New house wiring
Greg Toennies
I am in the process of building a new house. I have run 2 RG6 and 2 Cat 5
to every room in the house down to where my wiring closet will be. I have
my wiring blocks ready to do the final hookup when I noticed something that
may be an issue.
When the utilities came in they dug 1 trench and located the cable and
telephone wires and dropped them on top and between the 220 line coming
into the house. Is this a potential issue for noise on the phone lines?
Should I look into digging another trench and rerun the phone and cable
away from the power lines?
Any feedback would be appreciated.
Greg
Sylvan Butler
Greg Toennies (greg...@10yes.com) on 11 Jun 1998 09:26:46 GMT wrote:
>When the utilities came in they dug 1 trench and located the cable and
>telephone wires and dropped them on top and between the 220 line coming
>into the house. Is this a potential issue for noise on the phone lines?
Most likely you are fine. For how long are they together?
Usually the phone, cable, and power companies are all seperate, and
they do their work at different times, and at different depths (at
least here in Idaho, the power companies like to be very deep, the
phone company prefers to be >18" deep, and the cable company likes to
be just under the surface). Did you actually see all three cables in
the same trench all tangled together?
Given the work involved, I wouldn't consider relocating wires in a
trench until you need to solve a problem. At that point, probably the
easiest (best?) solution would be to simply run a new phone wire from
the demarkation point to your network interface. The phone company
will need to do that.
I think it quite unlikely that you will have cable problems. The cable
is shielded against RF interference, and the ground all around will
also absorb quite a bit.
sdb
--
Do NOT send me unsolicited commercial e-mail (UCE)!
Watch out for munged e-mail address.
User should be sylvan and host is cyberhighway.net.
Jim Sokoloff
xsylvan...@cyberhighway.net (Sylvan Butler) writes:
> Given the work involved, I wouldn't consider relocating wires in a
> trench until you need to solve a problem. At that point, probably
> the easiest (best?) solution would be to simply run a new phone wire
> from the demarkation point to your network interface. The phone
> company will need to do that.
I'm missing something there... The demarkation point (division between
what wire you own and maintain and what the telco owns and maintains)
generally IS the network interface, right? (So, that would be a short
wire indeed to run... :-) )
---Jim
Greg Toennies
I saw the trench that one utility dug, all of the cables are on top of each
other. Apparently it is an agreement where I am building that the builders
bury the cables (supplied by the utilities). They are on top of each other
and they run that way for about 75 feet. My concern is more for the phone
than the cable. I have a friend that logs in the net at very slow speeds
because of line noise. The phone company says there is not problem because
the line is a voice line (you can pay extra for a data line) and the noise
is not audible.
Greg Toennies
Rich Hurd
Sylvan Butler
OK, OK... demark may not be the right word, but I was hoping you would
know what I meant when I clearly specified the other end as network
interface. What do you call the point where the wire from your network
interface hooks up with the main bundle from the phone company, and all
the wires from your neighbors' houses also hook up to the bundle?
At my previous house it was a little 5" square box/post about 3' high.
Both it and the cable company's ???? point (a 12" cylindrical post
about 18" tall) were in a corner of my backyard. At my inlaw's it is
by the street in front of a neighbor's house. At my parent's it is
several hundred feet away up the side alley to the other street.
Sometimes (like my parents) they serve a lot of houses and are much
bigger than a little square post. Open any of them up, and the number
of wires is shocking!
When I was a kid, I watched the phone tech wiring up that box which
serves my parents. It took more than two full days from the time the
first cable was brought into the box, until they were ready to move the
individual phone line connections from the old box to the new one.
Richey Ewing
Sylvan Butler wrote in message <6lrq9j$u7l$4...@news.cyberhighway.net>...
>OK, OK... demark may not be the right word, but I was hoping you would
>know what I meant when I clearly specified the other end as network
>interface. What do you call the point where the wire from your network
>interface hooks up with the main bundle from the phone company, and all
>the wires from your neighbors' houses also hook up to the bundle?
It is appropriately called the Pedestal or "Ped" for short in telco lingo.
Richey Ewing
___________________________________________
Richey Ewing rew...@lcc.net
Marketing Consultant 1.800.974.4659
Lufkin-Conroe Communications www.lcc.net
___________________________________________
br...@karas.com.delthis
On 12 Jun 1998 17:59:15 GMT, xsylvan...@cyberhighway.net (Sylvan
Butler) wrote:
>
>OK, OK... demark may not be the right word, but I was hoping you would
>know what I meant when I clearly specified the other end as network
>interface. What do you call the point where the wire from your network
>interface hooks up with the main bundle from the phone company, and all
>the wires from your neighbors' houses also hook up to the bundle?
The other end is not a network interface, the network interface is the
box typically mounted to the electrical meter post (here in Michigan)
where the telco demarc's their line(s) into your phone line(s). What
you are referring to is typically called a can, or a hut, depending on
size.
--
Brian@ 'at' @Karas. 'dot' .com.
Return address munged to prevent SPAM...
http://www.geocities.com/researchtriangle/3300
Sylvan Butler
br...@karas.com.delthis on Fri, 12 Jun 1998 22:27:42 GMT wrote:
>On 12 Jun 1998 17:59:15 GMT, xsylvan...@cyberhighway.net (Sylvan
>Butler) wrote:
>>
>>OK, OK... demark may not be the right word, but I was hoping you would
>>know what I meant when I clearly specified the other end as network
>>interface. What do you call the point where the wire from your network
>>interface hooks up with the main bundle from the phone company, and all
>>the wires from your neighbors' houses also hook up to the bundle?
>The other end is not a network interface, the network interface is the
>box typically mounted to the electrical meter post (here in Michigan)
>where the telco demarc's their line(s) into your phone line(s). What
>you are referring to is typically called a can, or a hut, depending on
>size.
And if you would read more carefully, when one end is the network
interface, the other end is the "can, or a hut" which I, not knowing
the name, called "demark." Therefore, when referring to the "can, or a
hut" by whatever name, then the "the other end [is the] network
interface," which I clearly identified in my original post, and the
post you quoted above.
And if you really want to be this pedantic, it is entirely correct to
refer to either point as a point of demarcation. Look it up.
Sylvan Butler
Jim Sokoloff (soko...@tiac.net) on 16 Jun 1998 14:55:58 -0400 wrote:
>challenge. Well, I did. Those who don't care can profitably skip the
>rest of this post, killfile me, or whatever suits your fancy... :-)
>xsylvan...@cyberhighway.net (Sylvan Butler) writes:
>> And if you would read more carefully, when one end is the network
>> interface, the other end is the "can, or a hut" which I, not knowing
>> the name, called "demark." Therefore, when referring to the "can, or a
>> hut" by whatever name, then the "the other end [is the] network
>> interface," which I clearly identified in my original post, and the
>> post you quoted above.
>I have quoted a portion (the portion that remained on my local server)
>of your post below. If the original post was far clearer than the one
>I quoted, I apologize and am sure I'll see the original from dejanews
>soon enough... :-)
I think perhaps there has been some miscommunication...
BTW, the above paragraph you quoted, had nothing to do with you.
>> And if you really want to be this pedantic, it is entirely correct to
>> refer to either point as a point of demarcation. Look it up.
And by logical extension, having come from the same post, the above
also has nothing to do with you. However, being a public forum and
all, let the games begin!
>OK, I'll look it up for you, as you must have had some trouble finding
>the correct definitions:
Wrong.
>By my reading, both in the bell atlantic tariffs, and in webster's,
Webster's does suffice.
>(At least not from any standpoint that the customer gives a hoot
>about;
Now that may be entirely true for the 99th percentile. But there are a
lot of correct things that customers do not care about, but that has
nothing to do with there correctness.
>sure, it may "demarc" the change from fiber to copper or the
Sure does.
>junction of a single subscriber to the common multi-paired line, but
Yup, another one.
>as far as the tariffs are concerned, that wiring is neither owned nor
>maintained by the customer, so who cares?)
pedantic correctness, the purpose of this discussion, that's who.
>or, from webster's:
>demarcation or demarkation n. 1. The setting or marking of boundaries
>or limits. 2. A separation; distinction: a line of demarcation. [Sp.
>demarcacion < demarcar, to mark boundaries : de- (intensive < Lat.) +
>marcar, to mark < Ital. marcare, of Germanic orig.]
Good, your webster agrees with mine.
>The "network interface" is the boundary or limit (1) between the
>customer owned/maintained "inside wire" and the telco owned/maintained
>wiring. This is the separation/distinction (2) between what you need
>to be concerned with and what the telco needs to be concerned
>with.
>Not only does this seem the most logical usage of the term
>"demarcation point", it is indeed the common usage in telephony. To
OK, so we agree that it is entirely correct to refer to the network
interface as a point of demarcation.
>argue that it's "entirely correct" to refer to some other point in the
>network as the demarcation point is a difficult stance to
>substantiate.
I cannot believe you say that right after explaining how it is, a
demarcation, by giving two examples and quoting webster's to show how
it fits the definition. Whether or not "anyone cares" about a specific
demarcation is totally irrelvent to whether or not it is correct.
Perhaps you confuse correct with customary and should also look up
those?
>Ask 10 telco folks where the "demarcation point" is in your service,
Yup, confusion between correct vs customary is definitely indicated by
appeal to establish customary usage.
>and I bet that ZERO of them point to the
>"hat"/"can"/"frozzle"/"doodad" on the street, 9 of them get it right
>and the 10th has no idea what you're talking about.
FWIW, about three years ago I asked my former neighbor, who happened to
park a telco cherry picker behind his house, what he did for the telco.
He is the one that told me about "demarks". He said, "I wire up all
the demarks for new subdivisions in northwest Boise." I asked
"demarks?" He responded by describing the green boxes, and explaining
how it was his job to connect them to the telco network for new
subdivisions, hopefully before the houses were built. And that the
phone company (USWest here) hired contractors to run the subscriber
lines from there to each house when service was ordered.
So I don't know if he normally says "can" or "hut" or "ped" or
whatever, but he definitely said "demark" when talking about the end of
the wire opposite the network interface.
>:-)
Here is one of mine: :)
>My repsonse to your original post, which you apparently took exception
>to was as follows:
I took no exception to your response, but did take somewhat humorous
exception to your general lack of helpfulness accompanied with humor at
my expense. (I probably should have inserted a smiley since I was
responding with humor to a smiley-terminated paragraph, but I did not.
My mistake, and I apologize to all offended by that lapse.)
Instead of correcting my terminology, you took time to nitpick. Then,
when I asked for clarification, I did get one good response (Thanks
Richard Ewing) and one not too bad response (Brian Karas?) even tho he
did misread. And when I explained how he misread, and mentioned the
short form of what you explained above re. webster's et al, you took up
the sword... Don't cut yourself.
>---Begin quoted---
>xsylvan...@cyberhighway.net (Sylvan Butler) writes:
>> Given the work involved, I wouldn't consider relocating wires in a
>> trench until you need to solve a problem. At that point, probably
>> the easiest (best?) solution would be to simply run a new phone wire
>> from the demarkation point to your network interface. The phone
>> company will need to do that.
It seems OBVIOUS in that paragraph, that "demark" and "network
interface" are being used to refer to two different endpoints of a
cable, in spite of perhaps customary usage. If you really cannot see
that, I can't help. There is nothing more to say.
Richey Ewing
Well, I would like to answer the original question, but it has expired from
my server.
Ok....time for a lesson on telco terminology :-)
I work for a telecommunications company in the Data Sales department,
however we have a local telephone exchange subsidiary located in our
building,
so I went downstairs and had a talk with a couple of the "phone guys"....
Today in most larger communities the local CO (Central Office) is connected
to multiple
"Access Nodes" in various subdivision or areas via fiber. These are
usually the little
buildings you see, often referred to as "huts". Then from the Access Node
copper cable is
run to throughout the subdivision. At certain locations there may be large
metal cabinets
or "closets" that again branch off into smaller geographic areas. These
"closets" feed the
last leg of copper that runs to your area. Here the cable is terminated
into a Pedestal or Can.
Normally in subdivisions there is one Ped for each house, sometimes in
Apartments or densely
populated areas one Ped may serve multiple tenets. Your individual line
will then run from
the Ped to your house and terminate a point called the Point of Demarcation,
or Demarc for short.
This same point is also referred to as the "network interface", because it
is the point in which your
wiring "interfaces" with the telco's network. The whole purpose for all of
this is to determine which
portion of the wiring you are responsible for and which the telco is
responsible for. All this means is
that if you want the telco to work on your side of the Demarc they will
charge you for their time and materials.
In terms of DATA and voice circuits all services use the same copper wiring
up to your Demarc.
ISDN uses 1 pair, and T1's use 2 pair. T3's either run over broadband Coax
or Fiber. The only
difference between the digital and analog lines is that in order for the
digital lines to work all
of the bridge taps and loading coils must be removed from the line. It may
also be necessary for
repeaters to be added, however these will need power, so they are normally
located in the access
nodes where the fiber from the CO is convered to copper. It is very rare
that the phone company
will run fiber all the way up to your house. If they do they will have to
have some type of powerd box
at the demarc to convert the signal from fiber to copper.
I hope this clears up things for everyone.
If you still have questions about your original post, please repost it.
Thanks,
Richey Ewing
Marketing Consultant
Lufkin-Conroe Communications
http://www.lcc.net