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

Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #4551 > unrolled thread

routing

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

Contents

  routing Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2020-06-01 15:53 +0000
    Re: routing David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-06-01 18:31 +0200
      Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-01 22:30 +0000
        Re: routing "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-02 14:50 +0200
          Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-02 19:54 +0000
      Re: routing Ken Hart <kwhart1@frontier.com> - 2020-06-01 18:35 -0400
        Re: routing "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2020-06-01 19:00 -0400
          Re: routing David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-06-02 02:18 +0200
            Re: routing "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2020-06-01 20:32 -0400
              Re: routing David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-06-02 08:12 +0200
                Re: routing "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-02 14:54 +0200
                  Re: routing David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-06-02 15:53 +0200
                    Re: routing "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2020-06-02 11:19 -0400
                    Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-02 21:25 +0200
                    Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-04 20:44 -0700
                      Re: routing Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-06-05 17:31 +0000
                        Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-10 09:20 -0700
                    Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-04 20:46 -0700
                Re: routing "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2020-06-02 09:38 -0400
                  Re: routing Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2020-06-02 16:21 +0000
                    Re: routing David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-06-02 21:15 +0200
                    Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-02 21:36 +0200
                  Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-04 20:48 -0700
                    Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-05 04:54 +0000
            Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-02 21:30 +0200
              Re: routing Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2020-06-03 13:51 +0300
                Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-03 13:30 +0200
              Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-04 20:51 -0700
                Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-05 15:23 +0200
                  Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-10 00:19 -0700
                    Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-10 17:44 +0000
            Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-04 20:41 -0700
              Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-05 04:50 +0000
              Re: routing David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-06-05 09:44 +0200
                Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-10 00:36 -0700
          Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-04 20:40 -0700
            Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-05 04:47 +0000
              Re: routing David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-06-05 09:53 +0200
              Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-10 00:41 -0700
                Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-10 12:40 +0200
                  Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-10 09:25 -0700
                    Re: routing Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2020-06-12 09:45 +0000
                    Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-12 13:55 +0200
                      Re: routing David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-06-12 15:45 +0200
                        Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-12 23:21 +0200
                      Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-12 22:55 -0700
            Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-05 15:34 +0200
              Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-10 00:45 -0700
                Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-10 12:52 +0200
      Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-04 20:35 -0700
        Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-05 15:38 +0200
          Re: routing Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2020-06-05 15:46 +0200
            Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-06 00:00 +0200
          Re: routing Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2020-06-09 18:57 +0000
            Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-09 21:08 +0200
              Re: routing Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2020-06-09 22:07 +0000
                Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-10 00:36 +0200
          Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-10 00:48 -0700
        Re: routing Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2020-06-05 15:45 +0200
    Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-01 22:21 +0000
      Re: routing Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2020-06-02 02:39 +0000
        Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-02 04:30 +0000
          Re: routing Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2020-06-02 12:03 +0000
    Re: routing Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2020-06-02 20:34 +0000
      Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-02 23:08 +0200
      Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-02 21:20 +0000
    Re: routing Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2020-06-05 15:25 +0000
      Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-06 00:02 +0200
        Re: routing Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-06-06 08:04 +0000
          Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-06 12:00 +0200
            Re: routing Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2020-06-06 10:43 +0000
              Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-06 13:35 +0200
                Re: routing Bob Tennent <rdtennent@tennent.ca> - 2020-06-06 12:04 +0000
                  Re: routing "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2020-06-06 20:35 +0200
            Re: routing Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> - 2020-06-10 00:55 -0700
          Re: routing William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2020-06-06 16:19 +0000

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#4551 — routing

I need a low-latency connection to a colleague in the
same city (Kingston Ont.) but who has a different ISP.
I've traced the route of packets and they go via Toronto,
Chicago, Buffalo, and finally back to Kingston (!). I've
asked tech support for my ISP and they say they can't do
anything about this. Is there anything I can do on my
system, such as routing packets directly to the final
destination or to the Buffalo site?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#4552

On 01/06/2020 17:53, Bob Tennent wrote:
> I need a low-latency connection to a colleague in the
> same city (Kingston Ont.) but who has a different ISP.
> I've traced the route of packets and they go via Toronto,
> Chicago, Buffalo, and finally back to Kingston (!). I've
> asked tech support for my ISP and they say they can't do
> anything about this. Is there anything I can do on my
> system, such as routing packets directly to the final
> destination or to the Buffalo site?
> 

Basically, no.

For a more expensive answer, one of you could change ISP's so that you 
have the same ISP, or you can set up a direct radio link using something 
like these:

<https://www.ui.com/products/#airfiber>


(When posting in an international newsgroup, it's a good idea to assume 
that no one else has a clue what country you are in.  If you think that 
specific places are relevant to your post, state the country.)

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

#4554

On 2020-06-01, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
> On 01/06/2020 17:53, Bob Tennent wrote:
>> I need a low-latency connection to a colleague in the
>> same city (Kingston Ont.) but who has a different ISP.
>> I've traced the route of packets and they go via Toronto,
>> Chicago, Buffalo, and finally back to Kingston (!). I've
>> asked tech support for my ISP and they say they can't do
>> anything about this. Is there anything I can do on my
>> system, such as routing packets directly to the final
>> destination or to the Buffalo site?
>> 
>
> Basically, no.
>
> For a more expensive answer, one of you could change ISP's so that you 
> have the same ISP, or you can set up a direct radio link using something 
> like these:
>
><https://www.ui.com/products/#airfiber>
>
>
> (When posting in an international newsgroup, it's a good idea to assume 
> that no one else has a clue what country you are in.  If you think that 
> specific places are relevant to your post, state the country.)
>
Kingston is in Ontario, Canada at the east end of Lake Ontario.  Toronto,Canada
is on the west end of the north shore of the same lake. Chicago is at the
bottom of Lake Michigan in the USA. Buffalo is at the west end of Lake
Eire. Getting fro Buffalo to Kingston goes through Toronto. So his
complaint is that a 10 km trip is making the packet go on a 1000km trip.
Mind you since a packet can circle the whole earth in 1/7 of a second,a
1000 km trip is not too bad. Actually it is possible that that packet
actually made a 35000 km trip up to one of the geosynchronous sattelites
and back again but then again that would imply about a 1 second round
trip.

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

#4563

On 02/06/2020 00.30, William Unruh wrote:
> On 2020-06-01, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>> On 01/06/2020 17:53, Bob Tennent wrote:
>>> I need a low-latency connection to a colleague in the
>>> same city (Kingston Ont.) but who has a different ISP.
>>> I've traced the route of packets and they go via Toronto,
>>> Chicago, Buffalo, and finally back to Kingston (!). I've
>>> asked tech support for my ISP and they say they can't do
>>> anything about this. Is there anything I can do on my
>>> system, such as routing packets directly to the final
>>> destination or to the Buffalo site?
>>>
>>
>> Basically, no.
>>
>> For a more expensive answer, one of you could change ISP's so that you
>> have the same ISP, or you can set up a direct radio link using something
>> like these:
>>
>> <https://www.ui.com/products/#airfiber>
>>
>>
>> (When posting in an international newsgroup, it's a good idea to assume
>> that no one else has a clue what country you are in.  If you think that
>> specific places are relevant to your post, state the country.)
>>
> Kingston is in Ontario, Canada at the east end of Lake Ontario.  Toronto,Canada
> is on the west end of the north shore of the same lake. Chicago is at the
> bottom of Lake Michigan in the USA. Buffalo is at the west end of Lake
> Eire. Getting fro Buffalo to Kingston goes through Toronto. So his
> complaint is that a 10 km trip is making the packet go on a 1000km trip.
> Mind you since a packet can circle the whole earth in 1/7 of a second,a
> 1000 km trip is not too bad. Actually it is possible that that packet
> actually made a 35000 km trip up to one of the geosynchronous sattelites
> and back again but then again that would imply about a 1 second round
> trip.
> 

Most of the delay is not caused by distance, but by the number of 
machines that process each package. Basically the number of routers.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

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

#4573

On 2020-06-02, Carlos E. R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 02/06/2020 00.30, William Unruh wrote:
...
>>>
>> Kingston is in Ontario, Canada at the east end of Lake Ontario.  Toronto,Canada
>> is on the west end of the north shore of the same lake. Chicago is at the
>> bottom of Lake Michigan in the USA. Buffalo is at the west end of Lake
>> Eire. Getting fro Buffalo to Kingston goes through Toronto. So his
>> complaint is that a 10 km trip is making the packet go on a 1000km trip.
>> Mind you since a packet can circle the whole earth in 1/7 of a second,a
>> 1000 km trip is not too bad. Actually it is possible that that packet
>> actually made a 35000 km trip up to one of the geosynchronous sattelites
>> and back again but then again that would imply about a 1 second round
>> trip.
>> 
>
> Most of the delay is not caused by distance, but by the number of 
> machines that process each package. Basically the number of routers.

Most of the sattelite delay is speed of light. They are far away if
geosynchronous. On land I agree that the routers, etc can be a
significant delay. esp for distances of a few to a hundred km. 
For thousands of km speed of light again becomes the problem.
A ping to the UK from Vancouver is about 140ms, which is about c/2.5 for
the round trip great circle distance.
(c=vel light) 
>

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

#4555

On 6/1/20 12:31 PM, David Brown wrote:
> On 01/06/2020 17:53, Bob Tennent wrote:
>> I need a low-latency connection to a colleague in the
>> same city (Kingston Ont.) but who has a different ISP.
>> I've traced the route of packets and they go via Toronto,
>> Chicago, Buffalo, and finally back to Kingston (!). I've
>> asked tech support for my ISP and they say they can't do
>> anything about this. Is there anything I can do on my
>> system, such as routing packets directly to the final
>> destination or to the Buffalo site?
>>
> 
> Basically, no.
> 
> For a more expensive answer, one of you could change ISP's so that you 
> have the same ISP, or you can set up a direct radio link using something 
> like these:
> 
> <https://www.ui.com/products/#airfiber>
> 
> 
> (When posting in an international newsgroup, it's a good idea to assume 
> that no one else has a clue what country you are in.  If you think that 
> specific places are relevant to your post, state the country.)
> 

Here is a youtube video from Linus Tech Tips (one of your fellow 
Canadians!) testing a dish-type system. The video is kind of two parts: 
in the first 10 minutes, they fail to establish a link, mainly because 
of poor planning. In the final ten minutes, they do a much better job of 
linking a 12 Km distance, between a high-rise residence and a park. This 
may give you an idea of what is involved.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYJFwXw1ZIc

-- 
Ken Hart
kwhart1@frontier.com

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

#4556

On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 18:35:56 -0400, Ken Hart <kwhart1@frontier.com> wrote:

> On 6/1/20 12:31 PM, David Brown wrote:
>> On 01/06/2020 17:53, Bob Tennent wrote:
>>> I need a low-latency connection to a colleague in the
>>> same city (Kingston Ont.) but who has a different ISP.

The easiest way would be for both of you to get old fashioned modems, and
create a direct link between the two computers, using land line telephone
connections.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

-- 
Change dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org to davidwhodgins@teksavvy.com for
email replies.

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

#4557

On 02/06/2020 01:00, David W. Hodgins wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 18:35:56 -0400, Ken Hart <kwhart1@frontier.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 6/1/20 12:31 PM, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 01/06/2020 17:53, Bob Tennent wrote:
>>>> I need a low-latency connection to a colleague in the
>>>> same city (Kingston Ont.) but who has a different ISP.
> 
> The easiest way would be for both of you to get old fashioned modems, and
> create a direct link between the two computers, using land line telephone
> connections.
> 

Do you still have these?  Here in Norway, only small outlying villages 
still have analogue telephone lines, and most of these are being 
disbanded.  In my town (about 1000 households) we have had fibre for 
internet, TV and telephone (for those, like us, that still have a 
"house" telephone and not just mobiles) for about a decade.

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

#4558

On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 20:18:51 -0400, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
> Do you still have these?  Here in Norway, only small outlying villages
> still have analogue telephone lines, and most of these are being
> disbanded.  In my town (about 1000 households) we have had fibre for
> internet, TV and telephone (for those, like us, that still have a
> "house" telephone and not just mobiles) for about a decade.

Most people have switched to voip phones that work over internet connections, but
land lines are still available. Costs more, but it still works if the power is
out, which is not true for the voip phones. With a voip phone it's pretty hard
to call for support for electrical or internet disruptions. I'm in London,
Ontario, Canada, so like the OP in Kingston, within Bell Canada territory.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

-- 
Change dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org to davidwhodgins@teksavvy.com for
email replies.

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

#4561

On 02/06/2020 02:32, David W. Hodgins wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 20:18:51 -0400, David Brown 
> <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>> Do you still have these?  Here in Norway, only small outlying
>> villages still have analogue telephone lines, and most of these are
>> being disbanded.  In my town (about 1000 households) we have had
>> fibre for internet, TV and telephone (for those, like us, that
>> still have a "house" telephone and not just mobiles) for about a
>> decade.
> 
> Most people have switched to voip phones that work over internet 
> connections, but land lines are still available. Costs more, but it
> still works if the power is out, which is not true for the voip
> phones. With a voip phone it's pretty hard to call for support for
> electrical or internet disruptions. I'm in London, Ontario, Canada,
> so like the OP in Kingston, within Bell Canada territory.
> 

Wouldn't you use a mobile phone to call about power cuts?

Mobile phones dominate here - a lot of households don't even have a 
"house" telephone any more.

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

#4564

On 02/06/2020 08.12, David Brown wrote:
> On 02/06/2020 02:32, David W. Hodgins wrote:
>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 20:18:51 -0400, David Brown 
>> <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>>> Do you still have these?  Here in Norway, only small outlying
>>> villages still have analogue telephone lines, and most of these are
>>> being disbanded.  In my town (about 1000 households) we have had
>>> fibre for internet, TV and telephone (for those, like us, that
>>> still have a "house" telephone and not just mobiles) for about a
>>> decade.
>>
>> Most people have switched to voip phones that work over internet 
>> connections, but land lines are still available. Costs more, but it
>> still works if the power is out, which is not true for the voip
>> phones. With a voip phone it's pretty hard to call for support for
>> electrical or internet disruptions. I'm in London, Ontario, Canada,
>> so like the OP in Kingston, within Bell Canada territory.
>>
> 
> Wouldn't you use a mobile phone to call about power cuts?
> 
> Mobile phones dominate here - a lot of households don't even have a 
> "house" telephone any more.

The mobile phone network is more vulnerable to power failures than the 
POTS. The weak point is that the towers have only batteries for backup, 
which may last a day or less.

And of course, you may not have charge on your own phone.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.

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

#4566

On 02/06/2020 14:54, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 02/06/2020 08.12, David Brown wrote:
>> On 02/06/2020 02:32, David W. Hodgins wrote:
>>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 20:18:51 -0400, David Brown 
>>> <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>>>> Do you still have these?  Here in Norway, only small outlying
>>>> villages still have analogue telephone lines, and most of these are
>>>> being disbanded.  In my town (about 1000 households) we have had
>>>> fibre for internet, TV and telephone (for those, like us, that
>>>> still have a "house" telephone and not just mobiles) for about a
>>>> decade.
>>>
>>> Most people have switched to voip phones that work over internet 
>>> connections, but land lines are still available. Costs more, but it
>>> still works if the power is out, which is not true for the voip
>>> phones. With a voip phone it's pretty hard to call for support for
>>> electrical or internet disruptions. I'm in London, Ontario, Canada,
>>> so like the OP in Kingston, within Bell Canada territory.
>>>
>>
>> Wouldn't you use a mobile phone to call about power cuts?
>>
>> Mobile phones dominate here - a lot of households don't even have a 
>> "house" telephone any more.
> 
> The mobile phone network is more vulnerable to power failures than the 
> POTS. The weak point is that the towers have only batteries for backup, 
> which may last a day or less.

If you have a power cut that will knock out the towers for a day, it 
will knock out the POTS system too - the POTS exchanges take power to 
run and have batteries too.

Add to that, a large number of POTS telephones have local power - such 
as for cordless telephones.  It's been decades since I've used a home 
telephone that didn't need a power supply.

And in thunderstorms, it's the POTS telephones that are at risk - 
mobiles are fine, as are VOIP with fibre internet.

> 
> And of course, you may not have charge on your own phone.
> 

Most people are so addicted to their mobiles that they /always/ have 
charge on them - and probably have an external battery for emergency 
charging.  And you can charge them from your car, your laptop, or many 
other places.

Maybe I'm just lucky in living in a place where mobiles, internet, VOIP 
and power are all extremely reliable.

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

#4567

On Tue, 02 Jun 2020 09:53:17 -0400, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

> If you have a power cut that will knock out the towers for a day, it
> will knock out the POTS system too - the POTS exchanges take power to
> run and have batteries too.

False, that POTS will not be knocked out in a day. I've experienced 3 or 4 day
power cuts due to storms, and the pots continued to work. The local exchanges
all have generators backing up their short term battery backups.

> Add to that, a large number of POTS telephones have local power - such
> as for cordless telephones.  It's been decades since I've used a home
> telephone that didn't need a power supply.

While that's true, In the 75 years this house has had a land line, there was
only once where the lightning arrestors had to be replaced. The phone still
worked after the strike (which destroyed two desktop system motherboards),
and the electrical transformer on the pole across the street, but the phone
line had a lot of static till the graphite plugs that work as arrestors were
replaced.

> And in thunderstorms, it's the POTS telephones that are at risk -
> mobiles are fine, as are VOIP with fibre internet.

That's true, but the risk is extremely low. There have been people electrocuted
by land lines being hit by lightning, just as there have been while having showers,
but both occurrences have been very rare. Much lower risk than the risk of being hit
by a car crossing a busy street.

>> And of course, you may not have charge on your own phone.

> Most people are so addicted to their mobiles that they /always/ have
> charge on them - and probably have an external battery for emergency
> charging.  And you can charge them from your car, your laptop, or many
> other places.

Murphy's law. The power will go out just as re-charging of the phone is about
to be started. :-) Very few (if any) of the people I know have an external battery
for phone charging.

> Maybe I'm just lucky in living in a place where mobiles, internet, VOIP
> and power are all extremely reliable.

It's much more reliable now than it used to be. Winter's have been much less
severe than they were prior to 1980. Thunderstorms are more common, but multi
day blizzards or ice storms just don't seem to happen anymore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Canadian_blizzard_of_March_1971
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blizzard_of_1977

When the snow plows are pulled out of service due to visibility being less than
the distance from their windshields to the plow blade, and that lasts for days,
that is truly forced social isolation. With the power out, the only working
communication was battery powered radios and pots telephone lines.

There have been many others that were less severe or long lasting, but those
two stand out in in memory. :-)

Regards, Dave Hodgins

-- 
Change dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org to davidwhodgins@teksavvy.com for
email replies.

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

#4570

On 02/06/2020 15.53, David Brown wrote:
> On 02/06/2020 14:54, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 02/06/2020 08.12, David Brown wrote:
>>> On 02/06/2020 02:32, David W. Hodgins wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 20:18:51 -0400, David Brown 
>>>> <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>>>>> Do you still have these?  Here in Norway, only small outlying
>>>>> villages still have analogue telephone lines, and most of these are
>>>>> being disbanded.  In my town (about 1000 households) we have had
>>>>> fibre for internet, TV and telephone (for those, like us, that
>>>>> still have a "house" telephone and not just mobiles) for about a
>>>>> decade.
>>>>
>>>> Most people have switched to voip phones that work over internet 
>>>> connections, but land lines are still available. Costs more, but it
>>>> still works if the power is out, which is not true for the voip
>>>> phones. With a voip phone it's pretty hard to call for support for
>>>> electrical or internet disruptions. I'm in London, Ontario, Canada,
>>>> so like the OP in Kingston, within Bell Canada territory.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Wouldn't you use a mobile phone to call about power cuts?
>>>
>>> Mobile phones dominate here - a lot of households don't even have a 
>>> "house" telephone any more.
>>
>> The mobile phone network is more vulnerable to power failures than the 
>> POTS. The weak point is that the towers have only batteries for 
>> backup, which may last a day or less.
> 
> If you have a power cut that will knock out the towers for a day, it 
> will knock out the POTS system too - the POTS exchanges take power to 
> run and have batteries too.

True, but these are normally huge, and are backed by diesel generators 
over here, so that they can last for weeks.

> 
> Add to that, a large number of POTS telephones have local power - such 
> as for cordless telephones.  It's been decades since I've used a home 
> telephone that didn't need a power supply.

That is true - well, I was using one till about a year ago. I cancelled 
the line, but it was true POTS.

> 
> And in thunderstorms, it's the POTS telephones that are at risk - 
> mobiles are fine, as are VOIP with fibre internet.

Maybe :-D



>> And of course, you may not have charge on your own phone.
>>
> 
> Most people are so addicted to their mobiles that they /always/ have 
> charge on them - and probably have an external battery for emergency 
> charging.  And you can charge them from your car, your laptop, or many 
> other places.

The laptop may be needed otherwise to access some webpages to request 
services :-P


> Maybe I'm just lucky in living in a place where mobiles, internet, VOIP 
> and power are all extremely reliable.

I had the gadget that converts the fibre to ethernet fail completely 
about 6 months ago, so no service at all during a weekend, compounded 
with the impossibility to reach a human at the help phone for the 
company. I had to use the webforum to contact them - using the mobile 
phone to give internet to my laptop. Then they replaced the gadget.

Then, during the confinement because of covid-19, the box that gives TV 
service crashed and produced a broken image. I thought it needed 
replacement, something practically impossible with the confinement rules 
here. Fortunately, they managed to upload new firmware remotely and get 
it working again, but it took about a week. Again, contacting them via 
webforum.

The router does hang now and then. I have a setup to do a power cycle 
with a watchdog.

I have had internet fail completely some evenings. Sometimes the failure 
is regional and goes on the news.

TV may stop working while I watch something in the early hours, the 
thing reboots remotely.

At another place, electricity failed each evening randomly for some 
time, half an hour or so. I have a cute photo of the laptop illuminated 
by a kerosene lamp.



-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

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

#4582

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 6/2/20 6:53 AM, David Brown wrote:

> 
> If you have a power cut that will knock out the towers for a day, it
> will knock out the POTS system too - the POTS exchanges take power to
> run and have batteries too.
> 

No it won't. Central Offices (POTS) have generators.. Most cell towers
do, but not all of them.. A lot of the older ones simply have twenty 12v
batteries (AT&T / Verizon / etc)

The primary Central Office for San Diego has a 1 megawatt generator (for
example)..

I have NEVER had a landline go down because of a power failure. Not once.

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

#4597

On 2020-06-05, Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> wrote:

> On 6/2/20 6:53 AM, David Brown wrote:
>
>> If you have a power cut that will knock out the towers for a day, it
>> will knock out the POTS system too - the POTS exchanges take power to
>> run and have batteries too.
>
> No it won't. Central Offices (POTS) have generators.. Most cell towers
> do, but not all of them.. A lot of the older ones simply have twenty 12v
> batteries (AT&T / Verizon / etc)
>
> The primary Central Office for San Diego has a 1 megawatt generator (for
> example)..
>
> I have NEVER had a landline go down because of a power failure. Not once.

Neither did we, until we went to fiber.  Recently we had a day-long
scheduled power outage so Hydro could upgrade the lines.  I was going
to dig out my old line-powered phone and make regular checks on the
phone line, but I got busy with other things and forgot until about
four hours into the outage.  At that time I plugged the phone in and
tried it.  No dial tone.  Apparently the backup battery for the fiber
interface lasts less than four hours...

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  Apple is a cult.
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  Linux is anarchy.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  Pick your poison.

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

#4620

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 6/5/20 10:31 AM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2020-06-05, Johann Beretta <beretta@nun-ya-bizness.com> wrote:
>
>> On 6/2/20 6:53 AM, David Brown wrote:
>>
>>> If you have a power cut that will knock out the towers for a day, it
>>> will knock out the POTS system too - the POTS exchanges take power to
>>> run and have batteries too.
>>
>> No it won't. Central Offices (POTS) have generators.. Most cell towers
>> do, but not all of them.. A lot of the older ones simply have twenty 12v
>> batteries (AT&T / Verizon / etc)
>>
>> The primary Central Office for San Diego has a 1 megawatt generator (for
>> example)..
>>
>> I have NEVER had a landline go down because of a power failure. Not once.
>
> Neither did we, until we went to fiber.  Recently we had a day-long
> scheduled power outage so Hydro could upgrade the lines.  I was going
> to dig out my old line-powered phone and make regular checks on the
> phone line, but I got busy with other things and forgot until about
> four hours into the outage.  At that time I plugged the phone in and
> tried it.  No dial tone.  Apparently the backup battery for the fiber
> interface lasts less than four hours...
>
Assuming your fiber connection was residential, (and you had AT&T) it
probably originated in a VRAD.  I used to build those.. Four 170 amp
hour 12v AGM batteries in series for 48V... That's it..  170 amp hours
of 48v..

If you had a fiber connection from the cable company, I have no idea
what they use for backup power, as I never worked for them.

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

#4583

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On 6/2/20 6:53 AM, David Brown wrote:

> 
> Add to that, a large number of POTS telephones have local power - such
> as for cordless telephones.  It's been decades since I've used a home
> telephone that didn't need a power supply.
> 
Anyone who has a landline and doesn't keep a $15 non-external powered
handset around, to use in an emergency, is an idiot.

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

#4565

On Tue, 02 Jun 2020 02:12:45 -0400, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

> On 02/06/2020 02:32, David W. Hodgins wrote:
>> On Mon, 01 Jun 2020 20:18:51 -0400, David Brown
>> <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>>> Do you still have these?  Here in Norway, only small outlying
>>> villages still have analogue telephone lines, and most of these are
>>> being disbanded.  In my town (about 1000 households) we have had
>>> fibre for internet, TV and telephone (for those, like us, that
>>> still have a "house" telephone and not just mobiles) for about a
>>> decade.
>>
>> Most people have switched to voip phones that work over internet
>> connections, but land lines are still available. Costs more, but it
>> still works if the power is out, which is not true for the voip
>> phones. With a voip phone it's pretty hard to call for support for
>> electrical or internet disruptions. I'm in London, Ontario, Canada,
>> so like the OP in Kingston, within Bell Canada territory.
>>
>
> Wouldn't you use a mobile phone to call about power cuts?
>
> Mobile phones dominate here - a lot of households don't even have a
> "house" telephone any more.

I don't have, need, or want one. Due to health problems I rarely leave my house,
so a mobile phone is just a waste of money.

While a majority of new phones in the last decade or so have been mobile ones,
land lines are still an option, and many houses still have one. While I started
working as a programmer in 1979, many of the people over 50 (I'm 59) who own
their own homes are not computer literate, and choose to stay with their reliable
land line telephones.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

-- 
Change dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org to davidwhodgins@teksavvy.com for
email replies.

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

#4568

On 2020-06-02, David W. Hodgins <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> I don't have, need, or want one. Due to health problems I rarely
> leave my house, so a mobile phone is just a waste of money.

My wife and I both have mobiles (mine is a good old flip phone),
but I use mine primarily for text messages.  We still have our
land line and have no intention of giving it up.

One thing nobody has mentioned yet here is that the sound quality
of cell phones can be truly dreadful.  There's often some sort of
continual phase shifting distortion to which I'm extremely sensitve.
Apparently this doesn't bother most people, or there'd be an outcry
to move to better codecs and less jitter.  But I guess that's just me
being a curmudegeon again...

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  Apple is a cult.
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  Linux is anarchy.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |  Pick your poison.

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

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

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

csiph-web