Let us remember, to the RBOCs, LD equates to the ability to cross LATA boundries without involving a third party (LD company.)
For instance, look at Bellsouth.Net. It's their dialup hardware on their property with their dialtone, however, they have no wide area IP network because they cannot cross LATA boundries. Each POP is connected to the world via a "Global Service Provider" (UUNet in my area.) Connecting all these sites themselves would save them millions. (And give them a very big stick to weild over other ISPs.)
Alot of the problems in the DSL market stems from companies not being prepared for the bullshit required when dealing with Telcos. DSL is 100 times worse than normal telco services because hardware has to be installed on the Telco turf and that hardware needs power and connectivity to your infrastructure. Buying lines from Bell is no worse than buying anything else from them. There have been problems with some RBOCs prioritizing their own customers above competitive parties, but those have dwendled -- I've not (directly) seen any problems with BellSouth delaying installation of local loops. (Think about it, the RBOCs have a very powerful advantage in the DSL market -- they don't pay colo or loop fees.)
Actually, if it ever goes to court, there may be nothing to present. Unless he was aware the phone call was being recorded, the tape is tanted. If there was no search warrant, any materials collected by the FBI at his place of business is also tanted. If the agents didn't identify themselves prior to asking him to show them what he meant, that's entrapment. And of course, if he was never read his rights,...
While I certainly would agree, on the surface, this looks stupid, we may not have the full story. AND, accidental or intentional, he is almost certainly guilty of "computer tresspass". The "door" analogy is a little flawed... one cannot "see" that a password is not required without actually trying. Look at it more as walking up to knock on a door while blind-folded. Bascially, a locked door looks just like an unlocked door; you have to try to open it to tell one way or the other. And thus, the law is broken (bent, whatever.) Laws that apply to the physical world don't always have an equal in the virtual world.
(The lack of formal charges would suggest nothing will ever come of this stupidity.)
Hmm, evil or DDoS in the making
on
Code Redux
·
· Score: 5, Funny
I know I'm askin' for it, but I couldn't resist:
cd/home/httpd/html
ln -s/dev/zero default.ida
I'm only a 128k ISDN, but with compression, I can push over a T1 worth of zeros:-) (And people say PPPoE has no value.)
They cannot out-right tell the competition to go away without opening the door to antitrust suits. HellSouth has faced a number of them for this sort of thing.
Yes, the FCC mandates they have to allow access to the local loop (what's called an Unbundled Network Element - UNE.) However, they don't say how much they can charge for it -- that's up to the Public Utilities Commision. Until the last few years, the lines being used for DSL didn't fall within any existing PUC tariff. The FCC also mandates they have to allow access to wire centers, but, again, they set no rates.
At any rate, DSL ain't POTS. Rerouting circuit switched traffic for a POTS line is trivial -- the entire PSTN infrastructure is designed to handle it. Rerouting DSL is a pain in the ass and often not possible. The line goes from your house to the CO where it connects to the DSL termination gear. The line can be terminated by any DSLAM actually in that CO (with the exception of ISDL which isn't, strictly speaking, DSL -- it's a leased ISDN line.) Either your ISP owns the terminating hardware or they buy a port from someone who does have hardware there (i.e. a Partner ISP.) Barring those two, you're SOL.
And which law is that? The line belongs to Qwest and the ISP terminating it. I don't care how loud you scream, your traffic cannot be "routed to a different ISP" unless they are a Qwest DSL partner ISP (i.e. they have a trunk to Qwest to receive the traffic.)
In the case of Covad, the current ISP has to release the circuit before a new ISP can become the terminus. The end user has no say (at least to Covad.)
If there is only one thing to learn from the past 20 years of the software industry, it's that copy protection technology does not work. There has not been a single piece of copy protection technology that has had any effect. At worst, it has rendered some systems unusable -- most drives reduce read speed with they start encountering errors. (I had to remove the copy protection from Populous to even be able to play it. I was very god damned pissed off about that.)
Face facts. It's a sequence of ones and zeros. It's always the same sequence of ones and zeros. It is impossible to physically prevent the duplication of a series of ones and zeros. The sequence that equals 42 always equals 42 and it's always the same sequence.
Nothing they do can physically stop duplication. And it's not the average home user that costs the industry "billions of dollars a year" (which they like to throw out frequently with zero backing.) It's the factories de-compositing the discs -- making an almost molecular copy -- that are the serious problem and no amount of tricks can stop that.
Their stance has become "fuck it, make it illegal to even think about it." It's already illegal -- Copyright law is, surprisingly, a law.
And btw, the default in windows now is to use digital audio playback. I had a hell of a time getting 98 and even NT to play CDs on my laptop (Compaq LTE5400.)
Technically, the only thing the US can do is revoke his visa (passport/whatever) and kick him out of the country. In practice, the police (FBI/whatever) don't ask for proof of citizenship before they arrest you -- they don't care.
I suspect this will end up as an international "incident". Someone from the Russian Consulate will have to go through the proper channels to get their citizen released.
And, unless he was selling or otherwise knowingly distributing the program while at DefCon (or anywhere on US soil), he wasn't breaking any law. Even posessing the program on his laptop is not illegal. However, the act of publication has yet to be tested as everyone has backed away when faced with law suits.
(First amendment or not, the DMCA will not be thrown out. Personally, I find the DMCA utterly stupid -- it's a law that makes it illegal to break numerous pre-existing laws.)
#
# Setup the prompt
#
if (! $?STY) then
set prompt="[%l]%S%m:%s%c3/%S[%t]%s:"
else
set TTY = `echo $STY|cut -d. -f2`
if ($?PROMPT) then
set prompt="$PROMPT"
else
set prompt="[%l]%S%m($TTY\:S.$WINDOW):%s%c3/%S[%t]%s:" endif
endif
Which looks like:
[ttya2]beaker(ttyp1:S.3):~/[12:48pm]:
And here at work, the idiots set the prompts to:
PROMPT=$D $T$_$P$G
As has been stated repeatedly, they can enable backdoors perminantly. That will give you the ability to set the clock manually via the UI. Of course, without guide data, the tivo is next to worthless.
it will probably come with the new "improved" software only
Correct. All the new units should come with 2.0 on them. And they certainly will not work without a subscription.
they sold these things.
Actually, Philips, Sony, and Hughes sell the hardware. TiVo sells the software (aka "the service".) Pay attention to the name of the product... "Philips Personal Video Recorder with TiVo Service" You own the hardware, but you do not own the software on the drive (or any of the content of MFS -- backgrounds, fonts, sounds, etc.) TiVo is well within their legal rights to do what ever they want to the software. Please keep in mind this nut left it plugged into the phone line calling into UUNet and thus costing TiVo money while paying nothing.
... gain unauthorised access...
Right. First, the TiVo is not a "computer" in that sense. Second, how can it be claimed to be unauthorized access when it called tivo and did exactly what it was designed to do (and likely had done before)? He plugged it into the phone line knowing it's going to call TiVo everyday. Unsubscribed units do get upgrades -- though they will be the last to get it. And if he bothered to look, you certainly can set the date manually.
This is not a mistake. It's not an accident. The 2.0 software was intentionaly designed to be a pain in the ass without a subscription. TiVo doesn't make anything off the sale of the hardware -- they sell the "with TiVo Service" part. Everyone of those boxes will try to call TiVo everyday (if it cannot call in for several days, a watchdog reboots the box) either via the 800# -- which costs tivo in the neighborhood of 5 to 7 cents a minute -- or by a local UUNet modem pool which certainly costs TiVo money. They are not likely to change their stance on this. They are also moving to make it harder and harder for people to hack the hardware -- a PROM with a crypto signature on the kernel + initrd image, an initrd image with copies of core files which it will replace if changed, no more "shondss", etc.
And, the TiVo is much more than a TV listing as found "in the Sunday paper." (Last time I checked, the sunday paper was far from free.)
You forget about all the network (router) admins with their hands chained behind their back... money, time, hardware capabilities, etc. I know things will eventually bite one on the ass, but until there are teeth marks to point at, it's hard to break the inertia.
There's a lot of things I'd like to do -- things I've always advocated -- that I cannot do within the constraints of existing systems. The router doesn't have the processing power to handle a filter list that long. That version of IOS doesn't have that capability. That router won't run that version of IOS. I cannot break a router (and thus multiple connections) for an hour a day for a month to help Cisco debug IOS. (etc., etc.)
PS: I don't mean to pick on Cisco. I could just as easily (ok, more easily) point fingers at Telebit, 3Com, Ascend, etc.
Well, the packet has to come from somewhere. A spoofed packet will have a source address other than the actual source of the packet -- usually not even remotely similar to the actual source. If the router at the next hop takes the time to verify the incoming traffic on that interface is coming from addresses known to be there, then spoofing becomes a non-issue. Unfortunately, no one is sufficently paranoid (or insane) to configure spoofing filters on every interface. It's too much of a configuration management headache and it proves very costly to the router.
For example, let us assume an ISP has a customer with a LAN on the far end of a T1 using the class C 192.168.1.0. If the ISPs router were to see packets sourced from 172.16.4.7, then obviously something is not right. It's either spoofed or a mis-configuration -- the customer could be multi-homed, or have two LANs, etc.
As an admin (dare I say BOFH?) I'd just shut them off and wait for them to call tech support and then proceed to explain to them what they had done (knowingly or otherwise doesn't matter.) Disruption of network services is generally within the terms of service agreements.
And, yes, I have disabled customer's access and then gone and sat in the helpdesk area (the "fish tank") to wait for them to call.
Sorry, I left out the "not". Go ahead and give it a try; I bet you'll not be able to find anyone with functional spoofing filters. (No one I've ever worked for has one.)
It's not the size of the route tables. The filter list has to be inspected for every packet on the interface. You need help from the silicon to do it right.
Right. Maybe you do this, but most of the internet does despite efforts to the contrary -- MFS once threatened to disconnect people who weren't blocking spoofed traffic entering and leaving their network. We already know alot of providers just don't give a damn, as gibson puts it, as long as the bill gets paid.
Packet filtering becomes rather expensive as the filter list gets longer and the number of packets continues to grow.
Technically, they wouldn't have to share -- check with the local Public Utility agency. Those vaults aren't CO's or Wire Centers. There is extremely limited space and power in those vaults.
The CLEC can build their own vaults if they want. In my experience, no CLEC will build a vault -- there's no economic point in doing so.
And for my 2 cents, alot of the DSL providers are folding because they didn't realize what they were getting themselves into. The only way to make money from DSL is to be the phone company. And I don't think they realized the hell they were walking into trying to get access to the coveted last mile.
The Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) can only handle, at best, 64000 bit per second. That's 8000 8 bit samples per second. Each of those 8 bit samples is called a PCM Code. 56k modems (using a max of 7 of the 8 bits) work by transmitting digital data in the form of direct PCM codes instead of creating an analog signal. Basically, they are fixed frequency, voltage modulated radios.
The 56k T1 channels are from "robbed bit singalling" where bits are robbed from each channel to handle in-band management (caller id and that sort of stuff.) PRIs and SS7 keeps all that stuff out of band.
And while I'm drooling on about modems, that "crappy" 33.6k modem is actually a marvel of engineering. You get 14,400 bits per second out of a 1.8KHz analog signal -- 1200 baud. Beyond that, they begin to push the limits by using higher and higher symbol rates (up to 3.5KHz.) If that kind of code modulation were applied to PCM transmittions, you wouldn't hate your old modem as much.
Actually, alarm lines are not designed for communications. They are "dry contact" lines which means continuity is the only thing you can be certain of. You have zero say about the loading of the line -- it could have a load-coil every three feet. Additionally, when ordering an alarm circuit, you have to specify the location of both ends. You cannot be 100% certain it will go through even one CO.
Yeap. They are called "Remote Offices". And at least with BellSouth, you get only what BellSouth wants to sell you -- which is consumer ADSL. There is zero colo in a remote office.
Fiber-in-the-loop means you don't have an end-to-end copper loop. DSL, with the exception of IDSL, requires a direct electrical connection to the CPE. There are a number of products that can be placed in concentrators (i.e. DSL line cards) that move the DSL termination to the nearest junction which then trunks everything back to a "DSLAM" (calling it an ATM cell mux would be more accurate.) The problem is, no one uses this technology. I've known about them since mid-'98.
This is about surface vs. subsurface rights. It doesn't matter weither it's an actual lease or easement or whatever. The terms of the agreement are what's at issue. In the case of the "20,000" mentioned, the terms may have explicitly precluded burying or "sub-leasing" anything.
In all cases I am aware of (and there haven't been many new rails laid across North Carolina in recent years; in fact, some have been removed), the rail lines purchase right-of-way identical to that of the DOT -- with the exception that you can refuse to sell to a railroad.
The DOT certainly does not own the land overwhich they place roads. My property line actually extends to the center of the road beside the house. And that is on the deed. So, when they move a road, do I have to purchase "my" land back from the state? (No, because they don't own it. That's one of the reasons you cannot refuse to grant/sell right-of-way.)
The "contract" (100 year lease as I recall) allowing Duke Power to run a transmittion line across my family's property specifically states aerial deployment. They are not allowed to bury cable across the acres of pastures. (And they did surprisingly little damage in the process, btw.)
I stand by my original "lawyer bullshit" comment. The lawyers jump up and down on behalf of the issue because they stand to make a substantial fortune. The actual people "wronged" will walk away with next to nothing. (Remember the Iomega suit? After years, all the complaintants get is a rebate for more useless Iomega crap, and the lawyers get millions.) The detemination of how much they've been wronged (if at all) is something only a lawyer would quible over -- is six feet "subsurface" (are we counting the foot or more of dirt, sand, and gravel put there by the railroad?)
I repeat my original concern... if you can sue the railroad for "subsurface" use of your land, what's to stop people from suing any number of other utilities who bury things within the state's right-of-way? To quote a conversation between an NCDOT District Engineer and the Iredale County Water System Manager, "as I recall, your water lines are on DOT right-of-way. It'd be an aweful shame to make you move them."
What happens if I'm a farmer and you laid the fiber in the ground across one of my fields?
Then you'd have a train track smack through your corn field (or whatever.) The fiber is buried next to the tracks -- e.g. within a few feet.
it is trespassing on my property
Wrong again. Have you ever watched fiber being laid on RR right-of-way? (Obviously not) The cable is driven into the ground from a machine on the rails. They are no more tresspassing than Amtrak.
Interesting... the DOT doesn't have "drilling rights" either. So, does that mean millions of people should run out and sue a miriad of utility companies? (water lines, gas lines, phone trunks, and cable TV can all be found within the DOT RoW boundries.)
This is 100% lawyer bullshit. The sad thing (besides 45,000$/mile!) is the evil lawyers will win -- and walk away with 25% or more of the billions in settlements.
That's not entirely true. I've gotten 56k analog connections before. (Of course, I had control of the hardware on both ends.)
And I always get 56k connections from my courier -- the analog part is only 6 inches long before it goes into a netopia. It will still link at 56k with 200ft of cord on it, but it drops to 53k after a few minutes.
If you're outside the USoA, you can certainly get 56k analog connections -- over distances of miles. (All of/. isn't in the US.)
Slashdot Mirror
Let us remember, to the RBOCs, LD equates to the ability to cross LATA boundries without involving a third party (LD company.)
For instance, look at Bellsouth.Net. It's their dialup hardware on their property with their dialtone, however, they have no wide area IP network because they cannot cross LATA boundries. Each POP is connected to the world via a "Global Service Provider" (UUNet in my area.) Connecting all these sites themselves would save them millions. (And give them a very big stick to weild over other ISPs.)
Alot of the problems in the DSL market stems from companies not being prepared for the bullshit required when dealing with Telcos. DSL is 100 times worse than normal telco services because hardware has to be installed on the Telco turf and that hardware needs power and connectivity to your infrastructure. Buying lines from Bell is no worse than buying anything else from them. There have been problems with some RBOCs prioritizing their own customers above competitive parties, but those have dwendled -- I've not (directly) seen any problems with BellSouth delaying installation of local loops. (Think about it, the RBOCs have a very powerful advantage in the DSL market -- they don't pay colo or loop fees.)
Actually, if it ever goes to court, there may be nothing to present. Unless he was aware the phone call was being recorded, the tape is tanted. If there was no search warrant, any materials collected by the FBI at his place of business is also tanted. If the agents didn't identify themselves prior to asking him to show them what he meant, that's entrapment. And of course, if he was never read his rights, ...
While I certainly would agree, on the surface, this looks stupid, we may not have the full story. AND, accidental or intentional, he is almost certainly guilty of "computer tresspass". The "door" analogy is a little flawed... one cannot "see" that a password is not required without actually trying. Look at it more as walking up to knock on a door while blind-folded. Bascially, a locked door looks just like an unlocked door; you have to try to open it to tell one way or the other. And thus, the law is broken (bent, whatever.) Laws that apply to the physical world don't always have an equal in the virtual world.
(The lack of formal charges would suggest nothing will ever come of this stupidity.)
I know I'm askin' for it, but I couldn't resist:
/home/httpd/html
/dev/zero default.ida
:-) (And people say PPPoE has no value.)
cd
ln -s
I'm only a 128k ISDN, but with compression, I can push over a T1 worth of zeros
They cannot out-right tell the competition to go away without opening the door to antitrust suits. HellSouth has faced a number of them for this sort of thing.
Yes, the FCC mandates they have to allow access to the local loop (what's called an Unbundled Network Element - UNE.) However, they don't say how much they can charge for it -- that's up to the Public Utilities Commision. Until the last few years, the lines being used for DSL didn't fall within any existing PUC tariff. The FCC also mandates they have to allow access to wire centers, but, again, they set no rates.
At any rate, DSL ain't POTS. Rerouting circuit switched traffic for a POTS line is trivial -- the entire PSTN infrastructure is designed to handle it. Rerouting DSL is a pain in the ass and often not possible. The line goes from your house to the CO where it connects to the DSL termination gear. The line can be terminated by any DSLAM actually in that CO (with the exception of ISDL which isn't, strictly speaking, DSL -- it's a leased ISDN line.) Either your ISP owns the terminating hardware or they buy a port from someone who does have hardware there (i.e. a Partner ISP.) Barring those two, you're SOL.
And which law is that? The line belongs to Qwest and the ISP terminating it. I don't care how loud you scream, your traffic cannot be "routed to a different ISP" unless they are a Qwest DSL partner ISP (i.e. they have a trunk to Qwest to receive the traffic.)
In the case of Covad, the current ISP has to release the circuit before a new ISP can become the terminus. The end user has no say (at least to Covad.)
If there is only one thing to learn from the past 20 years of the software industry, it's that copy protection technology does not work. There has not been a single piece of copy protection technology that has had any effect. At worst, it has rendered some systems unusable -- most drives reduce read speed with they start encountering errors. (I had to remove the copy protection from Populous to even be able to play it. I was very god damned pissed off about that.)
Face facts. It's a sequence of ones and zeros. It's always the same sequence of ones and zeros. It is impossible to physically prevent the duplication of a series of ones and zeros. The sequence that equals 42 always equals 42 and it's always the same sequence.
Nothing they do can physically stop duplication. And it's not the average home user that costs the industry "billions of dollars a year" (which they like to throw out frequently with zero backing.) It's the factories de-compositing the discs -- making an almost molecular copy -- that are the serious problem and no amount of tricks can stop that.
Their stance has become "fuck it, make it illegal to even think about it." It's already illegal -- Copyright law is, surprisingly, a law.
And btw, the default in windows now is to use digital audio playback. I had a hell of a time getting 98 and even NT to play CDs on my laptop (Compaq LTE5400.)
Are there any international law experts around?
Technically, the only thing the US can do is revoke his visa (passport/whatever) and kick him out of the country. In practice, the police (FBI/whatever) don't ask for proof of citizenship before they arrest you -- they don't care.
I suspect this will end up as an international "incident". Someone from the Russian Consulate will have to go through the proper channels to get their citizen released.
And, unless he was selling or otherwise knowingly distributing the program while at DefCon (or anywhere on US soil), he wasn't breaking any law. Even posessing the program on his laptop is not illegal. However, the act of publication has yet to be tested as everyone has backed away when faced with law suits.
(First amendment or not, the DMCA will not be thrown out. Personally, I find the DMCA utterly stupid -- it's a law that makes it illegal to break numerous pre-existing laws.)
# Setup the prompt
#
if (! $?STY) then
set prompt="[%l]%S%m:%s%c3/%S[%t]%s:"
else
set TTY = `echo $STY|cut -d. -f2`
if ($?PROMPT) then
set prompt="$PROMPT"
else
set prompt="[%l]%S%m($TTY\:S.$WINDOW):%s%c3/%S[%t]%s:
endif
endif
Which looks like:
- [ttya2]beaker(ttyp1:S.3):~/[12:48pm]:
And here at work, the idiots set the prompts to:PROMPT=$D $T$_$P$G
Which looks like:
C:\>
As has been stated repeatedly, they can enable backdoors perminantly. That will give you the ability to set the clock manually via the UI. Of course, without guide data, the tivo is next to worthless.
- it will probably come with the new "improved" software only
Correct. All the new units should come with 2.0 on them. And they certainly will not work without a subscription.- they sold these things.
Actually, Philips, Sony, and Hughes sell the hardware. TiVo sells the software (aka "the service".) Pay attention to the name of the product... "Philips Personal Video Recorder with TiVo Service" You own the hardware, but you do not own the software on the drive (or any of the content of MFS -- backgrounds, fonts, sounds, etc.) TiVo is well within their legal rights to do what ever they want to the software. Please keep in mind this nut left it plugged into the phone line calling into UUNet and thus costing TiVo money while paying nothing. - ... gain unauthorised access
...
Right. First, the TiVo is not a "computer" in that sense. Second, how can it be claimed to be unauthorized access when it called tivo and did exactly what it was designed to do (and likely had done before)? He plugged it into the phone line knowing it's going to call TiVo everyday. Unsubscribed units do get upgrades -- though they will be the last to get it. And if he bothered to look, you certainly can set the date manually.This is not a mistake. It's not an accident. The 2.0 software was intentionaly designed to be a pain in the ass without a subscription. TiVo doesn't make anything off the sale of the hardware -- they sell the "with TiVo Service" part. Everyone of those boxes will try to call TiVo everyday (if it cannot call in for several days, a watchdog reboots the box) either via the 800# -- which costs tivo in the neighborhood of 5 to 7 cents a minute -- or by a local UUNet modem pool which certainly costs TiVo money. They are not likely to change their stance on this. They are also moving to make it harder and harder for people to hack the hardware -- a PROM with a crypto signature on the kernel + initrd image, an initrd image with copies of core files which it will replace if changed, no more "shondss", etc.
And, the TiVo is much more than a TV listing as found "in the Sunday paper." (Last time I checked, the sunday paper was far from free.)
You forget about all the network (router) admins with their hands chained behind their back... money, time, hardware capabilities, etc. I know things will eventually bite one on the ass, but until there are teeth marks to point at, it's hard to break the inertia.
There's a lot of things I'd like to do -- things I've always advocated -- that I cannot do within the constraints of existing systems. The router doesn't have the processing power to handle a filter list that long. That version of IOS doesn't have that capability. That router won't run that version of IOS. I cannot break a router (and thus multiple connections) for an hour a day for a month to help Cisco debug IOS. (etc., etc.)
PS: I don't mean to pick on Cisco. I could just as easily (ok, more easily) point fingers at Telebit, 3Com, Ascend, etc.
Well, the packet has to come from somewhere. A spoofed packet will have a source address other than the actual source of the packet -- usually not even remotely similar to the actual source. If the router at the next hop takes the time to verify the incoming traffic on that interface is coming from addresses known to be there, then spoofing becomes a non-issue. Unfortunately, no one is sufficently paranoid (or insane) to configure spoofing filters on every interface. It's too much of a configuration management headache and it proves very costly to the router.
For example, let us assume an ISP has a customer with a LAN on the far end of a T1 using the class C 192.168.1.0. If the ISPs router were to see packets sourced from 172.16.4.7, then obviously something is not right. It's either spoofed or a mis-configuration -- the customer could be multi-homed, or have two LANs, etc.
- Sorry I kill ya' Fidget.
As an admin (dare I say BOFH?) I'd just shut them off and wait for them to call tech support and then proceed to explain to them what they had done (knowingly or otherwise doesn't matter.) Disruption of network services is generally within the terms of service agreements.And, yes, I have disabled customer's access and then gone and sat in the helpdesk area (the "fish tank") to wait for them to call.
Sorry, I left out the "not". Go ahead and give it a try; I bet you'll not be able to find anyone with functional spoofing filters. (No one I've ever worked for has one.)
It's not the size of the route tables. The filter list has to be inspected for every packet on the interface. You need help from the silicon to do it right.
Right. Maybe you do this, but most of the internet does despite efforts to the contrary -- MFS once threatened to disconnect people who weren't blocking spoofed traffic entering and leaving their network. We already know alot of providers just don't give a damn, as gibson puts it, as long as the bill gets paid.
Packet filtering becomes rather expensive as the filter list gets longer and the number of packets continues to grow.
Technically, they wouldn't have to share -- check with the local Public Utility agency. Those vaults aren't CO's or Wire Centers. There is extremely limited space and power in those vaults.
The CLEC can build their own vaults if they want. In my experience, no CLEC will build a vault -- there's no economic point in doing so.
And for my 2 cents, alot of the DSL providers are folding because they didn't realize what they were getting themselves into. The only way to make money from DSL is to be the phone company. And I don't think they realized the hell they were walking into trying to get access to the coveted last mile.
Flashbacks to AT&T's true voice aside...
The Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) can only handle, at best, 64000 bit per second. That's 8000 8 bit samples per second. Each of those 8 bit samples is called a PCM Code. 56k modems (using a max of 7 of the 8 bits) work by transmitting digital data in the form of direct PCM codes instead of creating an analog signal. Basically, they are fixed frequency, voltage modulated radios.
The 56k T1 channels are from "robbed bit singalling" where bits are robbed from each channel to handle in-band management (caller id and that sort of stuff.) PRIs and SS7 keeps all that stuff out of band.
And while I'm drooling on about modems, that "crappy" 33.6k modem is actually a marvel of engineering. You get 14,400 bits per second out of a 1.8KHz analog signal -- 1200 baud. Beyond that, they begin to push the limits by using higher and higher symbol rates (up to 3.5KHz.) If that kind of code modulation were applied to PCM transmittions, you wouldn't hate your old modem as much.
Actually, alarm lines are not designed for communications. They are "dry contact" lines which means continuity is the only thing you can be certain of. You have zero say about the loading of the line -- it could have a load-coil every three feet. Additionally, when ordering an alarm circuit, you have to specify the location of both ends. You cannot be 100% certain it will go through even one CO.
Yes. Or reprovision it for ISDN.
Yeap. They are called "Remote Offices". And at least with BellSouth, you get only what BellSouth wants to sell you -- which is consumer ADSL. There is zero colo in a remote office.
Fiber-in-the-loop means you don't have an end-to-end copper loop. DSL, with the exception of IDSL, requires a direct electrical connection to the CPE. There are a number of products that can be placed in concentrators (i.e. DSL line cards) that move the DSL termination to the nearest junction which then trunks everything back to a "DSLAM" (calling it an ATM cell mux would be more accurate.) The problem is, no one uses this technology. I've known about them since mid-'98.
This is about surface vs. subsurface rights. It doesn't matter weither it's an actual lease or easement or whatever. The terms of the agreement are what's at issue. In the case of the "20,000" mentioned, the terms may have explicitly precluded burying or "sub-leasing" anything.
In all cases I am aware of (and there haven't been many new rails laid across North Carolina in recent years; in fact, some have been removed), the rail lines purchase right-of-way identical to that of the DOT -- with the exception that you can refuse to sell to a railroad.
The DOT certainly does not own the land overwhich they place roads. My property line actually extends to the center of the road beside the house. And that is on the deed. So, when they move a road, do I have to purchase "my" land back from the state? (No, because they don't own it. That's one of the reasons you cannot refuse to grant/sell right-of-way.)
The "contract" (100 year lease as I recall) allowing Duke Power to run a transmittion line across my family's property specifically states aerial deployment. They are not allowed to bury cable across the acres of pastures. (And they did surprisingly little damage in the process, btw.)
I stand by my original "lawyer bullshit" comment. The lawyers jump up and down on behalf of the issue because they stand to make a substantial fortune. The actual people "wronged" will walk away with next to nothing. (Remember the Iomega suit? After years, all the complaintants get is a rebate for more useless Iomega crap, and the lawyers get millions.) The detemination of how much they've been wronged (if at all) is something only a lawyer would quible over -- is six feet "subsurface" (are we counting the foot or more of dirt, sand, and gravel put there by the railroad?)
I repeat my original concern... if you can sue the railroad for "subsurface" use of your land, what's to stop people from suing any number of other utilities who bury things within the state's right-of-way? To quote a conversation between an NCDOT District Engineer and the Iredale County Water System Manager, "as I recall, your water lines are on DOT right-of-way. It'd be an aweful shame to make you move them."
- What happens if I'm a farmer and you laid the fiber in the ground across one of my fields?
Then you'd have a train track smack through your corn field (or whatever.) The fiber is buried next to the tracks -- e.g. within a few feet.- it is trespassing on my property
Wrong again. Have you ever watched fiber being laid on RR right-of-way? (Obviously not) The cable is driven into the ground from a machine on the rails. They are no more tresspassing than Amtrak.Interesting... the DOT doesn't have "drilling rights" either. So, does that mean millions of people should run out and sue a miriad of utility companies? (water lines, gas lines, phone trunks, and cable TV can all be found within the DOT RoW boundries.)
This is 100% lawyer bullshit. The sad thing (besides 45,000$/mile!) is the evil lawyers will win -- and walk away with 25% or more of the billions in settlements.
That's not entirely true. I've gotten 56k analog connections before. (Of course, I had control of the hardware on both ends.)
/. isn't in the US.)
And I always get 56k connections from my courier -- the analog part is only 6 inches long before it goes into a netopia. It will still link at 56k with 200ft of cord on it, but it drops to 53k after a few minutes.
If you're outside the USoA, you can certainly get 56k analog connections -- over distances of miles. (All of
- ISDN Line Configuration
(The formating is crap as there's no <PRE>.)Circuit Type... ISDN, Leased
Data Rate (kbps)... 144 (2B+D)
Data Link Encapsulation... Frame Relay
PPP over Frame Relay Enabled: Off