >>> copper for the PBX. >> ... don't limit yourself to 1 fiber pair and 75 copper pairs. A year >> or three down the road, you'll be kicking yourself. Compared to the >> installation costs, the cost of the cable is not significant. Put in >> 6-12 fiber pairs and 300-600 copper pairs. > Actually the 75 pair cable already has expansion space. I think we > only need around 45 or so. We are planning on only 2 pairs of fiber, > so I'll look into more. The cable we're supposed to get has only one > pair in it: we're planning on running two seperate cables for the 2 > pairs. I'm not sure why we're not getting one cable with several > pairs in it (that's what the phone contractor recommended): perhaps > they cost more than two seperate cables? It's possible the two smaller cables could cost less than one larger, expecially in a hybrid (fiber + copper) construction. Smaller cable sizes can also save on labor costs in a ducted installation by being easier to handle. > Also there are going to be 9 manholes along the trench, so installing > more cables later may not be that big of a deal. Sounds like a ducted installation, so adding cables later will be much easier, but still costly. The duct is a wise investment. How much cable capacity you provide in the initial installation requires a careful analysis of growth rate versus installation cost and the cost of financing excess capacity. > We already rent 8 or so "local loops" for about $15 each per month. > To upgrade to 45, rental would be $8000 a year. I think it would be > cheaper to rent T1s, but then we need expensive multiplexing equipment > as well. With the private cable you're installing, you of course won't have to rent any telco facilities for connecting your two sites. And, with the right PBX onfiguration, you won't need any mux equipment, either. The mux/demux functions, and possibly even the fiber or T1 interfacing (driver/receivers, DSU/CSU functions, etc.) should be part of the PBX. > The phone system itself is supposed to cost around $50,000. I'm still curious about the phone system model and configuration. You might able to gain a lot of PBX functionality *and* better handle the remote building link by investing more money in the PBX and less in cable and/or mux equipment. There are a few small PBXs that offer a fiberoptic, distributed architecture that would be ideal for your application. The Mitel SX-200 Light is one I've learned a little about. Tadiran's Coral ISBX has a fiber distributed shelf arrangement -- I know the switch but not so much about the fiber shelf. There may also be an economically feasible version of the NT Meridian. AT&T's Definity probably doesn't scale down to your size range with the fiber remote cabinet. There are probably others. >>> I plan on using these little $100 boxes which convert ethernet to >>> fiber and use some extra PCs w/linux as bridges. > Does anyone know about the boxes I'm mentioning here? I want to know > if they act like bridges: so that the ethernet length limit can be > exceeded. I would like to avoid buying expensive hubs if possible > (having a PC act as hub is what I'm planning on now, but if these > boxes do it anyway, all the better). At that price, they may be simple repeaters. They should do the trick, as long as you're not adding so many stations that you need to segment the LAN. I'm no LAN expert, though, so get some corroboration. >>> I would like to know if there are boxes which take both ethernet and >>> T1 (or whatever signal a pdx is likely to have) and multiplex them >>> together onto the fiber so that the copper cable is not needed. >> For PBX extensions, the economics of putting in mux/demux says copper >> is cheaper, until you get into the line capacity that justifies a >> remote switching equipment and trunking. > Yeah, that's what I gather. I think with all that copper we can get > away with a single PBX- although I don't know how digital/multi-line > phones are going to work. Many multiline/feature phone sets will work a 3000+ foot cable run, but some of them will need local supplemental power supplies. Look carefully at the costs for those power supplies, plus the cost of the multiple copper pairs versus one or two fiber pairs, plus the cost of protectors for the copper. >> At that point you'll be glad to have a copper pair to run a POTS >> line over for your modem. > Yeah, also it's good to have copper for any other simple signalling > application that might come along. When you're staying within a building, I'll agree that some extra copper pairs are good to have. Once you get outside, though -- even underground -- those copper pairs are as much an electrode into your communuications room as they are useful. > My biggest problem with copper is that I'm worried that it will only > exasperate our already serious lightning problem even further. We > usually lose an expensive 30 HP pump motor and several thousand > dollars worth of PBX pieces about once every two years. That's a very prudent and reasonable concern. If you consider the lightning problem to be a serious one, then you might want to rethink the copper- versus-fiber equation. Add in some costs for damaged equipment, downtime, lost business, and possibly even personal injury. Also add the cost for *effective* lightning protection -- as opposed to simple carbon or gas protectors -- which can come to around $5000 for both ends of 75 pairs. Paul A. Lee Voice 414 357-1409 Telecommunications Analyst FAX 414 357-1450 Woolworth Corporation CompuServe 70353,566 INTERNET <=PREFERRED ADDRESS* ------------------------------ From: pp002591@interramp.com (Neil Day) Subject: Looking For ATM Information Date: 20 Dec 1994 17:59:30 GMT Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link I'm interested in any information available about the performance of ATM networks. Specifically, typical point to point packet latencies and network performance degradation under heavy loads. I'm not a regular reader of this group, so responses via EMail to nmday@netcom.com would be appreciated. Thanks for any info you can provide! Neil ------------------------------ From: Jhupf Subject: Christmas Greetings From AT&T Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 00:45:36 EST Organization: News & Observer Public Access My son got a Christmas card from Ray Drake. Ray's return address is 295 Maple Avenue, Basking Ridge, NJ 07920! Hey isn't that the same address as AT&T Corporate Hq???? It sure is - Guess Old Ma Bell is renting rooms to make up for the loss of her monopoly! I don't know who Ray is and neither does my son -- but he sent him a a nice gift for Christmas, a check for $40! Now my son is one of those adult children who happened to return to our empty nest. He takes full advantage of his return to the nest including the use of MY telephone, he doesn't now have a phone he can call his own, nor for that matter has he ever been a customer of any phone company. But still Ray Drake in his generosity has decided to give him 40 bucks for Christmas -- hold on there are strings seems when the kid cashed the check he changed _MY_ LD carrier from MCI to AT&T! This annoyed me because I'm happy with MCI and don't want AT&T as my LD carrier! I call to get this put right and I find out that I'm stuck with AT&T for SIX MONTHS because of this marketing game they are playing and even though I did not change my carrier or even want it changed AT&T can come along and have someone else change it for me AND I'M STUCK! They told me it's legal, but I don't see how it can be, any opinions about this marketing strategy? I intend to stop in at MCI tomorrow and see if anyone there has an opinion about it! [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Try reading the fine print on the back side of the check Ray Drake sent your son. I think it says you agree to have AT&T as your carrier. Sorry, you lose, and happy holidays to you and your family and especially that son of yours. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Judith Oppenheimer Date: Tue, 20 Dec 1994 12:56:17 -0500 Subject: Seasons Greetings! To all who participate on these lists, who share support, advice, encouragement and friendship. What better place to say: Seasons Greetings, and Warmest Wishes for a Happy, Healthy and Prosperous New Year. Judith Oppenheimer Producer@Pipeline.com Interactive CallBrand(TM) The Brand: Awareness -> Image The CallBrand(TM): Awareness -> Interaction -> Revenue [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And the same to you! I am receiving many, many Christmas cards from Digest readers both in email and in the postal service. To all of you, my best wishes for a happy new year. I hope my new year will be a little better also. .... PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V14 #462 ******************************