really old phone lines

Page 4 of 6  


They always used the center-pair for the first one. That way no matter what happened with polarities, there would at least always be a connection. Something I found in an old, POTS history book once.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:10:48 -0400, "TWayne"

Makes sense. For some reason, ethernet cables avoid using the center pair.

These 3 pairs weren't in a row, so "center pair" here is meaningless. It would mans something on a jack, but not this non-connected cable.
I never got to see the connections to the only jack installed when the house was now. There were provisions for jacks in the bedrooms. Wire was installed, but no jacks. I later added a couple of jacks, and used an 8-ohm speaker to find the active pair.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah? Well the center pins on an ethernet card (in a computer) are shorted, for whatever THAT's worth.
Back in the dial-up days, I lost count of the times I would clear a hard short trouble report by removing the RJ11 plug from the ethernet port in the back of the computer and reconnect it into the nearby, internal modem IN port.
--
:)
JR

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Redelfs wrote:

Hmmm, You mean there are some dumbs who can see the difference between RJ11 and RJ45?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh, yeah. :\\
For whatever reason, the customer unplugged the phone cord from the computer's internal modem IN port. Then, probably fumbling around in back where it's dark and without a good, solid view, they inserted the plug into the ethernet port.
An RJ11 plug fits nicely into the 8-pin (usually ethernet) RJ45 jack. Doing so places a short across the center pins of the phone cord and, thusly, across the pair, effectively "killing" the phone line. Simply unplugging the phone cord from the ethernet port/jack removed the short and restored the customer's dialtone.
--
:)
JR

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 22:03:24 -0500, Jim Redelfs

I checker the loose ethernet cards I had around. 3 of them (all 100Mbps) and the pins shorted. the other 2 (10Mbps) did not. Maybe it's a speed indicator.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're bound determined to justify it aren't you? What you showed is not a RJ-11 jack which is what would be used in the home. If you plug any residential phone into a jack such as you described, it will not work from the yellow/green wires. It will work from the tip/ring pair at pins 3 & 4 ONLY. You also left out pins; there are 8 on the wiring you showed, which is shown incorrectly. Telephones do not come with some wired for pins 3 & 4 and others wired for other pins: In fact, very often the silver & gray telephone cables only consist of 2 actual conductors.
If you were to try to use the yellow/black for tip & ring, you would have to terminate those wires in hte jack the phone connects to at the normal positions in the box for the red/gree pair. so the yellow wire would go where it says red and the black to where it says green. Clearly wrong.
If a telco wires in a 2-line system, they will not use 6-conductor standard phone cable but will use 8 conductor instead, and 8 pin RJ jacks vs the 6 pin RJ11 jacks. The specs dictate that so that, where the wires are no longer twisted within the jacket of the cable, a distance can be maintained between them to keep line to line crosstalk from occurring.
I detest misinformation and especially when it comes from some moron who guesses at what the rules and regs say and want to justify their own existance by giving incorrect information. Whether you looked up "tip" and "ring" or just think they were handy buzz words, they are very real and have distinct meanings within the installations. You CAN connect another line to the black/yellow pair, but then you'll have some phones that don't work and need rewiring at the box, and a very good chance of crosstalk between the two lines, especially since I doubt you would know how to keep non-twisted sections short and the rest of the things any novice installer would know. If youwant the nitty gritty it exists in the CFR, Title 47, Part 68. Go educate yourself or quit giving out misinformation that can cause other people problems.
NOW the case is closed because I've no more food for you to troll on; you're on your own.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 11:04:39 -0400, "TWayne"

Um. I didn't describe an R-11 jack at all, dunderhead. We are talking about the WIRES. You also seem to think that the princess phones used the yellow/black pair for lighting. That's essentially incorrect in terms of this discussion, and you don/'t even know that much. The princess phone used the yellow and black wires IN THE PHONE forlighting power, but the wall connector was actually an adapter configured as a shunt to prevent those wires from connecting to the yello/black wiring in the wal, so it could still be used for that second phone line in the kids rooml. Those wires, IN THE PHONE were passed to a wall wart for power, and had ZERO to do with the telco wiring in the wall.

Forget pins, pinhead. We are talking about house wiring for telephones, not termination.
Only in the case of phone to wall cords that come packed with very cheap phones, will you see 2 wire cables. Not germane to the discussion at all. Google "red herring" for further information.

Yet that is EXACTLY what Telco's have done for decades to create a second line for the kids bedroom upstairs using the existing wiring. They don't homerun new wiring through a hosue for that, as it would be almost as stupid as you.

Then why do you keep posting it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@dog.com wrote:

Usually true, but not always. If the customer (usually the missus) objected to 'that ugly thing', or if there was no outlet near the phone drop, they would sometimes use the second pair for power, and put the wall wart in the basement. After I was here a year, I banged my head on an abandoned one hanging from its black and yellow wires under the basement stairs. (the run had been cut off upstream.) Not the first time I had seen a basement-mounted one. -- aem sends...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[snip]

Of course this is not "politically correct", but these messages do make women seem much more likely to be irrational. There ARE exceptions.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sam E wrote:

No sexism involved or intended. I have no idea if it is genetics or how they are raised, but in my experience, most women are MUCH fussier about the appearance of their surroundings. The stereotypes arose for a reason. Stuff most guys would shrug over irritates some women every time they see it. It isn't that they are irrational, it is that they have different priorities. Yes, there are exceptions, but that is why they are called exceptions.
-- aem sends...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:57:04 -0400, "TWayne"
[snip]

I have had a second line in here, but the telco put in completely different wiring for it. No cables are shared.
BTW, I later found out they charge over $200 for a little wiring, I could easily have done myself. It's still take new wire, since the old wiring has just 3 wires.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<...snipped...>

<...snipped...>
Maybe that should read "a telco _should_..." I have seen telco technicians do all kinds of things in residential wiring, including using black/yellow pairs, even green/black or red/yellow, or most any other permutation, if it helps them avoid stringing a new wire at telephone co. expense. I've seen them use wire nuts or twisted wires covered with electrical tape to make their connections. Of course, when it is at the consumer's expense, then they insist on doing everything up to standards. Please don't generalize what is probably best practice to what is actually being done the field.
--
Better to be stuck up in a tree than tied to one.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 19:27:51 +0000 (UTC), snipped-for-privacy@sdf.lNoOnSePsAtMar.org (Larry W) wrote:

Since the late 70s, all interior wiring belongs to the consumer. You don't get anything at telco expense anymore. I also haven't seen an interior phone wired by a real telco installer repairman in years either. They are usually contractors who are basically clueless. Back before the US v ATT decision if you had 2 lines, they ran 2 cables or a 25 pair if you were in an office that might get a call director phone. BSP said you did not run 2 lines in one cable without using twisted pair.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

<...snipped...>
IF the telco installed a demarc box, that is true. However, at least in my area, a lot of homes were missed. If the owner of such a home calls for a line problem today, the telco is required to repair the line even if it is inside the home, at least up to the junction blocks installed by the phone company back in the ancient past. That is where you will find the funky repairs I was describing. The technicians who make these repairs may well be contractors for the telephone co, I don't know. The telco won't install a demarc box on such a home without a lot of persuasion. I guess their bean counters figure it is cheaper to just repair the wiring, than to repair the wiring AND install the box.
--
There is always an easy solution to every human problem -- neat,
plausible, and wrong." (H L Mencken)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:45:15 +0000 (UTC), snipped-for-privacy@sdf.lNoOnSePsAtMar.org (Larry W) wrote:

I don't know where you heard that but they can put that Dmark on the first time you call them and walk away if their butt set works from the Dmark. The next time you will pay a trip charge. In real life I have not seen a house without a Dmark in almost 30 years. Maybe they are just more proactive in Florida
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008 22:51:44 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

I don't have one (in east Texas), although a neighbor does.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Is that still true today about no demarc? Where are you located? I'm curious. I was under the impression if there wasn't a modern demarc box, or if there wasn't one, they were required to install one. The new demarcs also have the advantage of getting rid of the old 600V gas tubes in favor of better components for the first-level surge protection. What bothers me about that is that even if there is no demarc box, the demarcation point is still considered to be the wall where the wiring enters from outside and from that point on it's the customer's responsibility. From my experience, knowledge the demarcation point can never go inside a building's walls without special waivers etc. for factories, etc. where outside access would be dangerous or impossible for whatever reason. An example would be a prison but there are lots of others. And they require 24/7 access to the demarcs.
Strange
Cheers,
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There sure is a lot of half and misinformation here. Sheesh!
Since 1984, ALL telephone services (read: ALL) have had a demarc - a DEMARCATION point.
That was - and still is - usually the Minimum Point of Presence or Penetration (MPOP).
Services installed or upgraded since about 1986 were done using a Standard Network Interface Device (SNI or NID).

Remember the difference between a demarc and SNI/D.
When a premise visit is made, and no SNI/D is present, one is SUPPOSED to be installed, at no extra charge to the customer, at that time.
Of course, if the weather is crappy, the work load is heavy, the installer/repairdroid is in a bad mood or Jupiter is not in alignment with Mars, the retrofit may be <ahem> deferred.

I am not sure that there is an OFFICIAL requiring entity (FCC, whatever?) but I believe it is official PRACTICE of all telcos.

Old? ARGH!! :)
Listen, Sonny-boy: I UPGRADED many a protector from the old carbon block protectors to the "new" gas tube variety. And the new stuff is NO better than the old carbon blocks.
The "protector" (within the SNI/D if present) is not to provide "first-level" surge protection. Instead, it is to keep your house from burning down in the event of a near-direct lightning strike. Even the modern stuff passes-through MOST transients. If it didn't, a phone company would have HUNDREDS or THOUSANDS of service call in the hours after every thunder storm. No way.

Again, please remember the DISTINCT difference between a "demarc" and a SNI/D.
In a grandfathered situation (one with no SNI/D), the telco responsibility extends INTO the premise (residential, commercial and industrial) to - and including - the protector block.
Most installations have the protection within a few feet of the service entrance. Those that extend great distances through the building BEFORE being protected are rare. In those cases, an upgrade would include installing the SNI/D at the entrance, thereby deregulating the rest of the formerly telco-owned cable that extends through the building to the former (divested) demarc. At that point, the protection is either removed or disabled in favor of that provided at the entrance and new SNI/D.
--
:)
JR

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:16:22 -0500, Jim Redelfs
[snip]

SUPPOSED to. They (Verizon) didn't when I got a second line in 1999.
[snip]
BTW, the installer also claimed I had poison ivy. I didn't.
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.