FW: (PM) DSL for PMs

Matt Magri (matt@netmeg.net)
Wed, 13 May 1998 16:07:27 -0400

Mark Radabaugh <mark@woodville.net> wrote:
> xDSL is not really something that a PM-3 can do. xDSL has to be
> implemented on the copper connecting the customer to the telco
> switch -- the equipment has to be located at the central office
> switch. It seems that most implementations of it in place so far
> have the telco providing the xDSL equipment and backhauling the
> data to ISP's.

YMMV. There are a number of ISPs who have the circuits running from
their space to the customers (via the CO)... it all depends on how
much the telco in that area is into controlling access to xDSL. In
some cases, the ISP had to become a CLEC to even get the wires.

I would hope that there will be a xDSL card for the PM4, at least.
Basically something to plug in a number of xDSL connections. The
tricky part is what sits on the customer side of the connection, tho
(since, obviously, they have to interoperate). Ascend has an IDSL
solution that's limited to 128k bandwidth and only requires an ISDN
TA at the customer end. I would rather see a better range of
bandwidth numbers (so that you could handle bigger connections, step
customers up as desired, etc.), but it's chief virtue is that it's an
xDSL solution that doesn't involve a lot of esoteric equipment. At the
ISP end there's an 8-port card that will go into a 4004, etc. It looks
like a good way to get your feet wet if you already have the box.

Anyway, a bigger-pipe solution would require something more specialized
at the other end. I don't know how Lucent RABU would want to address
that, but I hope we'll hear something soon. Of course, if xDSL equipment
was interchangable between vendors it wouldn't be such a big deal. I
don't know how soon -that's- going to change, tho...

Matt

-- 
Matt Magri
Netmeg Internet
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>