Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
- Original Message -
From: "Mark Kent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 12:39 PM
Subject: Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
>
> Order the T1 (ESF, B8ZS). As you order the circuit specify where you
> want it to end up ("server room, 2nd floor") and that you want an extended
> demarc (will cost extra).
>
> AT install time, make sure someone is around to cajole the installer
> into getting the NIU as close as you can to where your router will be.
> The installer should test from the extended demarc (make sure they do).
I have had LEC's tell me that the extended DMARC is only warranted for 3
months after install. Any work to the extended DMARC will cost you after
that if the trouble is within the extended DMARC. I have had telco techs on
site flat out refuse to repair an extended DMARC or tell you that it has to
be scheduled and will take a week to schedule. Occasionally a friendly tech
will just fix it for you without charge so, YMMV.
> Get a standard built-in T1 dsu like as been mentioned in previous posts.
> Plug it into the extended demarc with an ethernet patch cable.
>
> Now, even though I say to not worry, it is important to remember the
> #1 lesson when dealing with telephone companies. I figure it is the
> same all over the world, but just in case it isn't, I'll repeat it here:
>
> The telco is not your friend.
Indeed. But be nice to the techs, save the anger for their management.
John Bittenbender
P.S. Welcome to the States (at least virtually)
Identity theft case could be largest so far
Important enough to not be off-topic. http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/07/21/cyber.theft/index.html - ferg -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
>> SmartJack with demarcation point in the office (or
>> same floor) instead of the building entrance point
I can't emphasize enough the importance of this, read ahead.
> Mark Kent wrote:
> You are not likely going to be able to control that,
> it depends on how the install tech's day is going.
> Strictly speaking, I believe they are supposed to put
> it at the MPOE.
For the smart jack, it depends on the telco and/or if the telco also is
the CLEC.
Example1:
You buy the T1 from AT&T, and they use SBC (formerly Pacific Bell) as
the CLEC. The only way you will get the demarc extended in your premises
is to have the router managed by AT&T, and then the demarc is the
Ethernet port of their router. If you have your own router the demarc is
the smart jack, the smart jack is at the MPOE and anything between the
smart jack and you is your responsibility, which is terrible as I will
explain below.
Example2: You buy the circuit from XO and they are their own CLEC. As
you hold the sales droid by the cojones you will be able to have the
demarc extended to your premises.
> As you order the circuit specify where you want it to
> end up ("server room, 2nd floor") and that you want an
> extended demarc (will cost extra).
Yes, yes, yes. It is worth the extra cost.
> AT install time, make sure someone is around to cajole the
> installer into getting the NIU as close as you can to where
> your router will be.
This is where there isn't much you can do about. I have tried several
times to "cajole" with 200 bucks in cash and/or other incentives; it did
not happen.
> The installer should test from the extended
> demarc (make sure they do).
The installer and all the techs always test from the demarc, whether or
not it's extended. What you DON'T want to do is to extend the demarc
yourself (because you don't actually extend it), and here's why:
- Let's assume example 1 above.
- The demarc is at the MPOE; the smart jack is 1ft away from the NIU;
you have a 300ft cat5 cable between the smart jack and the CSU/DSU in
your premises.
- You drop packets; you have 65 identically configured sites, you
replaced the router and the CSU/DSU twice already, and you still drop
packets. As the config can't be at fault as it works fine on the other
64 sites and the hardware can't be at fault since you replaced every
piece of it including the power cord and the patch cords twice, it's
obviously a circuit issue, right?
- You call AT&T. "It works on my side" (remember this sentence).
- You call SBC. "It works on my side". That is, if you get them to talk
to you as the circuit goes to AT&T and they will likely say "talk to
them".
- You call AT&T again. "It works on my side".
- You call your AT&T sales droid and threaten not to pay the bill and
sue them.
- After 2 days of ping-pong you finally get an SBC tech to come and test
the line (possibly by lying at the number of CRC errors).
- The SBC tech comes, plugs the pattern tester at the smart jack, loops
the remote CSU/DSU, and it all tests clean.
- The SBC tech report that the circuit is clean, now you're back dealing
with AT&T.
- More time passes by. You finally get the AT&T tech to come. He does
the same as the SBC tech: plugs the tester at the demarc and runs bit
patterns. "It works on my side".
- You say: but I need it to work at my router, not in the MPOE room.
Tough luck, buddy. Our responsibility stops at the demarc; it tests
clean, we don't give a rip if you extended the demarc to your office.
Tough luck. Sometimes pattern testers detect line issues, sometimes they
don't. Now you have to move your CSU/DSU and router in the MPOE room
(possibly open to all winds) and _prove_ them that it's a circuit issue.
Morale: you want the demarc extended to the same room you have the
CSU/DSU in your premises, ESPECIALLY if there is more than one company
involved.
> Get a standard built-in T1 dsu like as been mentioned in
> previous posts. Plug it into the extended demarc with an
> ethernet patch cable.
Yes indeed. CAT5 is your friend even if it's not necessary on paper.
Michel.
Re: Campus size Wireless LAN
On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 04:03:18PM -0400, Brandon Pinsky wrote: > I just installed a Quickbridge 60 recently. It's pretty nice. The > throughput is good over a .75 mile link. I was able to successfully > push ~20Mbps with an iperf test. Installation was easy relative to > some of the other equipment we have installed. The feed line is UTP > and the radio gets power over the UTP cable. The uplink interface is > 100BaseT which is easy. My only complaint is that it is not remotely > manageable. You have to have direct console to make any config changes > which means taking the link down. We have another .11a system in I believe that this is fixed in the latest release of code... bill > production made by RadioLan and it is plagued by the same design flaw. > Stupid... I'd like to compare it to the Cisco one. I bet it is more > manageable. > > BJ > > On Jul 21, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Eric Brown wrote: > > > > > Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless > > connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? > > It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good > > bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! > > > > -Eric > -- Bill Petrisko
RE: Campus size Wireless LAN
Thanks for the info! That's exactly what I need. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Blomquist Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 4:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Campus size Wireless LAN > On Jul 21, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Eric Brown wrote: > >> >> Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless >> connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? >> It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good >> bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! >> >> -Eric Just a quick note, I'm running the Proxim AP600 units (Tsunami baby brothers) with great results. 48-54Mb/s for .5 mile shot. Easily remote configurable, quick setup and much cheaper than the Tsunami if all your doing is a quick P2P. my $.02 Scott -- Scott V. Blomquist,A-SA-CN-NRKTINLC(tm) #2598 ITI/Bear&CoRochester, VT 802-767-3174(v) 802-767-3726(f) "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from Magic." A. C. Clarke
RE: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
I would watch out on the ADSL lines; most carriers I have dealt with in the past on these types of circuits fall under the residential category and there for do not have the same type of SLA's (24x7 support or response window) that say an SDSL business account would. Depending on the required uptime you may want to stick with SDSL (Usually 2.0Mbs Up/Down) if you go with any of the xDSL types of circuits and verify with the Telco that their SLA fit your business needs. Of course if cost is not a object and you require a strong SLA for the circuit I would stick with a T1 or even a reasonably priced Fractional T3 assuming you have or can get the equipment. Chris Burton Network Engineer Walt Disney Internet Group: Network Services The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential, intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact Walt Disney Internet Group at 206-664-4000. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon R. Kibler Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 9:45 AM To: Andre Oppermann Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul Andre: If your distance for the short-haul is less than 10 miles or so (line-of-sight), I would go wireless. Reasons: a) you can get 10-30MBps on wireless vs. 1.4Mbps for T1. b) if you already have an antenna or other high-point, you can own the wireless network for about what the Telco would charge for a T-1 over about a year. If you really want a wire circuit, for long-haul or short-haul, consider multiple xDSL connections. For example, under the current pricing we are seeing, we can install 8 ADSL circuits for about what one T-1 would cost. With 8 ADSLs, you would be getting >10 Mbps inbound and 2.8Mbps outbound -- equivalent to 8 inbound T-1s and 2 outbound T-1s for the same price as a single T-1. Just some thoughts. Jon Kibler -- Jon R. Kibler Chief Technical Officer A.S.E.T., Inc. Charleston, SC USA (843) 849-8214 == Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service http://www.trustem.com/ No Spam. No Viruses. Just Good Clean Email.
Re: Campus size Wireless LAN
- Original Message - From: "Eric Brown" > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:01 AM Subject: Campus size Wireless LAN > Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless > connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? > It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good > bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! > > -Eric You also might want to ask the folks on : http://isp-lists.isp-planet.com/isp-wireless/ http://wisp-equipment.net http://archives.part-15.org http://www.wispa.org/ who seem to use every vendor known to man. --Michael
Re: Campus size Wireless LAN
Brandon Pinsky wrote: I just installed a Quickbridge 60 recently. It's pretty nice. The throughput is good over a .75 mile link. I was able to successfully push ~20Mbps with an iperf test. Installation was easy relative to some of the other equipment we have installed. The feed line is UTP and the radio gets power over the UTP cable. The uplink interface is 100BaseT which is easy. My only complaint is that it is not remotely manageable. You have to have direct console to make any config changes which means taking the link down. We have another .11a system in production made by RadioLan and it is plagued by the same design flaw. Stupid... I'd like to compare it to the Cisco one. I bet it is more manageable. BJ On Jul 21, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Eric Brown wrote: Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! -Eric check http://www.alvarion.com Curtis
RE: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Actually, it has little to do with the techs day.
It's all provisioning. At the local mom and pop
CLEC, it actually may be the techs day. YMMV. :)
DSX indicates a cross connect in the loop.
A cross connect is a dumb mechanical device that does nothing
except put access points in the "long haul" circuit so that you
can troubleshoot in case of an error or failure. The X
connect, depending upon interconnect or full cross connect
capability, determines how much test, add, drop, or move
capability you have. All the cross connect equipment I
am aware of is capable of E1/T1.
A smartjack is a dumb device as well, just creating a loop when
you disconnect from it which enables the telco to test facing
themselves. That's why you want one in your cabinet facing them.
If you want to insure you are not a TYPE 2 powered drop from
the CO or remote, find out what the CLLI code of providers
net is and use that as the Z end when ordering. If they don't
have equipment and are going to buy a tail circuit, the last mile,
give them someone elses mux CLLI and tell them it's a "preferred
provider". The CLLI code is almost always printed/taped/labeled
on the front of the device.
As far as distance goes, I can cover a 150,000 s/f collocation space from
one end to the other with shielded ABAM and wire wrap termination blocks.
For this purpose, an ethernet cable should be fine for a long ways. :)
You can tweak out the LBO if necessary, but you want to do this only
if you have to. Messing with the dB levels could be problematic and should
be done in conjuction with the provider.
-M
--
Martin Hannigan (c) 617-388-2663
VeriSign, Inc. (w) 703-948-7018
Network Engineer IV Operations & Infrastructure
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Mark Kent
> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 12:40 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
>
>
>
> >> o SmartJack with demarcation point in the office (or same
> floor) instead
> >>of the building entrance point
>
> You are not likely going to be able to control that,
> it depends on how the install tech's day is going.
> Strictly speaking, I believe they are supposed to put
> it at the MPOE.
>
> >> If I am unlucky the T1 gets delivered either directly or
> via repeaters as
>
> You are worrying about this too much.
>
> Order the T1 (ESF, B8ZS). As you order the circuit specify where you
> want it to end up ("server room, 2nd floor") and that you
> want an extended
> demarc (will cost extra).
>
> AT install time, make sure someone is around to cajole the installer
> into getting the NIU as close as you can to where your router will be.
> The installer should test from the extended demarc (make sure
> they do).
>
> Get a standard built-in T1 dsu like as been mentioned in
> previous posts.
> Plug it into the extended demarc with an ethernet patch cable.
>
> Now, even though I say to not worry, it is important to remember the
> #1 lesson when dealing with telephone companies. I figure it is the
> same all over the world, but just in case it isn't, I'll
> repeat it here:
>
> The telco is not your friend.
>
> -mark
>
Re: Campus size Wireless LAN
On Jul 21, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Eric Brown wrote: Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! -Eric Just a quick note, I'm running the Proxim AP600 units (Tsunami baby brothers) with great results. 48-54Mb/s for .5 mile shot. Easily remote configurable, quick setup and much cheaper than the Tsunami if all your doing is a quick P2P. my $.02 Scott -- Scott V. Blomquist,A-SA-CN-NRKTINLC(tm) #2598 ITI/Bear&CoRochester, VT 802-767-3174(v) 802-767-3726(f) "Any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from Magic." A. C. Clarke
DLS Service Simulator
We would like to make a system setup capable to automatically test several points of our network (different BRAS, different DNS Servers, etc), mainly using PPPoE Does anyone have or heard about this kind of "DSL simulator"? -Hamilton DDD para todo o Brasil e DDI para o mundo inteiro. Pense 14, Fale 14, Ligue 14
Re: Campus size Wireless LAN
I just installed a Quickbridge 60 recently. It's pretty nice. The throughput is good over a .75 mile link. I was able to successfully push ~20Mbps with an iperf test. Installation was easy relative to some of the other equipment we have installed. The feed line is UTP and the radio gets power over the UTP cable. The uplink interface is 100BaseT which is easy. My only complaint is that it is not remotely manageable. You have to have direct console to make any config changes which means taking the link down. We have another .11a system in production made by RadioLan and it is plagued by the same design flaw. Stupid... I'd like to compare it to the Cisco one. I bet it is more manageable. BJ On Jul 21, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Eric Brown wrote: Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! -Eric
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Yes, this is built around category 3 wiring, not 5. The specs are a little more forgiving. Just grab any 'ole ethernet patch cord and hook it up. Works flawlessly. Unless you're running between DSX pannels or into another MUX, you never need to roll pairs on a T1 installation so just wire straight through. On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 10:57:20AM -0700, Mark Kent wrote: > > >> I don't think standard ethernet pinouts are correct. You want a cable > >> with pins 1&2 on one twisted pair and 4&5 on another (7&8 for DDS 56K). > > Correct has nothing to do with it. > Any straight-through cable will work just fine. It's just from the > jack to the equipment... and it's already been specified that the > extended demarc has been made to the place specified by the customer > (i.e., near the router). > > If you're only going 14 feet (up a wall, across a ladder, down a rack) > then you can use silver satin, or just about any straight-through cable > you find on the floor or under the tiles or in the trunk of your car. > > -mark --- Wayne Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/
Re: Campus size Wireless LAN
We're using a Western Mutiplex Tsunami 100 5.3 -5.8 Ghz over a 4 mile shot and it has worked flawlessly except for a couple realy bad rain storms and 1 lightnening strike which whipped out a power supply that was easily replaced at radio shack. Western Multiplex, Model# Tsunami 100 27720-1a1 5.3 - 5.8 Ghz - D. Scott Smith Operations Manager Core Communications, Inc. - Original Message - From: "Roy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Eric Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 2:19 PM Subject: RE: Campus size Wireless LAN > > Not a direct answer but I can highly recommend Airaya http://www.airaya.com > > I have a number of their bridges operating including one of six miles. > > Roy > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > Eric Brown > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 11:02 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Campus size Wireless LAN > > > > Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless > connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? > It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good > bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! > > -Eric >
RE: Campus size Wireless LAN
Not a direct answer but I can highly recommend Airaya http://www.airaya.com I have a number of their bridges operating including one of six miles. Roy -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Eric Brown Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 11:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Campus size Wireless LAN Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! -Eric
Follow the money - Extortion gang caught
Its easier to follow the money. DDOS gang arrested in Russia. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3914363.stm The National High-Tech Crime Unit, which led the investigation, tracked down the racketeers by tracing money transfers between the three men and ten gang members who had been arrested in Latvia in November.
Campus size Wireless LAN
Anyone have experience with Proxim's tsunami quickbridge for wireless connectivity between buildings at line of site distances under 1 mile? It's cheaper than Cisco and looks good on paper. Looking for the good bad and ugly. Thanks in advance! -Eric
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
>> I don't think standard ethernet pinouts are correct. You want a cable >> with pins 1&2 on one twisted pair and 4&5 on another (7&8 for DDS 56K). Correct has nothing to do with it. Any straight-through cable will work just fine. It's just from the jack to the equipment... and it's already been specified that the extended demarc has been made to the place specified by the customer (i.e., near the router). If you're only going 14 feet (up a wall, across a ladder, down a rack) then you can use silver satin, or just about any straight-through cable you find on the floor or under the tiles or in the trunk of your car. -mark
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Another drawback is that, by their nature, ADSL circuits have a higher latency than standard T1 service. So if this is something thats really important, a "propper" T1 might be a better option. Then there's that little problem of maintaining routing over 8 parallel links, etc. On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 10:32:30AM -0700, Adam Debus wrote: > > Something to be careful on with ADSL is repair times. For example, with > Qwest there is a 4 hour guarenteed dispatch (24x7x365) on T1 circuits, and a > 23 business hour dispatch on ADSL. YMMV with other telcos. > > --- > Adam Debus > Network Engineer, ReachONE Internet > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > - Original Message - > From: "Jon R. Kibler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Andre Oppermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 09:44 > Subject: Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul > > > > Andre: > > > > If your distance for the short-haul is less than 10 miles or so > (line-of-sight), I would go wireless. Reasons: > >a) you can get 10-30MBps on wireless vs. 1.4Mbps for T1. > >b) if you already have an antenna or other high-point, you can own the > wireless network for about what the Telco would charge for a T-1 over about > a year. > > > > If you really want a wire circuit, for long-haul or short-haul, consider > multiple xDSL connections. For example, under the current pricing we are > seeing, we can install 8 ADSL circuits for about what one T-1 would cost. > With 8 ADSLs, you would be getting >10 Mbps inbound and 2.8Mbps outbound -- > equivalent to 8 inbound T-1s and 2 outbound T-1s for the same price as a > single T-1. > > > > Just some thoughts. > > > > Jon Kibler > > -- > > Jon R. Kibler > > Chief Technical Officer > > A.S.E.T., Inc. > > Charleston, SC USA > > (843) 849-8214 > > > > > > > > > > == > > Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service > > http://www.trustem.com/ > > No Spam. No Viruses. Just Good Clean Email. > > > > --- Wayne Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Jon R. Kibler wrote: Andre: If your distance for the short-haul is less than 10 miles or so > (line-of-sight), I would go wireless. Reasons: a) you can get 10-30MBps on wireless vs. 1.4Mbps for T1. b) if you already have an antenna or other high-point, you can > own the wireless network for about what the Telco would charge for a T-1 over about a year. If you really want a wire circuit, for long-haul or short-haul, > consider multiple xDSL connections. For example, under the current pricing we are seeing, we can install 8 ADSL circuits for about what one T-1 would cost. With 8 ADSLs, you would be getting >10 Mbps inbound and 2.8Mbps outbound -- equivalent to 8 inbound T-1s and 2 outbound T-1s for the same price as a single T-1. Sorry, I meant "short-haul" and "long-haul" in the electrical sense for the length of the cable line between two devices speaking the T1 line format (B8ZS). Some documentation I have read refers the to the two T1 types DSX-1 and DS-1 as short- and long-haul. Going Wireless is not an option since the distance will be the same as between major US cities. Going ADSL is not an option because of reliablility issues and its 'hackish' implementation. -- Andre
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Something to be careful on with ADSL is repair times. For example, with Qwest there is a 4 hour guarenteed dispatch (24x7x365) on T1 circuits, and a 23 business hour dispatch on ADSL. YMMV with other telcos. --- Adam Debus Network Engineer, ReachONE Internet [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Jon R. Kibler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Andre Oppermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 09:44 Subject: Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul > Andre: > > If your distance for the short-haul is less than 10 miles or so (line-of-sight), I would go wireless. Reasons: >a) you can get 10-30MBps on wireless vs. 1.4Mbps for T1. >b) if you already have an antenna or other high-point, you can own the wireless network for about what the Telco would charge for a T-1 over about a year. > > If you really want a wire circuit, for long-haul or short-haul, consider multiple xDSL connections. For example, under the current pricing we are seeing, we can install 8 ADSL circuits for about what one T-1 would cost. With 8 ADSLs, you would be getting >10 Mbps inbound and 2.8Mbps outbound -- equivalent to 8 inbound T-1s and 2 outbound T-1s for the same price as a single T-1. > > Just some thoughts. > > Jon Kibler > -- > Jon R. Kibler > Chief Technical Officer > A.S.E.T., Inc. > Charleston, SC USA > (843) 849-8214 > > > > > == > Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service > http://www.trustem.com/ > No Spam. No Viruses. Just Good Clean Email. > >
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
One word of caution on that - we had a customer who got 4 separate 1M/1.5M ADSL circuits - all to the same DSLAM. Ended up that the telco had only provisioned that DSLAM with a single T1, and was apparently unable to upgrade that, negating any advantage to the multiple DSL's. It was a remote DSLAM, not in a CO, btw. If you don't have a point to point circuit, make sure the upstream has sufficient bandwidth to support what you are ordering. ** Reply to message from "Jon R. Kibler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Wed, 21 Jul 2004 12:44:46 -0400 > Andre: > > If your distance for the short-haul is less than 10 miles or so > (line-of-sight), I would go wireless. Reasons: >a) you can get 10-30MBps on wireless vs. 1.4Mbps for T1. >b) if you already have an antenna or other high-point, you can own > the wireless network for about what the Telco would charge for a T-1 > over about a year. > > If you really want a wire circuit, for long-haul or short-haul, > consider multiple xDSL connections. For example, under the current > pricing we are seeing, we can install 8 ADSL circuits for about what > one T-1 would cost. With 8 ADSLs, you would be getting >10 Mbps inbound > and 2.8Mbps outbound -- equivalent to 8 inbound T-1s and 2 outbound > T-1s for the same price as a single T-1. > > Just some thoughts. > > Jon Kibler > -- > Jon R. Kibler > Chief Technical Officer > A.S.E.T., Inc. > Charleston, SC USA > (843) 849-8214 -- Jeff Shultz A railfan pulls up to a RR crossing hoping that there will be a train.
RE: Inexpensive Telephone Conference Bridge System
Yep, Asterisk and a MeetMe room. Gotta warn you though, you might like it so much you replace your pbx. -ejay > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Adam 'Starblazer' Romberg > Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 1:10 AM > To: Robert A. Hayden > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Inexpensive Telephone Conference Bridge System > > > > We have ideas for hacking something up with a linux box, > but I'd prefer > > something a little more designed for the task. > > Asterisk running the Digium Wildcard's is very nice. I have one of > those set up as a 'test' box.. there is a POTS number, but > from there it > gets translated into SIP and connects to my box. > > www.asterisk.org might be of some interest. > > Thanks, > > Adam > > > Adam 'Starblazer' Romberg Appleton: 920-738-9032 > System Administrator Valley Fair: 920-968-7713 > ExtremePC LLC-=- http://www.extremepcgaming.net
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Andre: If your distance for the short-haul is less than 10 miles or so (line-of-sight), I would go wireless. Reasons: a) you can get 10-30MBps on wireless vs. 1.4Mbps for T1. b) if you already have an antenna or other high-point, you can own the wireless network for about what the Telco would charge for a T-1 over about a year. If you really want a wire circuit, for long-haul or short-haul, consider multiple xDSL connections. For example, under the current pricing we are seeing, we can install 8 ADSL circuits for about what one T-1 would cost. With 8 ADSLs, you would be getting >10 Mbps inbound and 2.8Mbps outbound -- equivalent to 8 inbound T-1s and 2 outbound T-1s for the same price as a single T-1. Just some thoughts. Jon Kibler -- Jon R. Kibler Chief Technical Officer A.S.E.T., Inc. Charleston, SC USA (843) 849-8214 == Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service http://www.trustem.com/ No Spam. No Viruses. Just Good Clean Email.
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
>> o SmartJack with demarcation point in the office (or same floor) instead
>>of the building entrance point
You are not likely going to be able to control that,
it depends on how the install tech's day is going.
Strictly speaking, I believe they are supposed to put
it at the MPOE.
>> If I am unlucky the T1 gets delivered either directly or via repeaters as
You are worrying about this too much.
Order the T1 (ESF, B8ZS). As you order the circuit specify where you
want it to end up ("server room, 2nd floor") and that you want an extended
demarc (will cost extra).
AT install time, make sure someone is around to cajole the installer
into getting the NIU as close as you can to where your router will be.
The installer should test from the extended demarc (make sure they do).
Get a standard built-in T1 dsu like as been mentioned in previous posts.
Plug it into the extended demarc with an ethernet patch cable.
Now, even though I say to not worry, it is important to remember the
#1 lesson when dealing with telephone companies. I figure it is the
same all over the world, but just in case it isn't, I'll repeat it here:
The telco is not your friend.
-mark
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Robert Boyle wrote: Does anyone else have more/better info? I've found this to be useful: http://www.dcbnet.com/notes/9611t1.html -- Gabriel Cain www.dialupusa.net Senior Systems Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP fingerprint: C0B4 C6BF 13F5 69D1 3E6B CD7C D4C8 2EA4 2B08 1C6D Technology for the sake of business.
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Ok, thanks for all the responses so far! To summarize what I've gathered from the answers and reading through the pointed out websites. For ordering T1 leased-line services I want the following: o Router port with integrated CSU/DSU (instead of going T1->X.21->Router) [this was clear to me from the beginning] o Linecode B8ZS (because this gives clear channels with 64k rate) o Framing ESF(because this supports line diagnostics) o SmartJack with demarcation point in the office (or same floor) instead of the building entrance point o For lines that come with a SmartJack (aka HDSL2) I only need 'short-haul' T1 line (<655 feet, called DSX-1) If I am unlucky the T1 gets delivered either directly or via repeaters as four-wire service from the central office which makes it 'long-haul' T1 with line segment lenth of up to 6,000 feet between repeaters (called DS-1). The remaining question I have is how common are the two types of DSX-1 (short-haul with SmartJack) vs. DS-1 (long-haul directly to CO) lines? Anyone with experience how this is being handled by the various Telcos? Maybe percentages one type versus the other? Are there major Telcos which clearly do not support the above settings? To know who to avoid when procuring services. -- Andre
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Robert Boyle wrote: At 08:25 AM 7/21/2004, you wrote: o What is "Wet T1 Capable"? What is it used for and who needs this? This is one of the "features" of the new WIC-1DSU-T1-V2. It seems that some DSUs can be powered by the telco remotely. In 15 years of working in communications, I've never seen this, but that doesn't mean it isn't used by some remote telco using old style T1 without HDSL or HDSL2 running over the line. In almost all cases today, the T1 spam itself will be powered from the CO and the smartjack will convert 2 HDSL pairs or one HDSL2 pair to a T1 signal with distinct TX/RX pairs. Does anyone else have more/better info? I found something on Cisco's website. However this seems only to be relevant for 'long-haul' T1 connection when there is a four-wire going directly to the central office (and possibly through repeaters). http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2641/products_installation_guide_chapter09186a008007cb6d.html Enabling Wetting Current on the WIC-1DSU-T1-V2 Card The WIC-1DSU-T1-V2 card supports wetting current. Wetting current is a small amount of electrical current (60 to 140 milliamps) sent from the central office to the card to prevent the corrosion of electrical contacts in the card's network connection. Wetting current may be enabled or disabled by the user. It is controlled by the placement of a jumper on connector J2 on the card. Figure5-6 shows the J2 connector and the jumper. The feature is enabled by connecting pins 1 and 2 of the J2 connector with a jumper. It is disabled either by removing the jumper or by connecting pins 2 and 3 of the J2 connector. The card is shipped with the jumper connecting pins 2 and 3 on the J2 connector, which disables the wetting current. -- Andre
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
Robert Boyle wrote: You can travel up to 655 ft. with a T1 cable from the NTU which the phone company will drop at your site. According to the letter of the specs, you are supposed to use "T1 cable" two 22AWG pairs individually shielded to prevent cross-talk. In practice, we have extended DMarcs up to 200-300 feet with regular Cat 3/4/5/6 cable and have never had any problems or out of spec. cross-talk as a result. Kentrox used to have a white paper regarding demarcation extensions. They indicated that regular Cat 3/5 cable could likely be used to 1000-2000 feet, and individually-shielded twisted pair cable could go 6000 feet. As noted above, crosstalk is normally the critical factor in the distance "game". pt
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
This is a pretty good site that will answer most of your questions. http://www.dcbnet.com/notes/9611t1.html On 7/21/04 7:25 AM, "Andre Oppermann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm having a few questions about T1 line support in the US because I have to > procure > some Router/Network hardware for US branches of a company (I am from Europe). > > Normally in Europe when you order an E1 (G.703) connection the Telco delivers > a > NTU (Network termination Unit) which normally is a (S)HDSL modem converting > from > two-wire DSL to four-wire E1 electrical. The cable between the NTU and the > Router > is normally very short, a few feet/meters. > > o How is this normally done in the US by the Telcos for T1 lines? > > o I assume the difference between T1 short-haul and long-haul is the cable > length. >But what is it used for? Is it still common to have long-haul T1 > connections >either within buildings or towards the central office of the Telco? Would > I be >fine with buying short-haul-only interfaces in any common scenario? > > o What is "Wet T1 Capable"? What is it used for and who needs this? > > o What else is important in dealings with US Telcos when ordering and using T1 >leased-line services? > > Thanks for any input. -- Ken Budd Data Systems Engineer 702 Communications Moorhead, MN 56560 PH: 218.284.5702 FAX: 218.284.5746
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
At 08:25 AM 7/21/2004, you wrote: Normally in Europe when you order an E1 (G.703) connection the Telco delivers a NTU (Network termination Unit) which normally is a (S)HDSL modem converting from two-wire DSL to four-wire E1 electrical. The cable between the NTU and the Router is normally very short, a few feet/meters. You can travel up to 655 ft. with a T1 cable from the NTU which the phone company will drop at your site. According to the letter of the specs, you are supposed to use "T1 cable" two 22AWG pairs individually shielded to prevent cross-talk. In practice, we have extended DMarcs up to 200-300 feet with regular Cat 3/4/5/6 cable and have never had any problems or out of spec. cross-talk as a result. o How is this normally done in the US by the Telcos for T1 lines? Same basic procedure, the telco will drop off a T1 smartjack (NTU) and you will plug your equipment into this box. o I assume the difference between T1 short-haul and long-haul is the cable length. But what is it used for? Is it still common to have long-haul T1 connections either within buildings or towards the central office of the Telco? Would I be fine with buying short-haul-only interfaces in any common scenario? Most modern equipment allows you to set the tx/rx gain on the DSU. We use mostly Cisco WIC-1DSU-T1 cards which fit into any 1600/1700/2600/3600/3700 router and provide better diagnostic capabilities than older standalone DSUs. It is also nice to have a single box rather than two power cables and a serial cable to worry about at a remote site. o What is "Wet T1 Capable"? What is it used for and who needs this? This is one of the "features" of the new WIC-1DSU-T1-V2. It seems that some DSUs can be powered by the telco remotely. In 15 years of working in communications, I've never seen this, but that doesn't mean it isn't used by some remote telco using old style T1 without HDSL or HDSL2 running over the line. In almost all cases today, the T1 spam itself will be powered from the CO and the smartjack will convert 2 HDSL pairs or one HDSL2 pair to a T1 signal with distinct TX/RX pairs. Does anyone else have more/better info? o What else is important in dealings with US Telcos when ordering and using T1 leased-line services? If the service is available in your office areas, make sure to specify ESF framing and B8ZS encoding when you order the line. AMI is robbed bit signaling and will give you 24 56k channels instead of the 24 64k channels of B8ZS. The biggest problem is keeping after the carrier to actually install the circuit. -Robert Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211 "Good will, like a good name, is got by many actions, and lost by one." - Francis Jeffrey
Re: T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Andre Oppermann wrote: > I'm having a few questions about T1 line support in the US because I have to procure > some Router/Network hardware for US branches of a company (I am from Europe). > > Normally in Europe when you order an E1 (G.703) connection the Telco delivers a > NTU (Network termination Unit) which normally is a (S)HDSL modem converting from > two-wire DSL to four-wire E1 electrical. The cable between the NTU and the Router > is normally very short, a few feet/meters. FYI I'm in the UK, this is not normal in all europe i guess.. they usually present as unbalanced g703. I dont know the answers to the below as I've never had a T1 in the US.. but I think its important particularly when ordering in a market your not familiar with to request the telco gives you a specification. Even if you get the answers to the questions, dont assume this applies to all circuits from all telcos in NA.. get the spec and confirm with your supplier that you are getting what you expect. If you order the wrong thing it will cost money.. Steve > > o How is this normally done in the US by the Telcos for T1 lines? > > o I assume the difference between T1 short-haul and long-haul is the cable length. >But what is it used for? Is it still common to have long-haul T1 connections >either within buildings or towards the central office of the Telco? Would I be >fine with buying short-haul-only interfaces in any common scenario? > > o What is "Wet T1 Capable"? What is it used for and who needs this? > > o What else is important in dealings with US Telcos when ordering and using T1 >leased-line services? > > Thanks for any input. >
T1 short-haul vs. long-haul
I'm having a few questions about T1 line support in the US because I have to procure some Router/Network hardware for US branches of a company (I am from Europe). Normally in Europe when you order an E1 (G.703) connection the Telco delivers a NTU (Network termination Unit) which normally is a (S)HDSL modem converting from two-wire DSL to four-wire E1 electrical. The cable between the NTU and the Router is normally very short, a few feet/meters. o How is this normally done in the US by the Telcos for T1 lines? o I assume the difference between T1 short-haul and long-haul is the cable length. But what is it used for? Is it still common to have long-haul T1 connections either within buildings or towards the central office of the Telco? Would I be fine with buying short-haul-only interfaces in any common scenario? o What is "Wet T1 Capable"? What is it used for and who needs this? o What else is important in dealings with US Telcos when ordering and using T1 leased-line services? Thanks for any input. -- Andre
Re: Whois/RWhois Server - what is everyone running..?
Richard J. Sears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We are looking into the possibility of implementing our own RWhois > server as opposed to continuing to provide information via SWIP. I > am looking for any advice as to what people are currently running > for their whois/rwhois server. When I started working at CentralNic, I found it was little more than a Perl script hanging off inetd. I replaced it with an Apache-style preforked daemon (still written in Perl) that cached database handles and the like, with the intent that this was a proof of concept for a C++ version. As is typical, the Perl worked well enough that it didn't get rewritten :) [...] > Searching Google does not seem to produce a variety of whois/rwhois > server software. It's not exactly a common requirement... -- PGP key ID E85DC776 - finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for full key
