On 9/21/2007, Piotr Galka wrote:
As I understood if the factory has its own Ethernet net than (terminal) devices destined to be connected to such net are not under the scope of RTTE directive because their owner connects them to his own net. Right ? But what if their internal net is also connected to the global Internet ? Do such devices become to be "terminal equipment" (under RTTE) because their owner is not also the owner all Internet ? Hi Piotr: I think these distinctions have been discussed and debated in the past by others on this board, and I'm not sure I want to get too involved interpreting hypothetical scenarios. For what its worth, my view is that a private Ethernet network, such as a network used only internally by a private corporation, is clearly not subject to the RTTE. I also don't think that adding an Internet connection to this network automatically makes it subject to the RTTE, because in my view the Internet is not a "public telecommunications network" as defined in the RTTE. Others may disagree with me and my interpretation may in fact be wrong. In my view, the only way that the RTTE would enter the picture via the Internet connection is if the internal, private network was connected to the Internet via the public telecommunications network, such as a T1/E1 line. Even in that case, though, my view is that the only piece of equipment subject to the RTTE would be the device that contains the T1/E1 port. There is plenty of room for varying interpretations here, since the RTTE directive defines TTE as, "a product enabling communication or a relevant component thereof which is intended to be connected directly or indirectly by any means whatsoever to interfaces of the public telecommunications network." I think that common sense has to be used in interpreting this ambiguous definition, and interpretations may vary. Keep in mind, though, that there is probably very little material effect from declaring a product to be ITE or TTE if in fact the equipment has no direct connection to the public telecommunications network. I would be inclined to call such a product ITE, but I'm not sure if the actual tests that would apply would be any different if it was called TTE. Joe Randolph Telecom Design Consultant Randolph Telecom, Inc. 781-721-2848 (USA) j...@randolph-telecom.com http://www.randolph-telecom.com <http://www.randolph-telecom.com/> ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________ - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to emc-p...@ieee.org Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas emcp...@ptcnh.net Mike Cantwell mcantw...@ieee.org For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: j.bac...@ieee.org David Heald: emc-p...@daveheald.com All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
