Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : LAST MILE TECHNOLOGIES - Let's Discuss Them Here -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (8722)	10/2/2000 10:14:57 AM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

>>Assumme copper exhaust is a problem -- Then the literal doubling of T1 capacity can be gained by HDSL2. Seems to me it's quite compelling for a telco to roll it out.<< These likelihoods were built into the North American Digital Hierarchy standards during the 1960s. Initially (and these are still used in some areas) the solution was to introduce the T1C (at 3.15 Mb/s, thus doubling the speed of the T1) and the T2 (at 6.3 Mb/s, effectively four times the speed of the T1 + buffering bits and other management overhead). These new line rates introduced repeater spacing requirements that were more stringent than those that were used for T1, which was and still is ~5,000 feet, to coincide with loading coil (pot) points on interoffice cable spans. T1C and T2 are now pretty much relegated to Mux stages in Central Office equipment, although the T2 is still used extensively to bundle four T1s in SLC 96 systems (Subscriber Line Carrier) and microwave systems. The 96 results from 4 * 24 channels per T1, = 96 per "system." T1C and T2 rates also align with MPEG compression rates. Or, maybe I should say that the MPEGs aligned themselves to the Line Rates. In any event, they are the speeds of choice due to the abundance of mux stages in SONET and other TDM devices that use them. They fit like the proverbial glove.

To: MikeM54321 who wrote (8722)	10/2/2000 5:44:15 PM
From: justone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12823

Mike: I see that Frank has answered your questions with far more erudition than I could, but I thought I'd address one of your issues. Yes, HDSL-2 using a single pair instead of two is a big big advantage in copper exhaust. So I suppose the question is again what do you do when go need more than a copper pair. I should have thought fiber was not likely until then, except that I've heard of at least one case where a CLEC is proposing it- don't ask me how they justified the costs you note. I and several thread members seem to think HDSL-2 has 5 years to go before then. About the issue of HDSL being "minor" and transparent- well yes, that is why it succeeds. If you, as head of IT, go to your CFO and say, "hey, boss, we need 10 more lines to handle two years expansion, I thing we should put in a 10G fiber link and run VOIP on the internet" , you'll be thrown out of the office. If you go and say, "hey, this CLEC claims they can deliver the same T1 we get from the ILEC at 1/2 the cost, and we don't need to change our PBX or routers or other equipment" , you are a big hero. ===== A personal rant almost on topic ===== I live in a suburb that was considered out in the sticks until recently. Four years ago, I was told I had taken the last copper pair on the street I live on, which is a long rural road and a major artery to the town center. I can't have xDSL, for example, since I'm about 2 miles from the CO in the town center. Nothing was done to expand the system, so I don't know what other people did for their second internet line. Perhaps the phone company put in SLC and I didn't notice. I got cable early this year, and would donate the second line back to the wire company if I could keep my fax number, so perhaps HFC is one sort of relief to copper exhaustion. Today it is not so rural. To accommodate a new large housing development down the street, they just finished digging up the streets and laying some sort of cable even though everything up to now was strung on poles. However, the stuff you can put on poles has become a legal nightmare, and they are overloaded, so they apparently found it better to dig, pipe, and plant. Independently the gas company came, and dug up the streets to reset the gas lines. I am scheduled next year to have them come and expand the sewer This is in Connecticut, which is hilly, very rocky, and very conservative about zoning. I have no idea how any of this is cost justified by what I call the 'wire' company, formerly known ILEC, or the others, but I do note that although the road was torn up for years, the town never fixed it until they needed to lay this cable. If it costs so darn much to dig up the ground, how come they are doing it three times in my yard! And I still don't have fiber to the home.