Re: Channel Bank (Was 'on-going cost effectiveness...)
Alexm (alexm@agetech.net)
Sun, 24 Nov 1996 17:40:12 -0500
Kevin Kadow wrote:
>
> > From: "Richard_R.Moore" <MOORERR@msu.edu>
> > Date: Fri, 22 Nov 96 17:17 EST
> > Subject: On-going cost effectiveness of PM3?
> >
> > However, unless i am asking the wrong question of my telephone company
> > (ameritech), a channelized T1 _with a channel bank at the central office_ will
> > cost about $300 per month MORE than individual phone lines. The channel bank
> > at the central office, i am told, is required to permit users to access any of
> > the 24 T1 channels by simply dialing a single phone number as they do now. If
> > i could avoid the channel bank, the cost would be some what less.
>
> This option is completely worthless to an ISP. Not only will it make it
> impossible to accept 56K (X2 or ISDN) calls, the extra D->A->D conversion
> will ruin any chances of your users connected at 28.8 or higher.
>
> A real channelized T1 takes 24 digital channels directly from the switch,
> with no conversion to analog. Anything less than this will give you WORSE
> results than just hauling in 24 POTS lines.
>
I think his problem hre is that at his switch they have dms100. He needs
to call and see if is a 5ess frame instead.