Verizon phasing out copper [telecom]

[Tom Metro]

Back when Verizon first rolled out FIOS, the recommendation was that
you should ask them to leave your copper wiring in place, as it
provided a few advantages:

1. Verizon was legally obligated to lease access to that copper to
their competitors, so you could purchase local phone service from
someone else; and

2. It allowed you to receive battery power from the central office to
keep your phones running in a power outage.

Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in
Newton [Massachusetts] saying "Verizon is replacing telephone wires
and removing obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service
reliability for our customers. To avoid future service interruptions
we'll need to move your telephone service to our new fiber
network. This will be done at no charge to you and you will keep the
same voice service at the exact same price you're paying now."

It seems unlikely they are still motivated by desire to escape sharing
their copper infrastructure with their competitors. Are there any
companies left that sell residential local phone service that haven't
moved on to VoIP? If anything, installing fiber service will only
lessen barriers to switching to a VoIP competitor.

So the old advice seem to be largely obsolete. (Regarding battery
power, the ONT has a battery that lasts, I think, 8 hours. If you use
a cordless phone, and even if you have the base plugged into a UPS (or
have a rare model with a built-in battery), your phone will likely die
in less than 8 hours. So practically speaking you aren't really any
worse off.)

I'd be curious to know what it is costing them to maintain their
copper plant. It must be a money sink, as they can't have high hopes
of converting a lot of these copper customers into subscribers of
Internet, TV, and other higher priced services. (Though undoubtedly
some will.) Most people still using copper are doing so specifically
because they don't want, or have no interest in, the other services
Verizon offers, so slightly reducing the barriers isn't going to turn
them into customers.

In fact, you have to wonder how many people faced with setting an
appointment to have this upgrade performed will say, "Landline? We
still have one of those? Lets just cancel it."

Anyone else received such a letter? Other than if you're still using
DSL, any reason to hold on to copper?

-Tom

--
Tom Metro
Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA
"Enterprise solutions through open source."
Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/

[Jack in TN]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Tom Metro <tmetro+blu....@and-this-too.gmail.com> wrote:

> Back when Verizon first rolled out FIOS, the recommendation was that you
> should ask them to leave your copper wiring in place, as it provided a
> few advantages: 1. Verizon was legally obligated to lease access to that
> copper to their competitors, so you could purchase local phone service

> from someone else; and 2. it allowed you to receive battery power from

> the central office to keep your phones running in a power outage.
>
> Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in Newton

Alarm systems that use 'dark copper' or other dedicated circuits might have
an issue. But I don't know how much that is done anymore anyway.

><> ... Jack

--
Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart... Colossians 3:23
"If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the precipitate" -
Henry J. Tillman
"Anyone who has never made a mistake, has never tried anything new." -
Albert Einstein
"You don't manage people; you manage things. You lead people." - Admiral
Grace Hopper, USN
Life is complex: it has a real part and an imaginary part. - Martin Terma

[Dan Ritter]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:29:08PM -0400, Tom Metro wrote:
> Back when Verizon first rolled out FIOS, the recommendation was that you
> should ask them to leave your copper wiring in place, as it provided a
> few advantages: 1. Verizon was legally obligated to lease access to that
> copper to their competitors, so you could purchase local phone service

> from someone else; and 2. it allowed you to receive battery power from

> the central office to keep your phones running in a power outage.
>
> Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in Newton

> saying "Verizon is replacing telephone wires and removing obsolete
> equipment to ensure long-term service reliability for our customers. To
> avoid future service interruptions we'll need to move your telephone
> service to our new fiber network. This will be done at no charge to you
> and you will keep the same voice service at the exact same price you're
> paying now."

Interesting phrasing. You should check with the appropriate
utility commission -- this sounds deceptive.

> It seems unlikely they are still motivated by desire to escape sharing
> their copper infrastructure with their competitors. Are there any
> companies left that sell residential local phone service that haven't
> moved on to VoIP? If anything, installing fiber service will only lessen
> barriers to switching to a VoIP competitor.

There are many residential CLEC companies. Installing FIOS won't
have the effect you mention, because VZ is not obligated to
carry anyone else's IP traffic. There is no Net Neutrality Act.

-dsr-

[Bob Hofkin]

On 4/30/2013 22:29, Tom Metro wrote:
>
> Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in
> Newton [Massachusetts] saying "Verizon is replacing telephone wires
> and removing obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service
> reliability for our customers. To avoid future service interruptions
> we'll need to move your telephone service to our new fiber
> network. This will be done at no charge to you and you will keep the
> same voice service at the exact same price you're paying now."

A VZ tech told me that the department that supports copper had been
merged in with the FiOS department. He said their goal is to get rid
of all copper by the end of the year.

Bob

[Pete Cresswell]

Per Bob Hofkin:

>A VZ tech told me that the department that supports copper had been
>merged in with the FiOS department. He said their goal is to get rid
>of all copper by the end of the year.

Might be a local thing. I know people who are far enough out in the
boonies that running fiber to them would seem highly unlikely within the
year.
--
Pete Cresswell

[Hal Murray]

In article <51844810...@horne.net>,

Tom Metro <tmetro+blu....@and.this.too.gmail.com> writes:

>So the old advice seem to be largely obsolete. (Regarding battery
>power, the ONT has a battery that lasts, I think, 8 hours. If you use
>a cordless phone, and even if you have the base plugged into a UPS (or
>have a rare model with a built-in battery), your phone will likely die
>in less than 8 hours. So practically speaking you aren't really any
>worse off.)

Some of us still use a non-fancy line powered phone.

Even if you normally use a fancy phone, you could keep an old one
in the closet for emergencies.

--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.

[John R Myers]

Tom Metro <tmetro+blu....@and.this.too.gmail.com> wrote:
> ... still using DSL, any reason to hold on to copper?

Way back when DSL first rolled into the neighborhood I signed up with
Verizon. Bad mistake, inept service, not at all reliable.

The company 'DSL Extreme' provides service over the Verizon copper so
I switched to them. The line drops occasionally but one call to DSL
Extreme resolves the problem. As often as not their outgoing
announcement advertises "widespread service outage in the following
Verizon service areas ...".

I have a static IP address from DSL Extreme. Verizon has no competitive
FIOS service. What is the value proposition?

--
Jack Myers / Westminster, California, USA

Aibohphobia: The fear of palindromes.

[Pete Cresswell]

Per Tom Metro:

>Anyone else received such a letter? Other than if you're still using
>DSL, any reason to hold on to copper?

One reason that comes to mind is continuity of service in the absence of
generator backup.

Another is the nuisance value/expense of having to replace that ONT
battery every couple of years.

I've got a little generator, so continuity is not an issue. But if I did
not have a generator, "Verizon is replacing telephone wires and removing

obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service reliability for our

customers." would come across as just another example of self-serving
corporate BS.
--
Pete Cresswell

[David Lesher]

On 4/30/2013 22:29, Tom Metro wrote:

> Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in
> Newton [Massachusetts] saying "Verizon is replacing telephone wires
> and removing obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service
> reliability for our customers. To avoid future service interruptions
> we'll need to move your telephone service to our new fiber
> network. This will be done at no charge to you and you will keep the
> same voice service at the exact same price you're paying now."

{Hmm, I don't see this in my spool, but extracted from the Hofkin quote}

I must wonder if this is required or they are trying to trick you.
[I know, I know....]

I suggest a letter back demanding clarification.

Under what authority are they doing this?
Am {I} *required* to submit?
What will my DSL or equivalent service cost?
How will my phone/data work without local power? [& mention Sandy]
Who pays for the local power the ONT requires?

etc. Send the letter in certified to some big cheese. CC: the
Mass PSC or equivalent...

I just got a "Rachael from Verizon" robocall telling me the same
thing. I ignored her/it.

As for Hofkin's note: A friend with copper was out of service
for 4+ months as they could not dispatch anyone who understood
enough to fix it. They kept sending FIOS techs who looked askew
at it and left.

[Doug McIntyre]

Tom Metro <tmetro+blu....@and.this.too.gmail.com> writes:
....<Verizon getting rid of their copper plant>...

>It seems unlikely they are still motivated by desire to escape sharing
>their copper infrastructure with their competitors.

I don't know any CLEC that actively goes after any residential
accounts and resells over the ILEC cable plant. They either target
business only customers, or it is the cableco selling access over
their own network.

The ILEC copper plant is definately becoming less and less relevant.

>I'd be curious to know what it is costing them to maintain their

>copper plant. It must be a money sink...

It my experience, the weather beats on the copper plant like nothing
else, and deteriates it, especially here in Minnesota with our
fairly extreme weather, snow, rain, hot sun, etc. Every spring/fall
I hear lots of complaints of degraded phone lines, static, cross talk, etc.

[Doug McIntyre]

Jack in TN <jack.rem...@and-this-too.coats.org> writes:
.... <snip about VZ cutting out their copper plant> ..

>Alarm systems that use 'dark copper' or other dedicated circuits might have
>an issue. But I don't know how much that is done anymore anyway.

Dry copper current loop alarms are pretty old tech, it hasn't been
preferred for many many years. Even in the last 12-15 years, it has
been more preferable to share a regular phone line for that. But now,
more and more alarm systems use cell-phone technology. Either SMS
alerting, or even voice alerting over a cell call.
Cell tech means no "phone lines to cut" by burglers.

***** Moderator's Note *****

Since cellular units are easy to jam, most high-value installations
use simple transmitters which will transmit a usable signal even if a
cell-phone jammer is turned on.

Bill Horne
Moderator

[tlvp]

On Sat, 04 May 2013 09:15:23 -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote:

> [In] my experience, the weather beats on the copper plant like nothing
> else, and deteri[or]ates it, especially here in Minnesota with our

> fairly extreme weather, snow, rain, hot sun, etc. Every spring/fall
> I hear lots of complaints of degraded phone lines, static, cross talk, etc.

And what the weather doesn't finish off completely, the squirrels do :-) .

Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[Bill Horne]

On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 11:17:40PM -0400, tlvp wrote:
> On Sat, 04 May 2013 09:15:23 -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote:
>
> > [In] my experience, the weather beats on the copper plant like nothing
> > else, and deteri[or]ates it, especially here in Minnesota with our
> > fairly extreme weather, snow, rain, hot sun, etc. Every spring/fall
> > I hear lots of complaints of degraded phone lines, static, cross talk, etc.
>
> And what the weather doesn't finish off completely, the squirrels do :-) .

Although copper-based Outside Plant is vulnerable to weather, that's
also true for /any/ physical layer. Fiber optic cable-based local
plant /might/ be more reliable, but it's because, paradoxically, it's
a more complicated and brittle technology than copper.

Fiber optic cables must be terminated in expensive and complicated
electronic devices, which are, let's not forget, both newer and
better-protected than the older terminal boxes where copper wires are
"fanned out" to feed buildings and/or subsidiary cables. The ONT
terminals where fiber-optic strands transition to copper have the
advantage of modern materials, better weatherproofing, and (most
importantly) a continuous, uninterupted path back to the CO.

Most problems with copper are due to deterioration of the splices, and
local cables can be spliced at so many potential failure points that
they become hard to maintain simply because operating companies don't
choose to pay for routine maintenance of the many splices that have
been installed over the years at terminal boxes, aerial tie plates,
and manholes.

In short, copper is being killed by the cold-hearted economics of the
telephone business: the simplicity, intuitive operation, and flex-
ibility of centrally-powered metallic conductors has led to their
becoming a thing of the past, replaced not because of the cost of the
metal, but because of the cost of maintaining it.

--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write me directly)

[Rich Greenberg]

In article <1OednRx0nImINRnM...@megapath.net>,

Which will do you no good if you are on FIOS and the ONT battery runs
down.

Hint: There is NO DC path to the CO.

--
Rich Greenberg Sarasota, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 941 378 2097
Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines: Val,Red,Shasta,Zero,Casey & Cinnar (At the bridge) Owner:Chinook-L
Canines: Red & Max (Siberians) Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L

[unknown]

tlvp wrote:
> On Sat, 04 May 2013 09:15:23 -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote:
>
>> [In] my experience, the weather beats on the copper plant like nothing
>> else, and deteri[or]ates it, especially here in Minnesota with our
>> fairly extreme weather, snow, rain, hot sun, etc. Every spring/fall
>> I hear lots of complaints of degraded phone lines, static, cross talk, etc.
>
> And what the weather doesn't finish off completely, the squirrels do :-) .

Verizon says they won't re-build the copper plant in Mantoloking NJ
after most of it was destroyed by Sandy. Instead they are providing
telephone service through their new service called Verizon Voice Link.

Voice Link basically connects your home telephone service to Verizon
Wireless but it operates just like it was connected to the CO with a
copper line - same telephone number, 911, etc.. However, in the event of
a power failure, it does run on 3 AA batteries which last 36 hours.
That's a lot better than FiOS which only gives you about 6 hours. With
enough spare AA batteries, you could go for a while.

More information in the 5/4 edition of the Asbury Park Press located at
http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013305020135

[Pete Cresswell]

Per Bill Horne:

>In short, copper is being killed by the cold-hearted economics of the
>telephone business: the simplicity, intuitive operation, and flex-
>ibility of centrally-powered metallic conductors has led to their
>becoming a thing of the past, replaced not because of the cost of the
>metal, but because of the cost of maintaining it.

This discussion has me wondering about the EMP weapons that have
surfaced in the news lately. (long story==>short story: devices have
been developed/weaponized that can deliver an electromagnetic pulse
similar that of an atomic bomb - but without the atomic bomb).
viz: http://tinyurl.com/c7r5tfw

I'm thinking the replacement of copper by fiberoptic would mean one less
vehicle for the pulse to get into electronic gear - leaving, of course,
AC power lines... but I have no clue how vulnerability differs between
phone and power lines.

Maybe somebody who knows something can comment.

--
Pete Cresswell

[Shirley Márquez Dúlcey]

Tom Metro wrote:

> Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in
> Newton [Massachusetts] saying "Verizon is replacing telephone wires
> and removing obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service
> reliability for our customers. To avoid future service interruptions
> we'll need to move your telephone service to our new fiber
> network. This will be done at no charge to you and you will keep the
> same voice service at the exact same price you're paying now."

[Verizon is not] using labor to dismantle the copper. Mostly they're
just turning it off, or letting it degrade to the point where they
can't provide adequate service with it. I'm a victim of the latter
here in Dorchester [Massachusetts]; we had DSL for a while but it
would go out every time we had a serious rainstorm and Verizon simply
wouldn't fix it. They would send out technicians /after/ the weather
cleared, find no problem, and go home, but would never send a tech
/DURING/ the bad conditions, or [they would] simply concede there was
a problem and run a new pair.

[Pete Cresswell]

Per Tom Metro:

>Anyone else received such a letter?

Can anybody comment on the prospects of Verizon putting in fiber in the
area behind Atlantic City NJ (Pleasantville, West Atlantic City)?
--
Pete Cresswell

[Fred Goldstein]

On 5/5/2013 10:32 AM, Bill Horne wrote:
> On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 11:17:40PM -0400, tlvp wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 May 2013 09:15:23 -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote:
>>
>>> [In] my experience, the weather beats on the copper plant like nothing
>>> else, and deteri[or]ates it, especially here in Minnesota with our
>>> fairly extreme weather, snow, rain, hot sun, etc. Every spring/fall
>>> I hear lots of complaints of degraded phone lines, static, cross talk, etc.
>>
>> And what the weather doesn't finish off completely, the squirrels do :-) .
>
> Although copper-based Outside Plant is vulnerable to weather, that's
> also true for /any/ physical layer. Fiber optic cable-based local
> plant /might/ be more reliable, but it's because, paradoxically, it's
> a more complicated and brittle technology than copper.
>
> Fiber optic cables must be terminated in expensive and complicated
> electronic devices, which are, let's not forget, both newer and
> better-protected than the older terminal boxes where copper wires are
> "fanned out" to feed buildings and/or subsidiary cables. The ONT
> terminals where fiber-optic strands transition to copper have the
> advantage of modern materials, better weatherproofing, and (most
> importantly) a continuous, uninterupted path back to the CO.

Well, no. There is a fiber drop to the house which is spliced atop the
pole, or plugged into a connector if the aerial cable was
pre-connectorized. And there could be splices in the fiber going back
to the CO. I've heard of reels going as far as 18 kilofeet, but there
could well be splices on the fiber path. And those have to be done right.

> Most problems with copper are due to deterioration of the splices, and
> local cables can be spliced at so many potential failure points that
> they become hard to maintain simply because operating companies don't
> choose to pay for routine maintenance of the many splices that have
> been installed over the years at terminal boxes, aerial tie plates,
> and manholes.

Age and lack of maintenance do take a toll. By the 1980s, they were
anticipating replacing the copper plant with fiber. In 1992-1993, the
Bells promised most states that they would replace most copper with
fiber by 2000 and completely get rid of copper by 2008-2010 or so,
providing 45 Mbps bidirectional common carrier (NOT just their
"information service") service to the home. In exchange, they were
allowed to move from strict price controls (rate of return) to looser
ones (price caps). Of course they didn't comply.

Hence Kushnick's Law: "A regulated company will always renege on
promises to provide public benefits tomorrow in exchange for regulatory
and financial benefits today."

[Matthew Gillen]

FiOS is not regulated in the same way copper POTS was, in some very
important respects.

First, access: Vz doesn't /have/ to provide third party access (so for
example there will never be another Speakeasy, or 10-10-220 if you
remember that).

Second, while Comcast is the vocal leader on this, Vz is right behind
them: they like to claim that since it's not a POTS line any more that
the provisions of common-carrier status don't apply (Comcast has
voiced this on a few occasions in testimony to the FCC; Verizon for
it's part took the FCC to court about net neutrality last year,
wherein they basically said the same thing Comcast said
("common-carrier doesn't apply to us anymore"):

http://www.dmlp.org/blog/2012/balancing-interests-open-internet-verizon-challenges-fccs-net-neutrality-rules
).

Matt

[Scott Dorsey]

unknown <arnie.g...@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote:
>tlvp wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 May 2013 09:15:23 -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote:
>>
>>> [In] my experience, the weather beats on the copper plant like nothing
>>> else, and deteri[or]ates it, especially here in Minnesota with our
>>> fairly extreme weather, snow, rain, hot sun, etc. Every spring/fall
>>> I hear lots of complaints of degraded phone lines, static, cross talk, etc.
>>
>> And what the weather doesn't finish off completely, the squirrels do :-) .
>
>Verizon says they won't re-build the copper plant in Mantoloking NJ
>after most of it was destroyed by Sandy. Instead they are providing
>telephone service through their new service called Verizon Voice Link.

Umm... and they can provide the uptime and line quality demanded in the
POTS tariff with this gadget?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Fred Goldstein]

On 4/30/2013 10:29 PM, Tom Metro wrote:
>
> Back when Verizon first rolled out FIOS, the recommendation was that
> you should ask them to leave your copper wiring in place, as it
> provided a few advantages:
>
> 1. Verizon was legally obligated to lease access to that copper to
> their competitors, so you could purchase local phone service from
> someone else; and
>
> 2. It allowed you to receive battery power from the central office to
> keep your phones running in a power outage.
>
> Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in
> Newton [Massachusetts] saying "Verizon is replacing telephone wires
> and removing obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service
> reliability for our customers. To avoid future service interruptions
> we'll need to move your telephone service to our new fiber
> network. This will be done at no charge to you and you will keep the
> same voice service at the exact same price you're paying now."
>
> It seems unlikely they are still motivated by desire to escape sharing
> their copper infrastructure with their competitors. Are there any
> companies left that sell residential local phone service that haven't
> moved on to VoIP? If anything, installing fiber service will only
> lessen barriers to switching to a VoIP competitor.

There are companies who still sell residential service over unbundled
copper. I have some as clients. The numbers don't work unless there's
DSL in the bundle (POTS alone isn't worth it) but it allows alternatives
to Verizon DSL. The fiber, of course, is closed to them, so pulling out
the copper is a way to lock you out of alternative carriers. The
alternative carrier could still make use of the copper plant if they
paid for a new drop wire, but that adds considerable cost.

I don't know of any such carriers here in Newton (where I am too), but
then I get my phone lines, and Internet access, from both Comcast and
RCN. They're both pretty reliable here.

Now I don't think they can *require* you to drop your copper. VZ's new
game is to refuse copper repairs to "chronic customers". But I have my
doubts that the Mass. Commissioner of Telecommunications & Cable,
Geoffrey Why, would allow wholesale removal of copper service. Also
note that once they have you on FiOS, they're try to get you to switch
service from Verizon-Massachusetts (tariffed, price-capped) to another
Verizon subsidiary (an unregulated one). This removes most of your
consumer protections, and allows them to plead poverty -- they are
losing so many customers! But to other subsidiaries. It's a dirty trick.

> I'd be curious to know what it is costing them to maintain their
> copper plant. It must be a money sink, as they can't have high hopes
> of converting a lot of these copper customers into subscribers of
> Internet, TV, and other higher priced services. (Though undoubtedly
> some will.) Most people still using copper are doing so specifically
> because they don't want, or have no interest in, the other services
> Verizon offers, so slightly reducing the barriers isn't going to turn
> them into customers.
>
> In fact, you have to wonder how many people faced with setting an
> appointment to have this upgrade performed will say, "Landline? We
> still have one of those? Lets just cancel it."
>
> Anyone else received such a letter? Other than if you're still using
> DSL, any reason to hold on to copper?
>

The cost of maintaining copper isn't trivial, but it does last a long
time. Some of their wires are more than 60 years old! Which is well
past their sell-by date, given that depreciation schedules were never
more than 40 years (AFAIK) and are shorter now. They basically stopped
maintaining things about 15 years ago when they were moved from rate of
return regulation to price cap regulation. If they stopped the upkeep,
they'd be allowed to keep the profit... which works for a short time.
But now the unmaintained plant is collapsing. And FiOS isn't getting
the hoped-for amount of business, especially in cable TV. So they're
desperate to push FiOS, by hook or by crook, where it was installed,
though they're not installing much more.

[Koos van den Hout]

unknown <arnie.g...@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote in <km6b4f$vql$1...@dont-email.me>:

> Verizon says they won't re-build the copper plant in Mantoloking NJ
> after most of it was destroyed by Sandy. Instead they are providing
> telephone service through their new service called Verizon Voice Link.

> Voice Link basically connects your home telephone service to Verizon
> Wireless but it operates just like it was connected to the CO with a
> copper line - same telephone number, 911, etc.. However, in the event of
> a power failure, it does run on 3 AA batteries which last 36 hours.

> More information in the 5/4 edition of the Asbury Park Press located at
> http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013305020135

A less-cheering view of the "service" Verizon is offering post-Sandy:
http://www.newnetworks.com/VerizonNYC.htm

Disclaimer: I'm not involved with US telecom, I ran into this link in
comp.risks and it looks quite relevant to this discussion.

Koos van den Hout

--
Camp Wireless, the site about wireless Internet | Koos van den Hout
access at campsites http://www.camp-wireless.org/ | http://idefix.net/
PGP keyid DSS/1024 0xF0D7C263 | IPv6 enabled!

[Jim Bennett]

On 2013-05-05 15:47, Pete Cresswell wrote:
> This discussion has me wondering about the EMP weapons that have
> surfaced in the news lately. (long story==>short story: devices have
> been developed/weaponized that can deliver an electromagnetic pulse
> similar that of an atomic bomb - but without the atomic bomb).
> viz: http://tinyurl.com/c7r5tfw
>
> I'm thinking the replacement of copper by fiberoptic would mean one less
> vehicle for the pulse to get into electronic gear - leaving, of course,
> AC power lines... but I have no clue how vulnerability differs between
> phone and power lines.
>
> Maybe somebody who knows something can comment.
>

There are basically three ways an EMP pulse can enter and destroy
telecommunications equipment. The first two, which you mentioned, are
through the lines themselves [including antenna feed lines for
wireless equipment], and through the power lines that may feed the
equipment. The third way is if the equipment is close enough to the
source of the pulse that it is directly exposed to the field.

Protecting against EMP is something that the DOD and the
telecommunications industry have been working on for a long time.
They first started on it way back in the early days of the cold war,
almost immediately after they became aware of it. Some of the studies
and reports have been declassified in recent years, and links to many
of them can be found in the archives of the yahoo group known as
"coldwarcomms" [1]. Just search the thread subject lines for "EMP,"
and make sure you have room for a lot of PDF files ;^)

How resistant copper-based telecommunications hardware is to EMP
varies widely, but I think I can confidently say that today's
equipment, built around low-power CMOS components, is much more
vulnerable than earlier generations of solid-state equipment. I
recently read a study from an actual EMP test in the late 1960's, in
which real, functioning ESS equipment and D type T1 channel banks were
subject to increasingly higher field strength pulses. Some of the old
equipment was a lot harder to kill than some ever might have thought.
Keep in mind that most of that equipment was built to a NEBS 3 level
of quality even before the standard existed, with chassis made of now
rare and exotic materials such as steel.

At the CO end, the level of EMP hardening that takes place likely
depends on just how important the Fed feels a particular installation
is. A local CO in a small town might have none, but a major East
Coast switching center that carries government and DSN [2] traffic
will likely by bolted down quite tightly indeed.

At the customer end, things get a lot dicier. If a company wants to,
they can certainly build an installation that is highly resistant to
EMP. In reality, most commercial systems, and certainly all consumer
grade equipment, is woefully unprotected. Some of the steps to EMP
control involve the same hardware that is used to meet code
requirements for protection against lightning and high-voltage power
line crosses, and we all see how little emphasis there is on this now
days.

As far as how fiber vs. copper relates to all of this, that also
varies. Fiber does have the advantage of not acting like a giant
antenna to pick up an EMP pulse and bring it directly into the
endpoint equipment, provided that the fiber cable is not reinforced
with a metal jacket or support/strength strand [such cable does
exist]. The FiOS system is a completely passive optical network [3]
between the CO and the customer, so the direct exposure of fiber
regenerators [repeaters] [4] has also been eliminated. This certainly
is an advantage when hardening for EMP, compared to a copper T1 or
HDSL line with multiple repeaters along the span that could be fried.
At the customer end, FiOS terminates in a box that contains plenty of
EMP sensitive parts. The ONT boxes that we see around here are fairly
well made equipment from the likes of Tellabs and Alcatel/Lucent, but
I doubt they can withstand a pulse of any real amplitude. Even if the
guts were protected and enclosed in a metal shielded box, it would
only help if the shielding had a very low-impedance path to ground.
Every ONT box seen around here has the ground lugs left unconnected,
or "flapping in the breeze," as they say.

So, to sum up, ordinary people and businesses who use electronic
communications are likely to see no real difference in the robustness
of their connections where EMP is concerned, regardless of whether
they are fed by FiOS or not. Of course, everyone knows that only
crazy "bunker mentality" people worry about these things, right? ;^)

References and Notes:

[1] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/coldwarcomms/

[2] Defense Switched Network, the successor to Autovon

[3] Talking here about true FiOS, with fiber all the way to the
customer, not "Fiber to the neighborhood" systems such as U-verse

[4] Modern fiber regen equipment uses EDFA to eliminate a lot of the
solid-state electronics that was needed in the past, but still contains
lots of silicon in the power supply and control circuitry. See
wikipedia for an explanation of EDFA


Jim Bennett
===================================================================
The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you.

[Jerry Feldman]

On 05/06/2013 09:24 AM, Matthew Gillen wrote:
> But not in the same way copper POTS was in some very important

The whole thing is very complicated because you have many new
technologies. In the POTS days, each town had its CO as well as one or
more "exchanges". Today, the exchanges are nearly meaningless and the
area codes are becoming that way especially when phones are going
mostly VOIP. IMHO, the carriers do need to be regulated. We
essentially have a small number of carriers now in the US. Your TV
cable companies compete with satellite and FIOS. Your phone provider
competes with the cable tv, providers as well as the several VOIP
providers. So, essentially Verizion, Comcast, Time-Warner, et. al
provide essentially competing services. The issue is that the
governments have not yet caught up to the industry.

--
Jerry Feldman <g...@remove-this.blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id:3BC1EB90
PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66 C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90

[T]

In article <km36he$27n$1...@reader1.panix.com>, wb8...@panix.com says...
[Moderator snip]

> A friend with copper was out of service for 4+ months as they could
> not dispatch anyone who understood enough to fix it. They kept

> sending FiOS techs who looked askew at it and left.

Can't be any worse than the guys at Cox. Here's my story.

A few years back I worked for a state government office. We had three
locations and had to have network connectivity in each. One of them was
in the RI State House.

When we in the I.T. unit moved out of the sub-basement of the State
House to the new facility we had a 10mbps fiber link at the new place,
and two 2mbps VAN circuits over coax to the State House and our other
office.

This required moving our cable modem for the van up one level in the
state House. Well, the closet that we went into had a cable amplifier in
it. Signal was way too hot.

I asked the Cox guy if he [had] an attenuator. "What's that?" he
asked. So then I realized, ok, if you need loss in a hurry what do you
do?

I told the guy to get a spool of coax and connectors. We were going to
build a poor man's attenuator.

[I] had him roll up 200 feet of cable and crimp new ends on it. We put that
between the amplifier and the cable modem and all of a sudden we had
just enough loss to get the signal within acceptable limits.

Of course we had other interesting problems. One particularly wet
spring we noticed wicked latency on the VAN link over to the State
House. So by now we were on a direct extension basis with the level II
guys at Cox. The called me back and told [me that] the manhole at the
base of Francis St. was filled with water. They pumped it out, dried
it out and everything was fine. They had to put an automatic sump pump
in the manhole for that spring.

But all the troubles we had with Cox paled in comparison to the general
idiocy of the Verizon guys.

For example - I had a hunt group on the phone system and one element of
the hunt group wouldn't transfer on busy. I traced it down and found out
it was what Verizon called a P-Phone. In other words, that allowed you
to hook a Nortel style set to the line and use the advanced features on
that. I tried to have Verizon delete the line and just punch a new one
down and I'd draw it into our punchdown block. Oh no. Can't do that.

I asked them to disconnect the P-Phone and remove it from the hunt on
their side. No can do.

At this point since I work for the state, my next call is to the PUC
where a former colleague is a commissioner. All of a sudden Verizon was
ready to play ball.

Then of course there were times where a phone tech would need a line so
he/she would DISCONNECT the line from a punchdown and clip on, and then
fail to replace the line.

Like I said, Cox may have issues but Verizon really sucks.

[T]

In article <CAMdng5sCDCP-WJ_7st1g3+W9XqKJkFY_2ozCMv7BaOODCO7-
0...@mail.gmail.com>, ma...@buttery.org says...

>
> Tom Metro wrote:
>
> > Today I received a letter from Verizon regarding my residence in
> > Newton [Massachusetts] saying "Verizon is replacing telephone wires
> > and removing obsolete equipment to ensure long-term service

> > reliability for our customers. [Moderator snip]

>
> [Verizon is not] using labor to dismantle the copper. Mostly they're
> just turning it off, or letting it degrade to the point where they

> can't provide adequate service with it. [Moderator snip]

Here in my section of Providence I frequently see drop lines just
dangling off a pole and laying in the street. And it stays that way for
a good long time too before someone realizes it's not HV cable and cuts
it down.

[unknown]

I would guess not. I don't think the requirements of the POTS tariff
would apply because this is a wireless service.

[T]

In article <hgddo81m21qfnt07n...@4ax.com>,
Pete...@invalid.telecom-digest.org says...

Hey, go and google the term "HERF". You can build your own. Just imagine
the joy of a mobile mounted unit with a rear [facing] RF horn. Cops
chasing you? Zap em'.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <kmauu6$mbr$1...@dont-email.me>,

unknown <arnie.g...@invalid.domain> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> unknown <arnie.g...@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote:
>>> tlvp wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 04 May 2013 09:15:23 -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> [In] my experience, the weather beats on the copper plant like nothing
>>>>> else, and deteri[or]ates it, especially here in Minnesota with our
>>>>> fairly extreme weather, snow, rain, hot sun, etc. Every spring/fall
>>>>> I hear lots of complaints of degraded phone lines, static, cross talk, etc.
>>>> And what the weather doesn't finish off completely, the squirrels do :-) .
>>>
>>> Verizon says they won't re-build the copper plant in Mantoloking NJ
>>> after most of it was destroyed by Sandy. Instead they are providing
>>> telephone service through their new service called Verizon Voice Link.
>>
>> Umm... and they can provide the uptime and line quality demanded in the
>> POTS tariff with this gadget?
>

>I would guess not. I don't think the requirements of the POTS tariff
>would apply because this is a wireless service.

So, you're saying that customers who were paying for POTS tariffed circuits
can suddenly be moved onto lower quality wireless services with no warning
and the PUC doesn't have anything to say about it?

[unknown]

Voice Link is not regulated by the PUC, yet

[MC Bouman]

Since the cost of labor far exceeds the value of the salvaged
material, I smell the stench of graft.

[HAncock4]

On Apr 30, 10:29 pm, Tom Metro <tmetro+blu.remove-

t...@and.this.too.gmail.com> wrote:

> Anyone else received such a letter? Other than if you're still using
> DSL, any reason to hold on to copper?

IMHO, the advantages of retaining copper are as follows. (note that
conditions will probably vary from one region to another),

--reliable power: During Sandy we lost power for five days, but our
copper based POTS never stopped working and it was absolutely critical
for us in the situation. Unfortunately, the projection for both
weather is more violent storms and the projection for power lines is
for more outages*.
IMHO, a telephone line these days should have a minimum of a solid
8-12 hours of backup capacity, because that will all be regularly
needed after a nasty storm. Hopefully we won't have more "Sandy's"
with extended multi-day outages. But a 12 or even 20 hour outage
won't be usual, especially for suburban customers.

--some regulatory protection: As others mentioned in thsi thread,
legacy POTS retains some protection from state and federal common
carrier regulators, but modern FIOS does not. It seems that
communiation carriers are taking an aggressive profit-seeking
approach, meaning individual customers with unsolved problems will
have little recourse.

--is FIOS even available? I know a lot of people who want it but
can't get it because the lines haven't been run yet. In our complex,
the Board rejected the Verizon proposal because it was too cumbersome
and unsightly--Vz wanted to put in a large junction box next to the
front door, then run the calbes around the exterior of the buildings.
All our other utility lines run underground. When we first got wired
for cable TV, they made a big sloppy mess (left coax running along on
top of sidewalks!) and they to jump on them to clean it up. They fear
Vz would dol the same thing, and in this world they're probably right.

As to repair of POTS lines. This hasn't been easy--it takes repeated
calls and sitting on hold waiting to get to a knowledgeable repair rep
and for them to send somebody out. In my area, once a guy actually
shows up the repair is easy--he just switches your line "to another
pair". Given that many no longer have a POTS line, there are extra
pairs available.

I don't know reliability and repair responsivness for FIOS. But from
people I know with cable phone service, repair support has been poor,
despite their TV ad claims of great customer service.


*The regulators are starting to push the power companies to improve
their reliability, but it's a touch and costly challenge. In older
communities, there are many mature trees, ready to fall over after a
violent storm. In some areas new lines have not kept pace with
population growth and there is less redundancy.
Another problem is that utilties have been forced to close their
oldest coal plants. This might be a problem every summer when power
consumption breaks new records, but there isn't enough generating and
transmission capacity to meet the load.


One thing about copper--others have reported that the telephone
network actually doesn't use very much. Rather, your phone line goes
to a modern digital concentrator and from there on fibre to the
central office.

[Scott Dorsey]

Right, but POTS services are. People, who had POTS services under the
tariff suddenly are being moved to a non-tariffed service against their will
because of the inability of the telco to properly fix the tariffed service.

That should have some Verizon executives being grilled in the state house
pretty heavily, I would expect.

[unknown]

[Moderator snip]

> tlvp wrote:
> Verizon says they won't re-build the copper plant in Mantoloking NJ
> after most of it was destroyed by Sandy. Instead they are providing
> telephone service through their new service called Verizon Voice Link.

Looks like Comcast is stepping up to the [plate] in Mantoloking

http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2013305170097

[HAncock4]

On May 10, 10:19 am, klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

> >Voice Link is not regulated by the PUC, yet
>
> Right, but POTS services are. People, who had POTS services under
> the tariff suddenly are being moved to a non-tariffed service
> against their will because of the inability of the telco to properly
> fix the tariffed service. That should have some Verizon executives
> being grilled in the state house pretty heavily, I would expect.

Verizon has publicly said it is transferring many services over to
non- regulated status. At this point probably a very small aspect of
service remains regulated; maybe the barebones POTS line; anything
beyond that is a "premium service". New carriers are barely
regulated, if at all.

As to the issue of telephone service regulation, these days the public
attitude is that "regulation bad, deregulation good". Even if a state
legislator complained, few would listen.

Anti-trust is another principle that has fallen by the wayside.
Comcast, a growing telephone service provider and a big cable TV
provider, owns Universal and NBC. Years ago, film production was
ordered to be separate from exhibition. Likewise, several of the Baby
Bells have merged back together, contradicting the Divestiture.