On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 05:08:51PM -0400, Andy Johnson wrote:
Alex Rubenstein wrote:
What possible technical issue could exist that to don't have to wire the dslam to a pots splitter?
Actually, even if they did wire it to a pots splitter, and there was no pots line present, it'd still work.
My speculation is that their billing/accounting system is based on a POTs number, and since these customers will not need one, they will have administrative errors managing accounts.
Their DSL OAM&P, at least in VerizonFL territory, is indeed tied to the associated voice DN; they don't even do *ticket* numbers at the consumer level: the tickets are tied to the DN as well.
Since VZ is doing their FTTP rollout, I imagine they have been tying new customers to Physical Addresses now instead, moving away from the old POTS based system. Again, all speculation based on how I see the DSL/FTTP order process taking place now.
And I've just heard from a customer for FTTP in Tampa that he loves the speed (13/1.2 stable)... but they're PPPoE at the box. <sigh> Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me