TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Dec 93 14:25:00 CST    Volume 13 : Issue 822

Inside This Issue:                        Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

   Combinet Users Mailing List (David E. Martin)
   Need Help With Ancient Western Electric 1A2 KSU (William L. Roberts)
   Information Wanted on Leewah Datacom Securities (Curtis Kundred)
   Is There a Good Cordless Headset Phone? (Lawrence D. Sher)
   Two Cellphones With Same Number - a Service? (Michael V. Murphy)
   Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted (John Landwehr)
   Cordless Phone Questions (Patricia A. Dunkin)
   ZEnith, ENterprise, Fred & Ethyl (David A. Kaye)
   Satellite Link Questions (Gerry Palmer)
   FAX Modem Needed For Disabled Worker (Charlie L. Eyster)
   Re: AC 520 for Arizona in March 1995 (Carl Moore)
   Re: Only Two "Operating" IXCs in DC (Mark Roberts)
   Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Bob Olson)
   Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk (Barry Lustig)
   Re: What Happened to "811" Numbers? (Paul Robinson)
   Re: 5ESS CentraNet Question (Russell Sharpe)
   Re: Wiring a New Home - Suggestions? (George Zmijewski)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks. Subscriptions are available at
no charge to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and
tell us how you qualify: [email protected].

The Digest is compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson Associates and
redistribution/cross-posting of articles herein to news groups such as
those distributed via 'Usenet' is prohibited unless permission is ob-
tained in writing. This does not apply to *authorized* redistribution
lists and sites who have agreed to distribute the Digest. All cross-
postings or other redistributions must include the full Digest intact
and unedited.

Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using
anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email
information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to
use the information service, just ask. You can reach us by snail mail
at Post Office Box 1570, Chicago, IL 60690 or Fax at 1-708-329-0572.

           -------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 10:45:41 CST
From: David E. Martin <[email protected]>
Subject: Combinet Users Mailing List


Combinet Users Mailing List

I have established a mailing list for discussions among users and
potential users of Combinet bridges.  The list is open to anyone. To
subscribe send e-mail to [email protected] with the single
line:

SUBSCRIBE

You will then be sent an acknowledgement and a list of instruction.  To
submit a message to the list send to [email protected].  It will be
reflected to all subscribers.  The list is not moderated.

I expect the list volume to be fairly low.  Some topics for discussion:
- use of NI-1 with Combinet bridges
- Combinet bridge security
- Interesting applications of remote bridging with Combinet
- Connection set-up times with Combinet bridges
- Anything else you want to disucss

Please contact me with questions or comments.


David E. Martin
HEP Network Resource Center                    Phone: +1 708 840-8275
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory            FAX: +1 708 840-8463
P.O. Box 500, MS 368; Batavia, IL 60510  USA  E-Mail: [email protected]

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (William L Roberts)
Subject: Need Help With Ancient Western Electric 1A2 KSU
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 15:09:09 GMT


I have an old mechanical relay 1A2 KSU installed at my home and a
slightly newer version which uses modular cards which I have salvaged
from an old building.  Can anyone point me to tech data concerning
configuring one or the other for such items a common ring, hold
circuit, etc.

It would also be helpful to have some information on the six-button
keysets which go with this system, particularly the differences in
their internal configuation with and without the added speakerphone.

Also, any thoughts on how a modem can be set up to provide A-A1
support for this sytem, possibly with some exclusion feature so
unsuspecting family members cannot inadvertently pick up the line in
use?

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Curtis Kundred)
Subject: Information Wanted on Leewah Datacom Securities
Date: 16 Dec 93 02:09:59 PST


Does anyone have information on a company Leewah Datacom Securities?
I am looking for anyone who might have worked with or for the company
and any information you might have on their products.  Please reply by
E-Mail to [email protected].


Curt

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Lawrence D. Sher)
Subject: Is There a Good Cordless Headset Phone?
Date: 16 Dec 1993 14:45:53 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN)


I know of only two cordless telephones that are headsets.  Both have a
belt pack for batteries, electronics, and buttons.  One is sold by
Hello Direct and has (at least) the fatal flaw that you cannot answer
calls using it alone.  The other is new from Radio Shack; it has no
local ringer, a very poor range (easing the problem of no local
ringer), and cuts off the connection in the presence of noise.

Are there any high-quality cordless headset phones?


Internet email: [email protected]
Larry Sher  US Mail: BBN, MS 6/5B, 10 Moulton St., Cambridge, MA 02138
Telephone: (617) 873 3426    FAX: (617) 873 3776

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (michael.v.murphy)
Subject: Two Cellphones With Same Number - a Service?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1993 23:37:17 GMT


I am looking for a way to have two different cellular phones use the
same number. Does any company offer this service? I would be willing
to pay more if only for the simplicity of having a number to give
out/remember.


Thanks,

mike m


[Moderator's Note: There are companies which say they will reprogram
your phones to do this, but note they are not service providers, just
hardware modification people. In the next message John Landwehr will
discuss this further.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (John Landwehr)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 93 17:35:00 -0600
Subject: Two Cellphones With Same Number? - Not Permitted


Ameritech and Cellular One in Chicago claim that you cannot have two
cellular phones with the same phone number.  (This would be a nice
feature if you have a car phone, and a handheld!  But they claim the
FCC doesn't approve. Translated -> they make more money this way).
Their suggestion is call forwarding and no-answer-transfer.

So what's the TELECOM Digest way around this?  Couldn't you reprogram
your second phone based on registration info stored on your first
phone?  Isn't this what those crooks are illegally doing by pulling up
next to you in a van full of electronic goodies to steal your registration
information as it goes over the air?

(And as a side note, did anyone get a copy of the Motorola Technical
Training Manual yet?)

'Inquiring minds want to  know...'


John Landwehr


[Moderator's Note: You can reprogram your cellular phone to anything
you like; that does not mean it will work when you try to transmit
with it. The catch is, the tower matches the ESN (electronic serial
number) of the phone -- over which you have NO control unless you are
really knowledgeable about working on the innards of the phone -- with
the 'phone number' of record for the instrument being used. If they
do not match, then service is denied. There are exceptions which have
been discussed here in the past. If you can change the ESN, and there
are people who know how to do it as a hardware mod for example, then
you are all set. You swap the ESN *and* the phone number, making the
two always match with cell company records and you are all set. The
trouble is, this defeats the fraud controls established by the carrier
and you have no one to blame but yourself if later on you get stuck
with a bunch of calls halfway around the world on your cellular bill.

I think it is too bad the cellular carriers insist on one or nothing
where the ESN is concerned. It seems like they could change that field
in their records to allow for two or three ESNs to all be valid per
'number'; that would offer a compromise between security and user
convenience.  Having two or three eligible ESNs for users who wanted
that many would still for all intents and purposes provide the same
level of security as exists now. The cell companies might want to have
users who request this sign off on something agreeing to accept
liability for some amount of fraud should it occur in order to protect
themselves. Naturally only the original ESN would be valid for calls
unless a second or third ESN was specifically entered in the records,
and I would probably hold the line at three; no one needs more than
that if that many.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 10:33 EST
From: [email protected] (Patricia A Dunkin +1 201 386 6230)
Subject: Cordless Phone Questions


1) On phones with several channels, is autoselect or do-it-yourself
preferable for the average user?  Autoselect sounds like a good idea,
but does it work as advertised, or are most people better off having
direct control over which channel is in use?

2) My sister's family has been noticing an increase in the amount of
crosstalk they get.  The last straw was overhearing a conversation
that sounded as clear as a normal telephone connection.  When she
called U.S. West, they said cordless phones (not her corded phone, but
other people's cordless phones) were probably causing the trouble.
This was not much help to her.  Is there anything she can do, or can
get U.S. West to do?


Thanks,

Pat Dunkin ([email protected])


[Moderator's Note: Cordless phones are becoming so common and widely
accepted that those ten channels allocated for their use around 46.6
mhz are pretty busy in some areas. Perhaps the cordless phone
manufacturers and the FCC never figured that a day would come when
more than ten people living in the same apartment complex would all
have cordless phones and want to use them at the same time.  It used
to be assumed that even if the cordless phone had only one channel
(out of the ten channels allocated), as long as the phones were sold
randomly around the country it was unlikely any two users living next
to each other would wind up with a phone on the same frequency as
their neighbor. Of course that's not the case any longer. With cordless
phones in many households and baby monitors or children's walkie-talkies
in the rest, the 46/49 territory is starting to get crowded. Add in a
few Radio Shack remote-controlled toy cars and airplanes for your
listening pleasure (many are in the 27 megs area squeezed between the
CB channels but others are up there in 46/49 with the phones) and you
can get a real zoo. Telco understandably takes the position that once
they deliver the dial tone to you in good working condition to your
'demarc', the rest of the problem is yours.

You don't mention if your sister's crosstalk problem is on her wired
phone or her cordless phone. If on the latter, she's stuck. Tell her
to buy one of the new 900 mhz phones from Radio Shack. If the
crosstalk is on her wired phone *and she has her cordless phone
plugged in, even if not using it* it still might be her problem rather
than telco. For instance, I have around here somewhere an *old*
cordless phone from the days when they were in the 27 megs/11 meter
area. Some guy living a couple miles away has a CB radio he runs like
a house afire, running illegal power all the time. His signal splashes
so much it makes the relays in the base of the cordless chatter
regardless of if it is being used or not. When he keys up his radio,
the cordless base gets confused and goes off hook, busying out my
phone line, and his modulations come right on down through the base
and into the phone line. Two miles away ... that's how strong that
signal is from his CB.

Tell sister to unplug (from the power line and the phone line) any
cordless phone she has. If the trouble is gone, good for her. She can
go get a new improved bang-up 900 mhz cordless and have some peace in
her life again. If the trouble does *not* go away at that point, *then*
call telco to complain about crosstalk. She should tell them it was
'tested at the demarc' (not quite, but for all intents and purposes
that's where she tested it) and the trouble persists. Then it becomes
telco's problem; not before what with the nutty and overzealous CB
operators in the world and babies who squall all day long into their
monitors, etc.  For further reading on the way in which radio signals
interfere with each other and household electronic appliances, etc see
the article in TELECOM Digest from a few years ago "Praise the Lord
and Pass the RF Filters" which discussed the citizens of Hammond, Indiana
and their battle with the very strong, improperly modulated signals
of WYCA Christian Broadcasters, a local FM station which was irradiating
them day after day.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (David A. Kaye)
Subject: ZEnith, ENterprise, Fred & Ethyl
Date: 16 Dec 1993 00:50:13 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access   (415) 705-6060  [login: guest]


David Cornutt ([email protected]) wrote:

> vice versa. I think Zenith was largely the independent telcos where
> Enterprise was mostly for the Bell System. [....]
> Fred & Ethyl Enterprises   Birmingham
>     Ask the Operator For..... WX-9999

Here in the SF Bay Area the universal California Highway Patrol (state
police) number was ZEnith 1-2000, though this state is 90% Bell.
There were also numerous ENterprise numbers.  In addition, for mobile
phones there were XY numbers in the format above (Ask operator for XY
1-9000).  Of course, there was a time when there really was a "Z" on
the phone dial where the zero is.


[Moderator's Note: I wish someone from the old Bell System who was
around the company in those days would write and explain precisely
the difference between Zenith and Enterprise. Was it just the telco's
choice which one to use, or was there some technical reason in the
accounting/revenue office that one was used some places and the other
in the rest of the country, or?  Come to think of it, besides seeing
Zenith as the automatic reverse charge prefix used a lot by GTE, I
think I saw a few sheriffs whose jurisdiction included people who were
a toll call to reach him on Zenith. What was the real story?   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Gerry Palmer <[email protected]>
Subject: Satellite Link Questions
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 15:16:17 -0500
Organization: ION Publishing Systems


Can anyone help answer these questions?

1) Is the time delay on a bidirectional satellite link to great to
allow LAN traffic (WAN traffic, that is!)?

2) For unidirectional satellite links, is a low-speed flow control line
always necessary in the other direction?

3) Is there anyone out there that sells a canned satellite solution so
that I can drop a file on a shared directory and have it appear at the
other end (unidirectional link preferable).


Thanks very much,

Gerry Palmer                Phone: 301-718-8857
ION Publishing Systems, Inc.  Fax:   301-718-6586
4915 St. Elmo Ave. #500     Bethesda, MD  20814

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Charlie L Eyster)
Subject: FAX Modem Wanted For Disabled Worker
Date: 16 Dec 93 18:05:35 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell Knowledge Network


I am looking for a fax modem with easy to use software for a
physically disadvantaged employee. Does anyone know, or have
experience with a product that is easy to use.

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 93 05:56:14 EST
From: Carl Moore <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: AC 520 for Arizona in March 1995


Notice that one of the ideas (accurate or not) which has floated
around concerning the NANP is that Mexico could become reachable with
area codes of form 52x where x is not 0; the current history file
refers to "not necessarily 0" and I will have to delete the word
"necessarily".  I see no Mexican city codes listed which start with 0.
As you know, Arizona borders Mexico.

There was also the idea that the first NNX area codes would be of form
NN0, which fits 520 (but does not fit 334, which was announced for
Alabama).  Would some people get confused and try to "correct" 520 to
502?  (502 is in western Kentucky, including Louisville.)

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Mark Roberts)
Subject: Re: Only Two "Operating" IXCs in DC
Organization: Tyrell Corp.
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 04:58:01 GMT


Paul Robinson ([email protected]) wrote:

> I was asked:
<portions of quote omitted>

>> I am sure there is some technicality in the word "operating" that
>> I am not educated about.

> This comment is correct and I used the wrong term.  Rather than use
> the term "operating" I should have said either "domiciled" or
> "headquartered".

> As far as I know, only two long distance companies have their
> headquarters in Washington, DC.  Mid Atlantic Telecom and MCI.  Sprint
> is in Shawnee Mission, KS if I remember, and AT&T is in Basking Ridge,
> NJ.  Number 4, which is Wiltel, if I'm not mistaken, is domiciled in
> Tulsa, Oklahoma, I think.  Anyone care to name who number five is?

Can't name number five, but can clarify Sprint's location.

It is in Westwood, Kansas, just across the Missouri border from Kansas
City, MO.  Sprint actually is domiciled in office buildings all
throughout the area, including some in KCMO and some in Overland Park,
KS.

Westwood actually is a small bedroom community.  The only other major
business there that I'm aware of are radio stations KMBZ and KLTH
(ex-KMBR-FM).

BTW, there is no such thing as "Shawnee Mission, KS" -- that is a
fiction of the U.S. Postal Service's imagination (and the name of the
largest school district in Johnson County, KS).


Mark Roberts -- Kansas City, MO -- in an orbit of mine own....
E-Mail:  [email protected], [email protected]   V-Mail:  coming sometime?!


[Moderator's Note: While the names of the 'big three' are never disputed
where long distance is concerned (AT&T, MCI and Sprint in that order) who
comes in fourth and fifth is subject to a lot of bickering among all the
players. Wiltel is one candidate, but LCI (the carrier for the Orange Card)
is another for fourth place. I guess it depends on how you cook the books
each time Dun and Bradstreet comes looking around. :)   PAT]

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Bob Olson)
Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk
Organization: Math and Computer Science, Argonne National Laboratory
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 14:52:25 GMT


In article <[email protected]>, Comroe-CDCS37 Rich
<[email protected]> wrote:

> However, when I recently moved residences (just three months
> ago), I was surprised when Illinois Bell Telephone refused to offer
> ISDN to my new house.  When I asked how come, they told me that it was
> only tariffed for business, and consequently not available for a
> residence.

That's very odd. In an ad glossy I recently received from Ameritech
they hype ISDN as a solution for home offices. Perhaps you should ask
again.


bob

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Barry Lustig)
Subject: Re: No ISDN Despite Big Talk
Organization: ICTV, Inc., Santa Clara, CA (408) 562-9200
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 09:13:02 GMT


In article <[email protected]>, Robert L. McMillin
<[email protected]> wrote:

On Thu, 25 Nov 1993 02:45:41 GMT, [email protected] (Will Estes) said:

>> I think you are missing the big picture here.  Within one year, people
>> are going to be able to buy unlimited 10 Megabit per second connections
>> to the net via existing cable TV cable, with a V.FAST or similar channel
>> going upstream.  This is going to cost $99/month or less for unlimited
>> network use.
> And who will be willing to pay $99/month for that?  I certainly
> wouldn't.  Talk to me when you have it down to $20/month or less.

 I for one, would be more than happy to get Internet access for
$99/month.  You have to remember that, currently, Internet access (I
don't mean just an account on an Internet attached machine) can cost
as much as $800/month for a 56Kb pipe, depending upon you location.
$99/month is cheap by comparison.


barry

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 00:48:50 EST
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: What Happened to "811" Numbers?
From: Paul Robinson <[email protected]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> Another reason to do away with 811 numbers is the similarity to
> 911. While I have not personally experienced it, it is my
> understanding that some switches are programmed with heuristic
> rules so that numbers "sufficiently close" to 911 will be
> intercepted to 911.

Not in my area.  Here's some tests I tried.  (Note when I say
'supervise' I mean the small 'click' the phone company sends back to
tell you it has accepted the dialed number.)

Well, unlike some people's comments, dialing '91' and then sitting and
waiting doesn't cause anything to happen.

Dialing '211' plus most any combination of 4 digits returns busy; I tried
things like the last 4 digits of my number, and that's also busy.

'311' for some reason, goes to directory assistance.

'411' is, of course, directory assistance.

Dialing '511' or '711' *instantly* begins to ring.  At midnight Friday
I tried five rings;  Nobody answers - no recording, nothing.

C&P Telephone has returned to '611' as the number for repair service.

Dialing '811' takes about five seconds to supervise, and about twelve
seconds it goes to a loud 'baw-baw-baw' tone, not the same as reorder.

I just tried it a moment ago.  Dialing '911' takes about four seconds
to supervise, and then it begins to ring.  I instantly hung up as soon
as I heard a ring, which from the last '1' to the ring was about five
seconds.


Paul Robinson - [email protected]

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (Russell Sharpe)
Subject: Re: 5ESS CentraNet Question
Date: 16 Dec 1993 10:41:54 GMT
Organization: Wellington City Council, Public Access
Reply-To: [email protected]


In article <[email protected]>, Bonnie J Johnson
<[email protected]> writes:

> Presently we can have Call Waiting on No Answer Diversion but NOT on
> Busy Diversion.

It's called a *Service Feature Conflict*, Call Waiting, and Diversion
on Busy both use the same _System Register_ to direct the switch
processor to the correct subroutine program.

It has the same effect as instructing a processor to do two things
simultaneoulsy with the same register ... you will probably get a system
error, or a corruption.

In my eleven years in the business, I have not yet heard of any
switch, (PABX or CO switch) capable of this somewhat impossible task.

In New Zealand, our NEC NEAX61E's will, if you have a Voice Mailbox,
Call Waiting, and No Answer diversion, a waiting call will divert to
the mailbox after the predetermined duration.

If you can preset the time before diversion to between zero and thirty
seconds, if you are maiking an important (or modem call), you can set
your diversion time to zero, thus effectively Diversion on Busy.

If your 5ESS (which I know very little about) has these services, this
may be an answer.


Regards,

Russell Sharpe        UseNet: [email protected]
                    FidoNet: 3:771/370 & 3:771/160
               Voice: +64 4 5639099
                  snailmail: 171 Holborn Drive
                             Stokes Valley 6008
                             New Zealand

------------------------------

From: [email protected] (George Zmijewski)
Subject: Re: Wiring a New Home - Suggestions?
Organization: MGZ Computer Services
Reply-To: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1993 11:27:03


In article <[email protected]> [email protected] writes:

> I am having a new home built and would like to install the wiring now
> that I might need for future technologies.  What would you recommend?
> Cable, fiber, copper, etc. Any suggestions welcome.

I wired my house about four years ago. Nothe that this was done in UK
and some things differ ie. one phone = four wires; two for speech, one
for ring shunt, one for earth recall (for PABX); for power we have 240
volts in the socket so our 30Amps = 65Amps @110 volts.

The idea was to put enough wire for next five to seven years.

POWER:
Each room has separate circuit for sockets (30 A - British Standard)
Each room downstairs has separate light circuit (10 A)
3 Bedrooms upstairs have one light circuit (10 A)
Landing/Stairs have separate light circuit (5 A)
Bathroom has separate light circuit (5 A)
Kithchen + Utility room 2 30 A circuits - one above the worktop for
        all the thing you plug in for making food, and second, below the
        worktop for oven , fridge, freezer
Utility room only separate circuit for dishwasher and washing machine (30 A)

Basement (where all wires come to) separate circuit for light, and
separate circuit for sockets

In the basement I have installed two sets for power fail fluorescent
lights (I got them second hand from some shop fitter) they have NiCd
batteries and keep one or two fluorescent tubes on for about 75 minutes;
they switch on automatically on power failure. I found this the most
useful feature in my house; you can take the fuse box to pieces, put
it back again and all with normal light, also when RCB trips the
lights I can get to the fuse box without breaking my legs over the
junk in the basement.

Bathroom light, kitchen "above worktop" circuits are on separate RCB
the most likely to trip, also lower rated RCBs are more sensitive.
Light circuits are on separate RCB from socket circuits -- I don't
want lights going off when there's a fault in my HiFi.  Kitchen "below
worktop circuit" is not protected by RCB -- I don't want my freezer to
be without power when I'm out and RCB falsely trips.  I use basement
circuit for "Computers only" -- it goes through UPS (latest addition).
I have single core 10 A rated cable connected to each light switch and
terminating near the fuse box - this allows me to connect room lights
to timmer switch overrriding the wall switch (an anti burglar device)

OTHER CABLING:

Cables running to two opposite corners of each room:

Two four pair phone cables, two shielded eight core serial cables, one
ethernet, one TV coax, there is ethernet cable linking two oposite
sockets in each room so that I can make loop from the basement, round
the room and back to the basement. Eight core alarm type cable is
terminating in all those places where infrared movement detectors get
a good view of the protected space; also I have magnetic switches
embeded in widows and doors (in addition to alarm use it is handy
indicator that all windows are closed.)

After four years I have found the most redundant is shielded serial
cable (seemed to be good idea at the time second hand terminals were
cheap and ethernet cards were expensive) I use it now to connect my
DOS PC upstairs to PBX programming socket in I want to reconfigure it,
also I have terminal connected to the call logging socket of the PBX --
(it shows me where my money goes :) )

Nowdays ethernet serves all computer related connections.  A lot of
phone wiring is very useful -- I have on average two phones in every
room so when phone rings it is never further that an arm's length (just
my lazy nature).

I have underestimated my need for external telephone lines. I had six
pair cable running to the connection box where telco can terminate
their wires I have replaced that with 20 pair now. (If I get over 20
pair I will get ground cable feed to the basement.)

I wanted to use some of the spare phone wiring to connect speakers
around the house for background music -- now I can have music relayed
via the speaker in my phones (reasonable quality) with the ability to
switch it on/of and volume control at each point. (The switch I have
now for voice extensions is Northen Telecom NortStar Compact; modems
and fax are routed via another switch.)

Total length of cable use I estimated at about 1.5 miles into standard
English Terrace house (three up two down kitchen, utility, bathroom).
Extra cost estimated at about 2000 USD Wall space in the basement used
for connection matrixes 4 ft by 9 ft !


George Zmijewski


[Moderator's Note: Wow!  You are *wired*, no doubt about it.  PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #822
******************************


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253

You are viewing proxied material from infinitelyremote.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.