Landlines

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Littleman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Littleman says:
<span style="color: #660000">If I were to run a server-based application from my home Internet connection, I wouldn't want to use cable, because the cable network is shared with other users in your immediate neighbourhood, thus not a very secure system.

What is 'fios'?</span> </div></div>

Oh I forgot to further explain that running any kind of Server means a very likely possibility that the Server would be exposed in some manner, so the same steps that you take on say a Server over a Land Line would be similar to that on a Cable Based Server.
Since the TelCos generally discourage the operation of Servers on an ordinary account, a Server setup up with the knowledge of the Provider get <span style="font-style: italic">(whether land or Cable)</span> a dedicated IP.

I say this to say that the concern must be with Bandwidth and not security. Land Line Providers are well versed in using scare tactics, which pushes the deceptive argument that as more Broadband Customers are signed up to Cable, the Bandwidth, will decrease. This is true but there is a rider to that argument. It is much easier and cheaper to increase Bandwidth on Cable that on Copper Lines and any Cable Company that cares about its reputation would not want to risk Consumer backlash simply because it refuses to plan properly and when plans fail, to rectify mistakes.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">FIOS</span> looks to be the future. Fiber Optic Cable have an almost infinite expansion capability and I think in the future both Land Line Companies and Cable Companies might find it cheaper to offer this as standard Termination for their Broadband Customers <span style="font-style: italic">(they already rely on Fiber Optic for there Switching and Bulk Transmission)</span>, which would make the whole thing cheaper and simpler!

[R00TS]

Re: Landlines

Keeping mine incase of power outages. dats the only reason..
but may call like Milo, and tell them I'm cuting it off just to see what they offer

[kia027]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R00TS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Keeping mine incase of power outages. dats the only reason..
but may call like Milo, and tell them I'm cuting it off just to see what they offer </div></div>

you can buy a battery backup device and u have a good 8 hrs

btw with Fios the ONT has a backup battery for 8 hrs too

[R00TS]

Re: Landlines

Thats cool but 8 hrs isnt enough.

[kia027]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R00TS</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thats cool but 8 hrs isnt enough. </div></div>

but when they replace ur copper with Fios that is what you will get..

out in my area, they are agressively marketing Fios.. to the point where Verizon sold off its rural local telephone market... the states of Maine, New Hampshire &amp; Vermont!

[bee_bop]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Littleman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Littleman says:
<span style="color: #660000">If I were to run a server-based application from my home Internet connection, I wouldn't want to use cable, because the cable network is shared with other users in your immediate neighbourhood, thus not a very secure system.

What is 'fios'?</span> </div></div>

Oh I forgot to further explain that running any kind of Server means a very likely possibility that the Server would be exposed in some manner, so the same steps that you take on say a Server over a Land Line would be similar to that on a Cable Based Server.
Since the TelCos generally discourage the operation of Servers on an ordinary account, a Server setup up with the knowledge of the Provider get <span style="font-style: italic">(whether land or Cable)</span> a dedicated IP.

I say this to say that the concern must be with Bandwidth and not security. Land Line Providers are well versed in using scare tactics, which pushes the deceptive argument that as more Broadband Customers are signed up to Cable, the Bandwidth, will decrease. This is true but there is a rider to that argument. It is much easier and cheaper to increase Bandwidth on Cable that on Copper Lines and any Cable Company that cares about its reputation would not want to risk Consumer backlash simply because it refuses to plan properly and when plans fail, to rectify mistakes.

<span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">FIOS</span> looks to be the future. Fiber Optic Cable have an almost infinite expansion capability and I think in the future both Land Line Companies and Cable Companies might find it cheaper to offer this as standard Termination for their Broadband Customers <span style="font-style: italic">(they already rely on Fiber Optic for there Switching and Bulk Transmission)</span>, which would make the whole thing cheaper and simpler!
</div></div>

Littleman says:
<span style="color: #660000">Internet Service Providers (ISP) providers cannot tell you not to use a server, since some home entertainment devices are servers themselves, such as some gaming devices. The ISPs do block the port for e-mail, I think it's port 25, to stop spamming, and also to force some users to get T-1 service, which has this port open, but is more expensive.

Tuffy, cable is different from a copper landline, cable users share the cable, and as more users are Online simultaneously, the bandwidth decreases. Also, any users of cable can see each others' computer, like a big network. With cable, you can't avoid using a firewall, or else!!!

Sniffer software can be used in this situation to intercept messages on the cable, meant for your neighbours. This doesn't happen with landline, since each DSL service (for eg.) is a unique connection, unshared with other adjacent users of the DSL service. Although from the trunk, or main fiber at the switch, the total bandwidth is divided-up among the DSL customers fed from that switch. From the switch towards the network, the signals from each customer are time-divided, so as to use the capacity of the fiber to its maximum, at all times. At this point one could intercept messages going to and from each user, but no one, except the government really shows any interest in doing this.

AT&amp;T is pushing the limits of copper landlines, to the point where they will be able to offer possibly up to 20 Megs on landline that has been specially prepared for this service. Cable has wide bandwidth, but it's expensive, and not as wide in bandwidth as fiber. There is a new passive fiber service, that is taken to the home, where the terminating device does not use electricity from the customer, but I don't think this is widely available. </span>

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Littleman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Tuffy, cable is different from a copper landline, cable users share the cable, and as more users are Online simultaneously, the bandwidth decreases. Also, any users of cable can see each others' computer, like a big network. With cable, you can't avoid using a firewall, or else!!![/color] </div></div>
Land Lines are shared too, at the head individual lines are then split off over Copper Wires. This fact makes it more difficult to speed up and increase Service on LAnd Lines, because the TelCos have to run more physical wires from the Splitter <span style="font-style: italic">(the physical characteristics of the wire also affect the scope and quality of the Service, which is why the availability of Super DSL is limited by the distance from the switching station.)</span> to each consumer. Cable is a big pipe and theatrically each user that gets connected to the Pipe could draw off more water than the pipe could supply.

The Cable Providers just like your other Utilities Providers do not dig up the main every time they need to connect a user, because proper planning should account for increase or even decrease in consumption.
As noted before FOIS should reduce or eliminate the limitations of either Service.

As for seeing you Computer on a Cable Service that is almost impossible in the ordinary run of things. Your System is IDed not because it is running on a Cable but because it on a Network open to interference (especially when you visit certain sites, download certain programs masked in data files, etc), which would why you would want your Computer to be Firewalled.

Can you show me any evidence that Consumers routinely have their Computers <span style="font-style: italic">(not operating a Server or otherwise exposing their Computers in some unsecured way to the outside world?)</span> tampered with simply because they are on Cable Broadband?

As for the Server you described that is a Network Server in your home sorta of like and Intranet. Exposing your Server to the Wide Area Network over the Internet requires an agreement with the provider because whether Copper Wire of Cable they expect the Home Consumer to remain within a certain Bandwidth, serving pages over the Internet to all-comers is more taxing than playing a Game on your Intranet.

[bee_bop]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tuff Gong</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Littleman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Tuffy, cable is different from a copper landline, cable users share the cable, and as more users are Online simultaneously, the bandwidth decreases. Also, any users of cable can see each others' computer, like a big network. With cable, you can't avoid using a firewall, or else!!![/color] </div></div>
Land Lines are shared too, at the head individual lines are then split off over Copper Wires. This fact makes it more difficult to speed up and increase Service on LAnd Lines, because the TelCos have to run more physical wires from the Splitter <span style="font-style: italic">(the physical characteristics of the wire also affect the scope and quality of the Service, which is why the availability of Super DSL is limited by the distance from the switching station.)</span> to each consumer. Cable is a big pipe and theatrically each user that gets connected to the Pipe could draw off more water than the pipe could supply.

The Cable Providers just like your other Utilities Providers do not dig up the main every time they need to connect a user, because proper planning should account for increase or even decrease in consumption.
As noted before FOIS should reduce or eliminate the limitations of either Service.

As for seeing you Computer on a Cable Service that is almost impossible in the ordinary run of things. Your System is IDed not because it is running on a Cable but because it on a Network open to interference (especially when you visit certain sites, download certain programs masked in data files, etc), which would why you would want your Computer to be Firewalled.

Can you show me any evidence that Consumers routinely have their Computers <span style="font-style: italic">(not operating a Server or otherwise exposing their Computers in some unsecured way to the outside world?)</span> tampered with simply because they are on Cable Broadband?

As for the Server you described that is a Network Server in your home sorta of like and Intranet. Exposing your Server to the Wide Area Network over the Internet requires an agreement with the provider because whether Copper Wire of Cable they expect the Home Consumer to remain within a certain Bandwidth, serving pages over the Internet to all-comers is more taxing than playing a Game on your Intranet.
</div></div>

Littleman says:
<span style="color: #660000">Tuffy, landlines are not shared. Each DSL, or ordinary POTS service, <span style="font-weight: bold">is a separate DS0 channel</span>, there are 24 DS0 channels that make up a T-1(or DS1), 28 T-1s make up a DS3, or T-3, service, and it goes on from there. Technically, you could break-out a single DS0 from a DS3 signal, but it's most often broken down to a DS1 (or T-1), then to the component DS0 channels.
Cable is shared, and when I get the time I'll find some references, it is a big network, where the individual users <span style="font-weight: bold">can</span> see each other.

AS for this paragraph you stated, &quot;<span style="font-style: italic">Exposing your Server to the Wide Area Network over the Internet requires an agreement with the provider because whether Copper Wire of Cable they expect the Home Consumer to remain within a certain Bandwidth, serving pages over the Internet to all-comers is more taxing than playing a Game on your Intranet.</span>&quot;

Well, my response to that is to ask you to check out this web server at fenixzone , which is a home-based server, and which the telco knows nothing about, at least <span style="font-weight: bold">not by an agreement</span>. In other words, I did not require the permission of the telco, or ISP, to operate that server.</span>

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Littleman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">AS for this paragraph you stated, &quot;<span style="font-style: italic">Exposing your Server to the Wide Area Network over the Internet requires an agreement with the provider because whether Copper Wire of Cable they expect the Home Consumer to remain within a certain Bandwidth, serving pages over the Internet to all-comers is more taxing than playing a Game on your Intranet.</span>&quot;

Well, my response to that is to ask you to check out this web server at fenixzone , which is a home-based server, and which the telco knows nothing about, at least <span style="font-weight: bold">not by an agreement</span>. In other words, I did not require the permission of the telco, or ISP, to operate that server.[/color] </div></div>

Yes but your response does not defeat my argument. Read any Service agreement between a home consumer and the provider, (Cable/DSL or any other High Speed Broadband Service), it explicitly bars the user from going beyond certain Bandwidth limits i.e. operating a Public Server, it does not say it can not be done. In fact that was the original reason why most users chose Cable over DSL when both were available, because the TelCos would simple disable your service when expand it in home with a router or build any kind of Server.

I have had both Service in the past so I am talking from experience. I first started with DSL then quickly went to Cable, because of the restriction on use and patchy service.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Littleman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Littleman says:
<span style="color: #660000">Tuffy, landlines are not shared. Each DSL, or ordinary POTS service, <span style="font-weight: bold">is a separate DS0 channel</span>, there are 24 DS0 channels that make up a T-1(or DS1), 28 T-1s make up a DS3, or T-3, service, and it goes on from there. Technically, you could break-out a single DS0 from a DS3 signal, but it's most often broken down to a DS1 (or T-1), then to the component DS0 channels.
Cable is shared, and when I get the time I'll find some references, it is a big network, where the individual users <span style="font-weight: bold">can</span> see each other.</span></div></div>In technical Terms all Communication over matter is shared, Cable and Land Line send out information via a Carrier Frequency, to get to individual Consumers a stream is given a unique Identifier. No the argument of where the split happens or how much sharing it involves let concede to use that it is less so in a Copper Line than on Cable, but my essential point is Cable Providers anticipate increase load and there are built in mechanisms to deal with this.

Now as to the other argument I am waiting for you to demonstrate that each user on a Cable System <span style="font-style: italic">(in the ordinary usage of the service)</span>, are able to see each other as you claim.

[kia027]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Littleman says:
Tuffy, landlines are not shared. Each DSL, or ordinary POTS service, is a separate DS0 channel, there are 24 DS0 channels that make up a T-1(or DS1), 28 T-1s make up a DS3, or T-3, service, and it goes on from there. Technically, you could break-out a single DS0 from a DS3 signal, but it's most often broken down to a DS1 (or T-1), then to the component DS0 channels.
Cable is shared, and when I get the time I'll find some references, it is a big network, where the individual users can see each other.
</div></div>

Remember also the loop can be shared as in a line split arrangement where that DS0 is split between two different providers as well.. one who has the voice and the other who has the data portion of the line. voice only uses about 8K of that frequency

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Keyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Littleman says:
Tuffy, landlines are not shared. Each DSL, or ordinary POTS service, is a separate DS0 channel, there are 24 DS0 channels that make up a T-1(or DS1), 28 T-1s make up a DS3, or T-3, service, and it goes on from there. Technically, you could break-out a single DS0 from a DS3 signal, but it's most often broken down to a DS1 (or T-1), then to the component DS0 channels.
Cable is shared, and when I get the time I'll find some references, it is a big network, where the individual users can see each other.
</div></div>

Remember also the loop can be <span style="font-weight: bold">shared</span> as in a line split arrangement where that DS0 is split between two different providers as well.. one who has the voice and the other who has the data portion of the line. voice only uses about 8K of that frequency
</div></div>I don't think you are helping his cause!

<span style="font-family: 'Arial Black'">Anyway</span> to get forward to the original convo.... SKYPE is still a valid option; it has performed almost flawlessly for me within the restrictions of WIFI availability. I have device that it works very well on even in Semi-Mobile Situations.

[bee_bop]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Keyer</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Littleman says:
Tuffy, landlines are not shared. Each DSL, or ordinary POTS service, is a separate DS0 channel, there are 24 DS0 channels that make up a T-1(or DS1), 28 T-1s make up a DS3, or T-3, service, and it goes on from there. Technically, you could break-out a single DS0 from a DS3 signal, but it's most often broken down to a DS1 (or T-1), then to the component DS0 channels.
Cable is shared, and when I get the time I'll find some references, it is a big network, where the individual users can see each other.
</div></div>

Remember also the loop can be shared as in a line split arrangement where that DS0 is split between two different providers as well.. one who has the voice and the other who has the data portion of the line. voice only uses about 8K of that frequency
</div></div>

Littleman says:
<span style="color: #660000"><span style="font-weight: bold">Keyer</span>, that splitting of the voice (or POTS) from data is known as frequency division multiplexing, which I deliberately didn't mention, since it really didn't have any bearing on the point of DSL being a single channel (unshared) DS0 signal coming from the Central Office switch.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In fact that was the original reason why most users chose Cable over DSL when both were available, because the TelCos would simple disable your service when expand it in home with a router or build any kind of Server.</div></div>

<span style="font-weight: bold">Tuffy</span>, if you have an XBOX 360, and play multi-player over the Internet you are using a server in the XBOX.
If you use a peer-to-peer service like Kazaa, or bitTorrent, you are also using a server that was installed as part of an application. This also goes for the former Napster service. The Telco companies know about this, and allow it, <span style="font-weight: bold">it is good for business</span>...

Having a server, with a router in your home is no big deal, it does not require a bandwidth greater than that of a DSL service. When you click on the link I provided previously all you are doing is connecting to the web server, and your browser requests web pages from the server, most of the files that would be sent to your browser are not larger than say 100 kBytes roughly...<span style="font-weight: bold">no big deal</span>...

Again, I reiterate, the DSL is provided by a DS0 channel that is of <span style="font-weight: bold">fixed</span> bandwidth, depending on the switch that provides the service it can be 64 kbits, or 1.5 Mbits, up to 10 Mbits. <span style="font-weight: bold">No</span> sharing of bandwidth takes place. As the signal gets multiplexed (no sharing of bandwidth), in C.O. equipment, it gets interleaved with bit streams from other DS0 signals, and broken up in size if necessary, at the other end it is demultiplexed to the original DS0 signal, etc.

<span style="font-weight: bold">To put simply, DSL is a point-to-point technology, and cable uses shared multi-point circuits.
&quot;A single downstream 6 MHz television channel can carry up to 27 Mbps of downstream data throughput from the cable head-end; upstream channels can deliver 500 Kbps to 10 Mbps from home and business end-users. <span style="font-weight: bold">This upstream and downstream bandwidth is <span style="font-size: 14pt">shared</span> by other data subscribers connected to the same cable network segment, which is often 500 to 2000 homes on a modern network</span>&quot; taken from DSL and cable modem networks . </span></span>

[kia027]

Re: Landlines

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Keyer, that splitting of the voice (or POTS) from data is known as frequency division multiplexing, which I deliberately didn't mention, since it really didn't have any bearing on the point of DSL being a single channel (unshared) DS0 signal coming from the Central Office switch.</div></div>

ahmm ok! but but what about this?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Data uses the higher frequency ranges and voice the lower frequencies of the same line to split the technology into a shared line. Each CLEC provider merely employs different analog frequencies for transporting voice and data on the line.
How It Works

One splitter is installed at the end user premises and a second one at the central office. The splitters permit xDSL service to be added to the local loop so that Line Splitting can be provisioned.</div></div>

[Seveen]

Re: Landlines

reception?

y'all making my head spin