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.

Non-Tech : Amati investors -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bill c. who wrote (28339)	11/5/1997 1:03:00 PM
From: SteveG	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 31386

<The CDSL solution will fit into the existing voice racking? For example, the CDSL line card will fit into the existing LU 5ESS voice platform with no splitters. POTS and this CDSL traffic will reside on the VOICE network and isn't split off onto a DATA network. I'm I off on this line of thinking?> Don't forget, ATT/LU 5ESS (and other more recent switches) are digital. This offers "embedded" or digital POTS, so no surprise here. The ability that CDSL is proposing, to interface directly with telco switches without going through an access multiplexer, is another advantage to CDSL over ADSL (providing they actually do what they say they are doing). <Does the CDSL stay connected all the time? Can the voice network handle the load? Aren't we back to upgrading the voice network for this long connect times.> Good question, I don't know. I spoke with a ROK engineer earlier, and will try get clarification soon. Maybe a Netspeed dig-off-hook-like design will be involved. <Voice connections were engineered for 3 minute calls not 2 hour CDSL connects> Just guessing here (will ask) : if we add a modem linecard, it seems that CDSL will avoid burdening the voice PSTN 4:1 ratio - the only thing that needs be preserved to avoid a circuit busy. <PS. Just take a step back to understand Aware's lite-adsl and ROK's CDSL solution with no splitters.... until later.> I'm interesting in how this is implemented also. One engineer asked me what I had heard about it, postulating that it must not take into account the CP wiring "rat's nest". All good questions. Steve