Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bu.edu!telecom-request From: sichermn@beach.csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Update on Rochester, NY Disaster Message-ID: Date: 9 Mar 91 23:54:56 GMT Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu Organization: Cal State Long Beach Lines: 27 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 193, Message 13 of 13 It's hardly an issue here (Southern California) unless it gets so dry the lines turn to dust and blow away ... but I was windering (sic): What fraction of utility lines are underground, particularly Telephone, and does it vary from region-to-region, state-to-state, or over smaller areas as to the practice and preponderance ? It would seem that they were more survivable from natural disasters (though less from back-hoe made ones). It would seem that overhead and otherwise exposed phone lines are most vulnerable under conditions that they might be most emergency-critical. I wonder if a cellular-based system wouldn't be more dependable in these circumstances. Future wire-based local network installations would have a limited-bandwidth cellular component in neighborhoods and at the CO. Each subscriber would have a cellular capability (perhaps more restricted than regular cellular and on different frequencies) either built into the phone (with price and size going down this shouldn't be a major problem) or perhaps as part of an *active* network interface, that permits them to tap into the stand-by cellular ports under restricted conditions to prevent overload (like the network restrictions that are imposed when disasters occur). Jeff Sicherman