Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #87133 > unrolled thread

Redundancy/Survival

Started byc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
First post2026-05-26 02:21 -0400
Last post2026-05-26 17:21 +0200
Articles 20 on this page of 205 — 16 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc


Contents

  Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 02:21 -0400
    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-26 08:46 +0200
      Re: Redundancy/Survival Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-05-26 09:49 +0200
        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 04:47 -0400
        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-26 11:25 +0200
        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-05-26 09:53 +0000
      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 04:38 -0400
        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-26 11:35 +0200
        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-05-26 22:09 +0000
          Re: Redundancy/Survival John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-05-26 16:17 -0700
            Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-05-27 00:02 +0000
              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-27 00:11 -0400
                Re: Redundancy/Survival Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-05-28 10:32 +0200
              Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-27 08:41 +0100
                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-27 11:04 +0200
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 03:31 -0400
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-28 09:18 +0100
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-28 13:42 +0200
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-28 15:01 +0100
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 21:34 -0400
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 11:07 +0100
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-29 12:55 +0200
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 12:14 +0100
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-29 13:36 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 13:26 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-29 19:36 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 17:24 +0100
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-29 19:37 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 19:36 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-29 22:34 +0100
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-30 04:29 -0400
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-30 13:09 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-30 23:29 -0400
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-05-31 21:45 -0400
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:15 +0200
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-01 18:53 -0400
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-02 01:46 +0000
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-02 03:01 -0400
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:12 +0000
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 10:16 +0200
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:09 +0000
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 21:26 +0200
                                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:48 +0100
                                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:35 +0000
                                              Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 17:25 +0100
                                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 19:24 +0200
                                              Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 20:04 +0100
                                                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 22:25 +0200
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-02 02:58 -0400
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-02 11:11 +0100
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-02 22:15 -0400
                                          Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 22:32 -0400
                                            Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 02:33 -0400
                                          Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:57 +0100
                                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:40 +0000
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-05-29 04:30 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 01:34 -0400
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 06:36 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-31 00:38 -0400
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-05-31 05:09 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-31 03:10 -0400
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-05-31 07:14 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-01 00:49 -0400
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-01 04:57 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 03:20 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 19:45 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 18:30 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:27 +0200
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 10:49 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 13:16 +0200
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 00:00 -0400
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:43 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:35 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:21 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 18:25 +0000
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 21:36 +0200
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:06 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:32 +0200
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:43 +0100
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 13:05 +0200
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:14 +0100
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:31 +0100
                                          Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:43 +0100
                                          Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 19:28 +0200
                                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 20:10 +0100
                                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
                                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 22:27 +0200
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:13 +0100
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:48 +0000
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-03 18:58 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:46 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-01 19:00 -0400
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-06-02 17:44 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 17:54 +0000
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 16:57 -0400
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 21:02 +0000
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:41 +0200
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:13 +0000
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:47 +0200
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:49 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:10 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 22:29 -0400
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:52 +0200
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:49 +0200
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 11:56 +0100
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 02:17 -0400
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 03:50 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-01 01:07 -0400
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:47 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 17:36 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:33 +0200
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:25 +0000
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 02:12 -0400
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:03 +0200
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:06 +0100
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:02 +0100
                                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
                                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 22:31 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:26 +0100
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 17:31 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:49 +0200
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:37 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-05-30 09:09 +1000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-30 13:17 +0200
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-05-31 07:33 +1000
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-31 00:14 -0400
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-31 12:09 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-01 00:51 -0400
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:28 +0100
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-31 12:58 +0200
                Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-05-27 20:51 +0000
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-05-27 14:02 -0700
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-05-28 08:54 +1000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-05-28 05:04 +0000
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 03:54 -0400
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-05-28 09:15 +0100
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 12:29 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-28 13:45 +0200
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-05-29 02:50 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 01:17 -0400
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 06:48 +0000
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-30 04:25 -0400
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-30 13:20 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-05-30 14:16 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-05-30 04:00 +0000
            Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 23:41 -0400
              Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-27 14:09 +0100
                Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 03:51 -0400
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-28 17:08 +0000
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 22:14 -0400
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 04:41 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 01:53 -0400
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 06:32 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 13:19 +0000
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:52 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:46 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-03 00:27 -0400
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 03:26 -0400
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 03:03 -0400
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:12 +0200
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:08 +0100
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:33 +0100
                                    Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-03 14:45 +0100
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 13:08 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 22:55 +0200
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-02 10:39 +0100
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 13:21 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-03 02:57 +0000
          Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 22:39 -0400
            Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-27 14:10 +0100
              Re: Redundancy/Survival not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-05-28 09:05 +1000
                Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-28 08:19 +0100
              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 03:52 -0400
                Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-05-28 09:20 +0100
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-28 20:34 -0400
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-05-28 21:07 -0400
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 13:40 +0000
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-01 19:12 -0400
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 10:28 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 12:15 -0400
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 16:19 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:30 +0200
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:29 +0100
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 16:49 -0400
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-03 12:18 +0200
                          Re: Redundancy/Survival Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-06-02 17:38 +0200
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 15:48 +0000
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 00:39 -0400
                            Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 17:55 +0200
                              Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 16:03 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> - 2026-06-02 12:22 -0400
                                  Re: Redundancy/Survival TheLastSysop <thelastsysop@dev.null> - 2026-06-02 16:36 +0000
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-02 18:39 +0200
                                Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-03 00:48 -0400
                    Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 01:21 +0000
                      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-29 02:08 -0400
                        Re: Redundancy/Survival rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-05-29 06:41 +0000
                Re: Redundancy/Survival Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-06-01 13:23 +0000
                  Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-01 23:00 +0200
    Re: Redundancy/Survival Marco Moock <mm@dorfdsl.de> - 2026-05-26 09:44 +0200
      Re: Redundancy/Survival c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-05-26 04:45 -0400
      Re: Redundancy/Survival "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-05-26 11:38 +0200
    Re: Redundancy/Survival "Worst Case" <fritz@spamexpire-202605.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2026-05-26 17:21 +0200

Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11  Next page →


#87397

FromRich <rich@example.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 02:10 +0000
Message-ID<10vo2eb$3b3aj$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87349
InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
> On 6/1/2026 2:30 PM, Rich wrote:
>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2026-06-01 05:20, Rich wrote:
>>> What could happen is mandating the router or ONT have a battery backup
>>> included, or at least optional. As simple as installing a bunch of AA
>>> batteries.
>> 
>> Yep, that's already what Verizon does with their FIOS service.  One
>> gets either a lead acid battery (UPS style battery) that will power the
>> ONT for "some time" on a power fail, or one gets a rather large box
>> that holds something like 12 D sized alkaline cell batteries as the
>> "backup power" should mains be out.  I'm not sure if the different
>> types arrive based on price level purchased, or just on "previously,
>> they privided this, now they provide that".
> 
> The lead acid is the older variety and the D cell is the newer one. I 
> had to buy the older kind on eBay as they are not really available 
> anymore.

Ah, that sounds reasonable, and is very in keeping with cheapening the 
product as time goes on.

> Neither is sufficient, you can get 8-24 hours of standby power 
> with these kinds, but that's woefully inadequate in an extended outage, 

Yep.  What they provide is, hopefully, enough time to call the electric 
utility to report your power being out.  But for extended outages, yes, 
within at most one day (and that assumes the batteries still contain 
their original energy amounts) you'll be out of communication.

> and both are now a significant cost that consumers are now expected 
> to bear.

Also true.  They supply the original battery, but you get to pay to 
replace it when it wears out over time.  And both wear out over time.  
The lead acid from being kept charged, the D cells from self discharge.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87401

FromInterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org>
Date2026-06-02 22:29 -0400
Message-ID<10vo3hu$3bkkd$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87397
On 6/2/2026 10:10 PM, Rich wrote:
> InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
>> and both are now a significant cost that consumers are now expected
>> to bear.
> 
> Also true.  They supply the original battery, but you get to pay to
> replace it when it wears out over time.  And both wear out over time.
> The lead acid from being kept charged, the D cells from self discharge.

Worse! They don't even supply the original battery! I had to buy my own 
as well as the unit. And most people don't even bother and then are 
surprised when their phone doesn't work when the power goes out.

At one point the battery was low on my original battery and the ONT did 
start beeping every 15 minutes, which was annoying. A Verizon tech 
happened to be visiting for something else and he got a kick out of 
seeing some vintage telephones around the home, so I got lucky and he 
gave me a free replacement battery from the truck. Not sure if that was 
any skin off his nose... but might have to fake a service call the next 
time it runs low and see if I can pull the same trick!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87418

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 11:52 +0200
Message-ID<63a5fmxucn.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87401
On 2026-06-03 04:29, InterLinked wrote:
> On 6/2/2026 10:10 PM, Rich wrote:
>> InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
>>> and both are now a significant cost that consumers are now expected
>>> to bear.
>>
>> Also true.  They supply the original battery, but you get to pay to
>> replace it when it wears out over time.  And both wear out over time.
>> The lead acid from being kept charged, the D cells from self discharge.
> 
> Worse! They don't even supply the original battery! I had to buy my own 
> as well as the unit. And most people don't even bother and then are 
> surprised when their phone doesn't work when the power goes out.
> 
> At one point the battery was low on my original battery and the ONT did 
> start beeping every 15 minutes, which was annoying. A Verizon tech 
> happened to be visiting for something else and he got a kick out of 
> seeing some vintage telephones around the home, so I got lucky and he 
> gave me a free replacement battery from the truck. Not sure if that was 
> any skin off his nose... but might have to fake a service call the next 
> time it runs low and see if I can pull the same trick!

Here the normal thing is to connect traditional phones to the ONT. They 
maintain the fantasy that everything was as it were (and charge the same 
prices). Actually, if you ask them, it is not possible to connect real 
VoIP phones.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87450

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
Message-ID<IYZTR.138996$Grwb.101821@fx13.iad>
In reply to#87401
On 2026-06-03, InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:

> On 6/2/2026 10:10 PM, Rich wrote:
>
>> InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
>>
>>> and both are now a significant cost that consumers are now expected
>>> to bear.
>> 
>> Also true.  They supply the original battery, but you get to pay to
>> replace it when it wears out over time.  And both wear out over time.
>> The lead acid from being kept charged, the D cells from self discharge.
>
> Worse! They don't even supply the original battery! I had to buy my own 
> as well as the unit. And most people don't even bother and then are 
> surprised when their phone doesn't work when the power goes out.

    I bought some batteries, but they weren't
    included - so I had to buy them again.
      -- Stephen Wright

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87419

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 11:49 +0200
Message-ID<8u95fmxucn.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87397
On 2026-06-03 04:10, Rich wrote:
> InterLinked <usenet@phreaknet.org> wrote:
>> On 6/1/2026 2:30 PM, Rich wrote:
>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2026-06-01 05:20, Rich wrote:


>> and both are now a significant cost that consumers are now expected
>> to bear.
> 
> Also true.  They supply the original battery, but you get to pay to
> replace it when it wears out over time.  And both wear out over time.
> The lead acid from being kept charged, the D cells from self discharge.

True lead acid batteries (not gel, ie, not maintenance free) last way 
longer. 5 years easily, maybe 10.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87426

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 11:56 +0100
Message-ID<10vp18e$3igml$3@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87397
The ultimate solution is of course a house wired for DC power fed to USB 
style  outlets with a big $10,000 battery, in addition to normal mains.

You simply feed your LV kit off that and Robert is a relative.

Then when renewable energy takes your country's grid down you can still 
complain to politicians

-- 
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as 
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87453

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
Message-ID<NYZTR.139004$Grwb.24822@fx13.iad>
In reply to#87426
On 2026-06-03, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> The ultimate solution is of course a house wired for DC power fed to USB 
> style  outlets with a big $10,000 battery, in addition to normal mains.
>
> You simply feed your LV kit off that and Robert is a relative.
>
> Then when renewable energy takes your country's grid down you can still 
> complain to politicians

And they can still ignore you.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87265

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-05-29 02:17 -0400
Message-ID<97OcnWwzhIQAsoT3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87255
Argue crap all you want - the providers are
generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
and I support that.

Note the theme here - "Redundancy".

Keep EVERYTHING that worked. Add on new stuff
all you want, but .....

Use the Laws. Hire class-action lawyers if needed
to kick ass.

Oh, and even TELEGRAPH service should be preserved
over a few copper lines. Slow, but WORKED and was
very robust. First comm network that could use
pre-Tube/Transistor amplifiers ... just relays.
Edison figured out how to record the traffic
even as a youth.

On the whole, "new" is MUCH more technically
complicated at every level. That complication
means MANY more ways for it to FAIL.

OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
LONG time.

So HOW do you call an ambulance ? Your bank ?

You AREN'T ... unless we've maintained some
lower-tech REDUNDANCY.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87318

FromRich <rich@example.invalid>
Date2026-06-01 03:50 +0000
Message-ID<10vivi4$1us3j$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87265
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> Argue crap all you want - the providers are
> generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
> and I support that.

And there you are slowly beginning to maybe see why POTS service was 
mostly "always working".  The "providers are generally required" part 
is why.

> OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
> several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
> 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
> LONG time.

Sadly, I have bad news for you.  Your wonderful copper POTS line that 
begins at the side of your house, and travels however far from pole to 
pole to reach you local telephone switch, well, guess what it connects 
to at that switch now in 2026?

The old electromechanical step-by-step switches, or electromechanical 
crossbar switches?  Nope.  Those were, mostly, long gone by the early 
70's.

It connects to...... a modern digitizer that digitizes the signals on 
the line, and the entire rest of the switch, in 2026, is a fancy 
computer system (usually running Erlang) that routes digital bits and 
bytes around.

Guess what happens to those digital computer switches should that EMP 
be exploded?

While you /might/ have 48v of power on the line, for a while (until the 
diesel generators run out of fuel) you won't have any communications, 
because *everything* after your copper wires terminate at the local 
switch is, and has been since the early 70's, essentially VOIP service 
now (not literally VOIP, but digital networking and/or digital 
computerized circuit switching (i.e.  ATM)).


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87324

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-01 01:07 -0400
Message-ID<bIScnQGbw7sQjoD3nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87318
On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote:
> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>> Argue crap all you want - the providers are
>> generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
>> and I support that.
> 
> And there you are slowly beginning to maybe see why POTS service was
> mostly "always working".  The "providers are generally required" part
> is why.
> 
>> OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
>> several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
>> 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
>> LONG time.
> 
> Sadly, I have bad news for you.  Your wonderful copper POTS line that
> begins at the side of your house, and travels however far from pole to
> pole to reach you local telephone switch, well, guess what it connects
> to at that switch now in 2026?
> 
> The old electromechanical step-by-step switches, or electromechanical
> crossbar switches?  Nope.  Those were, mostly, long gone by the early
> 70's.

   Saw 'em in action, late 60s. Neat !

> It connects to...... a modern digitizer that digitizes the signals on
> the line, and the entire rest of the switch, in 2026, is a fancy
> computer system (usually running Erlang) that routes digital bits and
> bytes around.
> 
> Guess what happens to those digital computer switches should that EMP
> be exploded?
> 
> While you /might/ have 48v of power on the line, for a while (until the
> diesel generators run out of fuel) you won't have any communications,
> because *everything* after your copper wires terminate at the local
> switch is, and has been since the early 70's, essentially VOIP service
> now (not literally VOIP, but digital networking and/or digital
> computerized circuit switching (i.e.  ATM)).

   Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL
   manually connect at least a sub-portion of the
   copper.

   Most tech fried ... hey ... telegraphy works  :-)
   Simple relay-based line amps. Worked in 1850 and
   can work now over remaining POTS lines. Find a
   neighborhood 'telegraph guy'.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87330

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-06-01 12:47 +0200
Message-ID<ni40fmxe5o.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87324
On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote:
> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote:
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>> Argue crap all you want - the providers are
>>> generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
>>> and I support that.
>>
>> And there you are slowly beginning to maybe see why POTS service was
>> mostly "always working".  The "providers are generally required" part
>> is why.
>>
>>> OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
>>> several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
>>> 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
>>> LONG time.
>>
>> Sadly, I have bad news for you.  Your wonderful copper POTS line that
>> begins at the side of your house, and travels however far from pole to
>> pole to reach you local telephone switch, well, guess what it connects
>> to at that switch now in 2026?
>>
>> The old electromechanical step-by-step switches, or electromechanical
>> crossbar switches?  Nope.  Those were, mostly, long gone by the early
>> 70's.
> 
>    Saw 'em in action, late 60s. Neat !
> 
>> It connects to...... a modern digitizer that digitizes the signals on
>> the line, and the entire rest of the switch, in 2026, is a fancy
>> computer system (usually running Erlang) that routes digital bits and
>> bytes around.
>>
>> Guess what happens to those digital computer switches should that EMP
>> be exploded?
>>
>> While you /might/ have 48v of power on the line, for a while (until the
>> diesel generators run out of fuel) you won't have any communications,
>> because *everything* after your copper wires terminate at the local
>> switch is, and has been since the early 70's, essentially VOIP service
>> now (not literally VOIP, but digital networking and/or digital
>> computerized circuit switching (i.e.  ATM)).
> 
>    Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL
>    manually connect at least a sub-portion of the
>    copper.

Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables 
to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the 
wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing.

> 
>    Most tech fried ... hey ... telegraphy works  :-)
>    Simple relay-based line amps. Worked in 1850 and
>    can work now over remaining POTS lines. Find a
>    neighborhood 'telegraph guy'.
> 


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87339

FromRich <rich@example.invalid>
Date2026-06-01 17:36 +0000
Message-ID<10vkfub$2ci6m$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87330
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote:
>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote:
>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>>> Argue crap all you want - the providers are
>>>> generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
>>>> and I support that.
>>>
>>> And there you are slowly beginning to maybe see why POTS service was
>>> mostly "always working".  The "providers are generally required" part
>>> is why.
>>>
>>>> OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
>>>> several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
>>>> 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
>>>> LONG time.
>>>
>>> Sadly, I have bad news for you.  Your wonderful copper POTS line that
>>> begins at the side of your house, and travels however far from pole to
>>> pole to reach you local telephone switch, well, guess what it connects
>>> to at that switch now in 2026?
>>>
>>> The old electromechanical step-by-step switches, or electromechanical
>>> crossbar switches?  Nope.  Those were, mostly, long gone by the early
>>> 70's.
>> 
>>    Saw 'em in action, late 60s. Neat !
>> 
>>> It connects to...... a modern digitizer that digitizes the signals on
>>> the line, and the entire rest of the switch, in 2026, is a fancy
>>> computer system (usually running Erlang) that routes digital bits and
>>> bytes around.
>>>
>>> Guess what happens to those digital computer switches should that EMP
>>> be exploded?
>>>
>>> While you /might/ have 48v of power on the line, for a while (until the
>>> diesel generators run out of fuel) you won't have any communications,
>>> because *everything* after your copper wires terminate at the local
>>> switch is, and has been since the early 70's, essentially VOIP service
>>> now (not literally VOIP, but digital networking and/or digital
>>> computerized circuit switching (i.e.  ATM)).
>> 
>>    Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL
>>    manually connect at least a sub-portion of the
>>    copper.
> 
> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables 
> to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the 
> wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing.

I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those "bundles" of 
4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 different colors (certianly 
not 4000 colors).  So "working out" which red/black, from the 10,000 
red/black pairs that terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" 
is a non-trivial job for the non-expert.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87343

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-06-01 22:33 +0200
Message-ID<9u61fmxgao.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87339
On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote:
>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote:
>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>>>> Argue crap all you want - the providers are
>>>>> generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
>>>>> and I support that.
>>>>
>>>> And there you are slowly beginning to maybe see why POTS service was
>>>> mostly "always working".  The "providers are generally required" part
>>>> is why.
>>>>
>>>>> OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
>>>>> several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
>>>>> 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
>>>>> LONG time.
>>>>
>>>> Sadly, I have bad news for you.  Your wonderful copper POTS line that
>>>> begins at the side of your house, and travels however far from pole to
>>>> pole to reach you local telephone switch, well, guess what it connects
>>>> to at that switch now in 2026?
>>>>
>>>> The old electromechanical step-by-step switches, or electromechanical
>>>> crossbar switches?  Nope.  Those were, mostly, long gone by the early
>>>> 70's.
>>>
>>>     Saw 'em in action, late 60s. Neat !
>>>
>>>> It connects to...... a modern digitizer that digitizes the signals on
>>>> the line, and the entire rest of the switch, in 2026, is a fancy
>>>> computer system (usually running Erlang) that routes digital bits and
>>>> bytes around.
>>>>
>>>> Guess what happens to those digital computer switches should that EMP
>>>> be exploded?
>>>>
>>>> While you /might/ have 48v of power on the line, for a while (until the
>>>> diesel generators run out of fuel) you won't have any communications,
>>>> because *everything* after your copper wires terminate at the local
>>>> switch is, and has been since the early 70's, essentially VOIP service
>>>> now (not literally VOIP, but digital networking and/or digital
>>>> computerized circuit switching (i.e.  ATM)).
>>>
>>>     Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL
>>>     manually connect at least a sub-portion of the
>>>     copper.
>>
>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables
>> to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the
>> wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing.
> 
> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those "bundles" of
> 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 different colors (certianly
> not 4000 colors).  So "working out" which red/black, from the 10,000
> red/black pairs that terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza"
> is a non-trivial job for the non-expert.

Heh, absolutely.

Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the English name, 
a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, connecting to 4000 at 
the other side which go to the actual switch. These are labelled, but 
you need to know the system. I have not wired these, so here I have to 
guess, but the phone number is not written here. Rather wire number of 
the bundle on the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You 
need a table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, possibly 
printed and stored in large binders.


-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87400

FromRich <rich@example.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 02:25 +0000
Message-ID<10vo3b2$3b3aj$4@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87343
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote:
>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote:
>>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote:
>>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Argue crap all you want - the providers are
>>>>>> generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
>>>>>> and I support that.
>>>>>
>>>>> And there you are slowly beginning to maybe see why POTS service was
>>>>> mostly "always working".  The "providers are generally required" part
>>>>> is why.
>>>>>
>>>>>> OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
>>>>>> several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
>>>>>> 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
>>>>>> LONG time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sadly, I have bad news for you.  Your wonderful copper POTS line that
>>>>> begins at the side of your house, and travels however far from pole to
>>>>> pole to reach you local telephone switch, well, guess what it connects
>>>>> to at that switch now in 2026?
>>>>>
>>>>> The old electromechanical step-by-step switches, or electromechanical
>>>>> crossbar switches?  Nope.  Those were, mostly, long gone by the early
>>>>> 70's.
>>>>
>>>>     Saw 'em in action, late 60s. Neat !
>>>>
>>>>> It connects to...... a modern digitizer that digitizes the signals on
>>>>> the line, and the entire rest of the switch, in 2026, is a fancy
>>>>> computer system (usually running Erlang) that routes digital bits and
>>>>> bytes around.
>>>>>
>>>>> Guess what happens to those digital computer switches should that EMP
>>>>> be exploded?
>>>>>
>>>>> While you /might/ have 48v of power on the line, for a while (until the
>>>>> diesel generators run out of fuel) you won't have any communications,
>>>>> because *everything* after your copper wires terminate at the local
>>>>> switch is, and has been since the early 70's, essentially VOIP service
>>>>> now (not literally VOIP, but digital networking and/or digital
>>>>> computerized circuit switching (i.e.  ATM)).
>>>>
>>>>     Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL
>>>>     manually connect at least a sub-portion of the
>>>>     copper.
>>>
>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables
>>> to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the
>>> wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing.
>> 
>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those "bundles" of
>> 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 different colors (certianly
>> not 4000 colors).  So "working out" which red/black, from the 10,000
>> red/black pairs that terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza"
>> is a non-trivial job for the non-expert.
> 
> Heh, absolutely.
> 
> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the English name, 
> a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, connecting to 4000 at 
> the other side which go to the actual switch. These are labelled, but 
> you need to know the system. I have not wired these, so here I have to 
> guess, but the phone number is not written here. Rather wire number of 
> the bundle on the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You 
> need a table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, possibly 
> printed and stored in large binders.

Given how many lines terminated in any given central office building, 
there has to be a labeling system.  But it won't be something that 
anyone can just walk into and begin connecting random lengths of spare 
copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small portion of customers to each 
other.  And yes, no dialing.  You get connected to your Aunt Edna two 
blocks over, but you two are the only two who get to talk (unless the 
"fixer" starts wiring a party line, but then too many on a party line 
makes for a mess too).

Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross connecting 
folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call the local 
hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk to, by manually 
wiring them up is rather insane.  It's just not feasable to do manually 
anymore, if the switching computers that usually do it are fried then 
there's lots of useless copper pairs connecting to dead phones.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87411

Fromc186282 <c186282@nnada.net>
Date2026-06-03 02:12 -0400
Message-ID<a9qdnfRK25e4W4L3nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#87400
On 6/2/26 22:25, Rich wrote:
> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote:
>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote:
>>>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote:
>>>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Argue crap all you want - the providers are
>>>>>>> generally REQUIRED to keep the POTS running
>>>>>>> and I support that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And there you are slowly beginning to maybe see why POTS service was
>>>>>> mostly "always working".  The "providers are generally required" part
>>>>>> is why.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK ... believable ... North Korea sets off
>>>>>>> several EMP bombs high over the USA. ALL the
>>>>>>> 'complicated' tech immediately DIES for a
>>>>>>> LONG time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly, I have bad news for you.  Your wonderful copper POTS line that
>>>>>> begins at the side of your house, and travels however far from pole to
>>>>>> pole to reach you local telephone switch, well, guess what it connects
>>>>>> to at that switch now in 2026?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The old electromechanical step-by-step switches, or electromechanical
>>>>>> crossbar switches?  Nope.  Those were, mostly, long gone by the early
>>>>>> 70's.
>>>>>
>>>>>      Saw 'em in action, late 60s. Neat !
>>>>>
>>>>>> It connects to...... a modern digitizer that digitizes the signals on
>>>>>> the line, and the entire rest of the switch, in 2026, is a fancy
>>>>>> computer system (usually running Erlang) that routes digital bits and
>>>>>> bytes around.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Guess what happens to those digital computer switches should that EMP
>>>>>> be exploded?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While you /might/ have 48v of power on the line, for a while (until the
>>>>>> diesel generators run out of fuel) you won't have any communications,
>>>>>> because *everything* after your copper wires terminate at the local
>>>>>> switch is, and has been since the early 70's, essentially VOIP service
>>>>>> now (not literally VOIP, but digital networking and/or digital
>>>>>> computerized circuit switching (i.e.  ATM)).
>>>>>
>>>>>      Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL
>>>>>      manually connect at least a sub-portion of the
>>>>>      copper.
>>>>
>>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and rewire the cables
>>>> to connect two phones permanently. Maybe, because the batteries are the
>>>> wrong voltage. Certainly no dialing.
>>>
>>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those "bundles" of
>>> 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10 different colors (certianly
>>> not 4000 colors).  So "working out" which red/black, from the 10,000
>>> red/black pairs that terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza"
>>> is a non-trivial job for the non-expert.
>>
>> Heh, absolutely.
>>
>> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the English name,
>> a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side, connecting to 4000 at
>> the other side which go to the actual switch. These are labelled, but
>> you need to know the system. I have not wired these, so here I have to
>> guess, but the phone number is not written here. Rather wire number of
>> the bundle on the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You
>> need a table to find out which is which, possibly computerized, possibly
>> printed and stored in large binders.
> 
> Given how many lines terminated in any given central office building,
> there has to be a labeling system.  But it won't be something that
> anyone can just walk into and begin connecting random lengths of spare
> copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small portion of customers to each
> other.  And yes, no dialing.  You get connected to your Aunt Edna two
> blocks over, but you two are the only two who get to talk (unless the
> "fixer" starts wiring a party line, but then too many on a party line
> makes for a mess too).
> 
> Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross connecting
> folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call the local
> hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk to, by manually
> wiring them up is rather insane.  It's just not feasable to do manually
> anymore, if the switching computers that usually do it are fried then
> there's lots of useless copper pairs connecting to dead phones.

   Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected
   customers surely exceeded the number of practical
   wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME kind of multiplexing
   scheme would have been absolutely required.

   NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period,
   the exact what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden
   behind corporate firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how
   is kinda obscure/proprietary/guessed.

   Fiber CAN be OK ... and fast ... but it's still a PHYSICAL
   system and that means Hardware Maint using HUMANS (for now).

   As mentioned somewhere, I still have a (now obscenely
   priced) COMCAST vid line. Unlike the phone company it
   comes in from 'the side'. Note SMALL trees/bushes eventually
   become BIG trees/bushes. You don't wanna know what the
   local trimming companies wanted to charge to clear a
   path for the Comcast wire. Fell around Covid time, they
   promised to come fix it all somehow, NEVER did. cheepo
   spice. Some fun Jamacian techs though.  A lot is still
   ON THE GROUND under a lot of tree limbs. The rest, well,
   bungie cords on tree limbs.

   Into Covid a neighbor went wild with lawn tools and SHREDDED
   my spliced wire. After two+ weeks I finally found SOMEONE at
   Comcast who actually understood when I said the PHYSICAL
   CABLE was broken. They kept wanting to test my Box. NOT
   the problem at all. Guess it was Page #2 in their Hindi
   diagnostic manual.

   Anyway, when it dies again it's gonna have to be a DISH.
   DO love "channel surfing" ... price about 2/3rds LESS
   since they don't have to bother with wires.

   Dish is NOT good for internet - too much satellite latency.
   Learned that WAY back, even when web pages were simple.
   33,000 miles UP, 33,000 miles DOWN, then all BACK again ...
   even the speed of light begins to SUCK. (where's "sub-space"
   comms ??? STILL waiting for my Flying Car and Atomic
   Batteries in everything too !!!)

   As for COMCAST ... time to go "semi-wireless". Run the
   cable down the MAIN lines in the Right Of Way along
   the real roads. Add a wireless "5G+" transmitter every
   block (a few more for 'country blocks'). Then you do
   not have to worry about weird trees/worse down back
   all the long driveways and dirt roads. You can get to
   the transmitters easily. MUCH less expense.

   "Comcast Business" ... well ... then you DO need a
   physical connection for the 1-10gbit link. However
   'biz' tend to be easier to GET at. Did get 'biz'
   from them eventually for my office. Initially the
   install price was horrible. However called near Xmas
   and apparently there was a sign-up drive. Got the
   long cable across a road for NOTHING  :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87420

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 12:03 +0200
Message-ID<sna5fmxn6s.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87411
On 2026-06-03 08:12, c186282 wrote:
> On 6/2/26 22:25, Rich wrote:
>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote:
>>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:

...

>>>>>> Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL manually
>>>>>> connect at least a sub-portion of the copper.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and
>>>>> rewire the cables to connect two phones permanently. Maybe,
>>>>> because the batteries are the wrong voltage. Certainly no
>>>>> dialing.
>>>> 
>>>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those
>>>> "bundles" of 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10
>>>> different colors (certianly not 4000 colors).  So "working
>>>> out" which red/black, from the 10,000 red/black pairs that
>>>> terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" is a non-
>>>> trivial job for the non-expert.
>>> 
>>> Heh, absolutely.
>>> 
>>> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the
>>> English name, a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side,
>>> connecting to 4000 at the other side which go to the actual
>>> switch. These are labelled, but you need to know the system. I
>>> have not wired these, so here I have to guess, but the phone
>>> number is not written here. Rather wire number of the bundle on
>>> the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You need a
>>> table to find out which is which, possibly computerized,
>>> possibly printed and stored in large binders.
>> 
>> Given how many lines terminated in any given central office
>> building, there has to be a labeling system.  But it won't be
>> something that anyone can just walk into and begin connecting
>> random lengths of spare copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small
>> portion of customers to each other.  And yes, no dialing.  You get
>> connected to your Aunt Edna two blocks over, but you two are the
>> only two who get to talk (unless the "fixer" starts wiring a party
>> line, but then too many on a party line makes for a mess too).
>> 
>> Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross
>> connecting folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call
>> the local hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk
>> to, by manually wiring them up is rather insane.  It's just not
>> feasable to do manually anymore, if the switching computers that
>> usually do it are fried then there's lots of useless copper pairs
>> connecting to dead phones.
> 
> Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected customers surely
> exceeded the number of practical wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME
> kind of multiplexing scheme would have been absolutely required.
> 
> NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period, the exact
> what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden behind corporate
> firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how is kinda obscure/proprietary/
> guessed.

By the 90's, it was digital exchanges. The working I explained in
another post, it is not multiplexing. Simple concept, the difficulty is 
the scale, and the details.

Here by the end of the 90's there remained a few (a hundred?) of 
electromechanical exchanges, some hybrid.

Redoing a big exchange back from digital to electromechanical is a huge
task, and requires expert knowledge that no longer exists. It would have
to be reinvented. Assuming there is room in the building.

...

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87429

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 12:06 +0100
Message-ID<10vp1r1$3igml$6@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87420
On 03/06/2026 11:03, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2026-06-03 08:12, c186282 wrote:
>> On 6/2/26 22:25, Rich wrote:
>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On 2026-06-01 19:36, Rich wrote:
>>>>> Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2026-06-01 07:07, c186282 wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/31/26 23:50, Rich wrote:
>>>>>>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>>>>>>> Well, if the digital stuff fries they can STILL manually
>>>>>>> connect at least a sub-portion of the copper.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Manually? You need an expert to go in the exchange and
>>>>>> rewire the cables to connect two phones permanently. Maybe,
>>>>>> because the batteries are the wrong voltage. Certainly no
>>>>>> dialing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've not even pointed out to him yet that in most of those
>>>>> "bundles" of 4000 pairs, that there's only about 8 or 10
>>>>> different colors (certianly not 4000 colors).  So "working
>>>>> out" which red/black, from the 10,000 red/black pairs that
>>>>> terminate at the switch, connect to "joe's pizza" is a non-
>>>>> trivial job for the non-expert.
>>>>
>>>> Heh, absolutely.
>>>>
>>>> Although you can find the cable at the... I don't know the
>>>> English name, a rack of wire wrapping pins. 4000 at one side,
>>>> connecting to 4000 at the other side which go to the actual
>>>> switch. These are labelled, but you need to know the system. I
>>>> have not wired these, so here I have to guess, but the phone
>>>> number is not written here. Rather wire number of the bundle on
>>>> the one side, and equipment number on the other side. You need a
>>>> table to find out which is which, possibly computerized,
>>>> possibly printed and stored in large binders.
>>>
>>> Given how many lines terminated in any given central office
>>> building, there has to be a labeling system.  But it won't be
>>> something that anyone can just walk into and begin connecting
>>> random lengths of spare copper pairs onto to "reconnect" a small
>>> portion of customers to each other.  And yes, no dialing.  You get
>>> connected to your Aunt Edna two blocks over, but you two are the
>>> only two who get to talk (unless the "fixer" starts wiring a party
>>> line, but then too many on a party line makes for a mess too).
>>>
>>> Expecting that some lineman's going to be able to go cross
>>> connecting folks who want to talk (even if they wanted to all call
>>> the local hospital) to the destination to which they want to talk
>>> to, by manually wiring them up is rather insane.  It's just not
>>> feasable to do manually anymore, if the switching computers that
>>> usually do it are fried then there's lots of useless copper pairs
>>> connecting to dead phones.
>>
>> Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected customers surely
>> exceeded the number of practical wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME
>> kind of multiplexing scheme would have been absolutely required.
>>
>> NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period, the exact
>> what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden behind corporate
>> firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how is kinda obscure/proprietary/
>> guessed.
> 
> By the 90's, it was digital exchanges. The working I explained in
> another post, it is not multiplexing. Simple concept, the difficulty is 
> the scale, and the details.
> 
Time division multiplexing was used from the 60s to the 90s on backhaul. 
After that packet switching multiplexing like frame relay was used.

the carriage of more than one circuit over the same medium is always 
multiplexing, it just gets done in different ways.

-- 
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale 
returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.

Mark Twain

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87428

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 12:02 +0100
Message-ID<10vp1kj$3igml$5@dont-email.me>
In reply to#87411
On 03/06/2026 07:12, c186282 wrote:
> Hmmmm ... by the 90s+ ... the number of connected
>    customers surely exceeded the number of practical
>    wire pairs almost everywhere. SOME kind of multiplexing
>    scheme would have been absolutely required.
> 
No. it never did. very few cistomers were ever multiplaxed. One pair per 
subcscriber line.


>    NOT fully versed in that alas, a 'transitional' period,
>    the exact what/where/why/how is kinda obscure, hidden
>    behind corporate firewalls. DID work, but EXACTLY how
>    is kinda obscure/proprietary/guessed.
> 
>    Fiber CAN be OK ... and fast ... but it's still a PHYSICAL
>    system and that means Hardware Maint using HUMANS (for now).
> 
Are you really that dim, or just a good actor?

Mainteneance is not a function of anything other than failure rate, and 
physicality has no correlation with that.

Cf the Moon. No-one maintains it.




-- 
"An intellectual is a person knowledgeable in one field who speaks out 
only in others...”

Tom Wolfe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87452

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 18:00 +0000
Message-ID<MYZTR.139002$Grwb.21955@fx13.iad>
In reply to#87411
On 2026-06-03, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:

>    Into Covid a neighbor went wild with lawn tools and SHREDDED
>    my spliced wire. After two+ weeks I finally found SOMEONE at
>    Comcast who actually understood when I said the PHYSICAL
>    CABLE was broken. They kept wanting to test my Box. NOT
>    the problem at all. Guess it was Page #2 in their Hindi
>    diagnostic manual.

BTDT.  There was construction going on across the street and a
dump truck tore out the fiber connection from the pole across
the street to our house.  It took days to find someone who
understood the concept of physical damage to the wiring.
The possibility didn't seem to be anywhere in their scripts.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#87463

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2026-06-03 22:31 +0200
Message-ID<ohf6fmxvvh.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#87452
On 2026-06-03 20:00, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-06-03, c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
> 
>>     Into Covid a neighbor went wild with lawn tools and SHREDDED
>>     my spliced wire. After two+ weeks I finally found SOMEONE at
>>     Comcast who actually understood when I said the PHYSICAL
>>     CABLE was broken. They kept wanting to test my Box. NOT
>>     the problem at all. Guess it was Page #2 in their Hindi
>>     diagnostic manual.
> 
> BTDT.  There was construction going on across the street and a
> dump truck tore out the fiber connection from the pole across
> the street to our house.  It took days to find someone who
> understood the concept of physical damage to the wiring.
> The possibility didn't seem to be anywhere in their scripts.

What it is amazing is that the automated diagnostic did not find that out.

I know that traditional phone service could test itself thoroughly and 
find the faults. Tests were automated, run periodically. Why not fibre?

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 6 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 11  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc


csiph-web