Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: claris!netcom!ergo@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Isaac Rabinovitch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Annoying Cross Talk Problem, HELP!
Message-ID: <12324@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 18 Sep 90 17:48:06 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Reply-To: claris!netcom!ergo@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Organization: UESPA
Lines: 22
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 656, Message 5 of 10


I'm no telecom expert, but I've experience with a cause of crosstalk
that nobody seems to have thought of.  It affected a bunch of
residential lines that had just been installed.  Turned out (according
to the guy who finally fixed it) that all the affected phone lines hat
been connected to various cable wires (go ahead and flame me, I'd like
to know the correct terminology) without reference to which twisted
pair each individual wire belonged to.

Incidentally, this was pre-breakup, and the battle between the
California PUC and Pacific Telephone (90% owned by AT&T) was still
going strong.  I was told that the reason for the initial problem was
inadequate training/apprenticship for the workers who made the initial
mistake and failed to diagnose the problem (or couldn't even find my
house!).  It seems likely to me now that the PUC's rate policy was
determined more by an anti-big business mentality than realistic
economics.  I'm no lover of big business (especially AT&T!) myself,
but this experience raised my kneejerk reflex threshold somewhat.


ergo@netcom.uucp			Isaac Rabinovitch
{apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!ergo	Silicon Valley, CA