how-to block ads
|
rwills70
join:2003-04-14
Rio Rancho, NM
| Help me find the remote DSLAM
I think thats what I'm looking for. I'm just real curious. A friend of mine who I consider lives out in the middle of nowhere recently got QWEST DSL service. I have it, but I live in town, close enough to the central office to be able to get it. He lives about 10-12 miles out of town. So I am assuming QWEST put a remote terminal somewhere close to his house. I am really shocked that they did it in the first place because it's such a rural area I don't see the market to make it really worth it for QWEST. But he has it nonetheless. So my question is, what does the remote DSLAM look like? Or does QWEST keep a list online somewhere of where their remote DSLAMS are at? Again, just really curious to know where they put it. | |
christcorp
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Cheyenne, WY
 ·Bresnan Online
 ·VOIPo
| It can look like a big cabinet next to a cross box, it can be inside of a shelter, or they even have some that are small enough to fit inside of an existing cabinet. You probably wouldn't notice it if you saw it. In many cases, an existing remote pair-gain system used to provide telephone, would have 2 cabinets. 1 for the pair-gain electronics and T1's themselves, a second for the cross box. Then a third for power. The dslam could be a 4th cabinet. There are many different configurations. It's impossible to tell you what to look for. If you know where the friend's cross box is, then it's possible that the dslam is next to it. But then, that isn't even always the case. Sometimes a dslam is strategically located and feed multiple cross boxes.
The point is; there is no way to tell you what to look for. Even if we could point it out to you in person, chances are that you would only be looking at a metal cabinet and wouldn't know the difference between it and any other cross box or pair gain cabinet.
Your shock that Qwest would even put a dslam in BFE is also misleading. If the existing pair gain already has power, capacity for T1's, space/shelter, etc... then it's actually not that expensive to put in a dslam. Some dslams are very inexpensive. It get expensive when you have to add power, add T1's/Fiber, add repeaters for the trip back to the C.O., pour concrete pads to put the cabinets on, etc... Sorry, but if your curiosity is that intense, then the only way for you to know, is to be in your friend's neighborhood at the time you see a Qwest outside tech and ask him/her specifically where it is. Later... Mike.... | |
rwills70
join:2003-04-14
Rio Rancho, NM | Thanks for the information. I think it's great that people are finally able to get DSL out there. Just thought it was never gonna happen. Or at least not for awhile. | |
Orygun
join:2002-03-30
Vida, OR
1 edit | It's not too strange for qwest to provide dsl to rural areas.
I live over half a mile up a steep gravel mountain road in a remote river community in oregon and my modem trains at 7168 kbps. Guess how I feel about Qwest. 
I think Qwest has agreements to provide dsl to some rural areas regardless of whether it is profitable or not. | |
christcorp
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Cheyenne, WY
·Bresnan Online
·VOIPo
| said by Orygun  :... I think Qwest has agreements to provide dsl to some rural areas regardless of whether it is profitable or not. No, Qwest doesn't have any agreements. They don't have to provide DSL to anyone. They do it totally for profit. The only thing they are required to provide per FCC and other governmental agencies is basic telephone service. Then, only to a certain dollar amount. After that, the government and/or customer pays the difference. DSL is not considered a communication service under the utility header. That is why cable companies are regulated the same with their tv or broadband. utilities and regs mandating availability include electric, water, gas, and telephone. All with different levels of requirements. DSL, Cable Broadband, etc... don't fall under this. If Qwest can't make money offering DSL, they aren't going to provide it. Later... Mike... | |
rwills70
join:2003-04-14
Rio Rancho, NM
| reply to Orygun
I did a search for Qwest rural New Mexico (where I live) and found this article.
Qwest complying with latest N.M. deal print
May 18, 2007
Qwest’s performance on an agreement to invest in New Mexico’s telecommunications system is on track so far, the company and state regulators said Thursday.
Qwest officials briefed the Public Regulation Commission on the company’s first-quarter progress on the agreement, which requires the company to spend $255 million on the state’s telecommunications system over the next three years.
The company spent $3.06 million during the first quarter, said Dennis Pappas, Qwest’s program manager for the settlement agreement.
And while that is a low figure compared to the $6.5 million a month the company plans to spend in the future, it is to be expected as the company plans exactly how to spend the money, Pappas said.
The company plans to deploy high-speed Internet services to 22 central offices throughout the state and, so far, has spent $1.9 million on those projects, Pappas said.
The company brought high-speed Internet services to Angel Fire during the first quarter, Pappas said.
By this time next year, however, 21 more communities should have high-speed Internet services in their central offices, Pappas said. The company expects to bring high-speed services to Cimarron and Mountain Air in 2008, he said.
The settlement requires the company deploy high-speed Internet services to 50 percent of the state’s rural households, Pappas said.
In addition to deploying high-speed Internet to central offices, the company also plans to deploy high-speed Internet services to remote terminals, which expand the service’s coverage from central offices, he said.
The settlement resulted from ongoing litigation between the commission and Qwest over a $788 million regulatory agreement reached in 2001. The company fell about $220 million short of what it promised, and litigation ensued after the commission ordered the company to spend the money or refund it to customers.
The state Supreme Court ruled in favor of the commission, and in 2006 the two parties reached the settlement, which requires the company to spend a total of $270 million. That figure includes $15 million in credits on customers’ bills.
In 2006, consumer advocates from AARP in New Mexico urged the commission not to take Qwest’s settlement offer, saying they did not believe the company would follow through. The organization has 264,000 members in New Mexico.
But Brian Harris, a telecommunications lawyer with the state Attorney General’s Office, said Thursday that he is “cautiously optimistic” the company will perform as promised. “I’ve seen good faith so far,” Harris said, “and I’m happy with the process.”
PRC Chairman Ben R. Luján said so far, he is impressed with Qwest’s plans for rolling out high-speed Internet services.
Luján said he attended a recent meeting in Questa with company officials, who promised to bring high-speed Internet services to the Taos County community by the end of this year. Previously, company officials thought they wouldn’t be able to provide the service until 2008 or 2009, he said.
Based on the first-quarter numbers, it appears the company is setting a proper pace on spending the $255 million, Luján said.
| |
christcorp
Premium
join:2001-05-21
Cheyenne, WY
·Bresnan Online
·VOIPo
| These agreements with individual communities is common among providers and such when a municipality, state, county, etc.. has provided some form of subsidies to the company. Either to expand or as a joint effort. Some communities, like in Utah, decide to venture on their own and install their own fiber optic ring around an entire town, city, county, etc... Obviously, Qwest or any other provider, would prefer to have customers. It is not uncommon for them to be offered incentives to build up a town, county, etc...
I misunderstood the comment about "Qwest having agreement to provide DSL to some rural areas regardless of whether it is profitable or not". Qwest isn't expected to put in DSL in an area to take a loss. Now, if a community, city, state, etc... subsidizes Qwest by guaranteeing a certain profit, expanded growth in another area, easement and right of way, etc... Then qwest isn't taking a loss. They are profiting from such an investment. Qwest can not be told by a city, town, municipality, etc... that they MUST put in DSL whether they like it or not and it doesn't matter if they lose money. That is against the law. But, Qwest can be subsidized for such an investment. Again, this is done all the time.
Sometimes, which if I'm not mistaken this New Mexico situation is the case, Qwest/US West was sued because of certain infractions. Part of the settlement was that instead of paying back customers or the state for restitution, that Qwest would agree to invest into the infrastructure. I believe reading a year or two back where this is EXACTLY what happened in New Mexico. They lost a law suit, and the state knowing that Qwest could prolong appeals and legal actions for years, decided to take an agreement where Qwest would invest into the state.
This is much different than Qwest or any company being forced to put dsl and such into places and purposely taking a loss. That is not what happened here and is not the case any place. The RBOCs are only REQUIRED to offer basic telephone service. Now, if they didn't offer newer technologies, and the customers bitched enough, then the state/local/feds/etc... would open the market to all competition to fill the gaps. So, Qwest provides DSL because it's profitable. Not every place has DSL. Some may not get it still for years. Time will tell. Later.... Mike.... | |
js2318
join:2005-08-02
North Platte, NE
| reply to rwills70
here is some of what you might have for RTs. Some picture aren't the best, but gives you an idea of what is out there.
Power ped/juice box - AC feeding RT
»www.emersonnetworkpower.com/ener···ebox.asp
Adtran 1124/1148 cabinet (actually made by emerson)
»www.emersonnetworkpower.com/ener···5900.pdf
Other RTs
»www.ptsupply.com/pdf/avestor_OSP···uide.pdf
Avaya 52e, Nextlevel USAM 8 & 16, NEC CREX 2, Alcatel 2030, Lucent 80e, are just a couple of the ones in my area, but by no means is a inclusive list of RT (DSL or POTs) that Qwest uses or has used in the past. Even if you find one of these cabinet, it doesn't mean the one on the opposite side of town is exactly the same. Like Christcorp pointed out, there are many different combinations out there. | |
|
