People who purchase unproven technologies...DSL

Daniel Senie dts at
Mon May 14 19:18:26 UTC 2001

At 10:25 AM 5/14/01, Greg Maxwell wrote:

>On Mon, 14 May 2001, Shawn McMahon wrote:
> > On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 07:53:50AM -0400, mike harrison wrote:
> > >
> > > > Why would anyone purchase dsl to run their business on. Let me 
> guess, the
> > > > price was right.
> > >
> > > I would call it a proven technology, but a very poor business model.
> > > And xDSL is definately not for mission critical operations.
> >
> > x is sometimes "H".
> >
> > Are you sure you want to say HDSL is not for mission-critical operations?
>Setting a trap here?
>xDSL, where x = S/H, as a physical carrier (and set of modulation schemes)
>is a tried and proven technoligy, often used today by telcos to carry T1s
>over longer spans with less need for repeating equipment.

Heh, I've had Verizon linemen yank HDSL-implemented T1 circuits because 
there was no dialtone. The ADSL from Verizon might actually be more 
reliable than their T1 service in areas where there's a shortage of pairs. 
After all, there WILL be a dialtone (assuming the ADSL is piggy-backing on 
a voice circuit) and the odds are they're not going to pull the circuit.

The xDSL standards folks probably should sacrifice a bit of bandwidth at 
the low end of the spectrum to generate an appropriate audio tone, letting 
the line workers know that the circuit IS in use. Clearly the absence of 
such has cost many folks a great deal of aggrevation, lost revenues, etc.

Daniel Senie                                        dts at
Amaranth Networks Inc.          

More information about the NANOG mailing list