On Tuesday 06 December 2005 17:36, Robert Collins wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-12-06 at 14:45 +1100, James Gray wrote:
> > > > At tleast this was how the regs were written back in '95 when I was
> > > > AUSTel Certified. Things may have changed - usual disclaimers apply.
> > >
> > > Jesus thats scarey. Why isn't my power socket AUSTel certified ?
> >
> > Because the assumption is that you are using AUSTel approved
> > network/telephone equipment which has been certified to meet the
> > isolation requirements.
> >
> > I've personally seen what happens to a thin-ether (10base2) network when
> > a PC's power supply decided to send all 240VAC through the motherboard
> > and hence the network card. Goodnight Irene for everything else too.
> > However, the same machine had an AUSTel certified internal (ISA) modem -
> > the PABX it was running through was untouched.
> >
> > See the difference?
>
> Sorry, I think my irony was not clear enough. I'm not saying the austel
> standards based/useless/wrong. I was pointing out that my *power supply*
> is electrical equipment, connected to the phone network but not
> certified. So I dont see why *other equipement* cannot also be
> considered outside the bounds of the standards, because of the same
> isolation requirements.
Ah - gotcha. NFI, I know of one cabler who was not certified and got stung
for wiring up a commercial premises that "eventually" got hooked into the
PSTN phone system. When the Telstra (then Telecom) dude showed up he blew
the whistle. They (AUSTel et al) seem to be a bit "thingy" about hard-wired
data networks for some reason.
James
--
It's amazing how nice people are to you when they know you're going away.
-- Michael Arlen
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
