From: "Mark Henigan" <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com>
Received-SPF: none (secmgr-ny.randr: 69.147.64.89 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of sbcglobal.net) client-ip=69.147.64.89; envelope-from=driven_zen@sbcglobal.net; helo=smtp116.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com;
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net;
  h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:X-Accept-Language:MIME-Version:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
  b=fxwhlNr0+HVbV4g+aamle0VOKwG1rjk4c8/pR8O9Yjv0IETmiZbrXaefXT37EUvogrXZiehFPyg8mGYJlRWmOgZAAvQhiHY5r4nFnt/LK90OsR8bYqZezLUoLJ+fc9xmptA5gs8AOkRKnCopQqHrmhc7XWMwtOtPUZ+4PRVjUvI=  ;
Message-ID: <47AFDB68.4080808@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 21:21:44 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (OS/2; U; Warp 4.5; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050922
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: OS/2 Wireless Users Mailing List <os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com>
Subject: Re: [OS2Wireless] VOT (very off-topic)
References: <list-1695049@2rosenthals.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-1695049@2rosenthals.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ed Durrant wrote:
> 
>> Ed Durrant replied:
>>
>>> Phone lines are usaually 600 Ohm impedance, co-ax on the other hand 
>>> is 50 or 75 Ohm.
>>>
>>> I'd try it since it's there - the worst that I would expect is that 
>>> the volume on one or both phone units will be lowered and if that's 
>>> the case you can easily disconnect the cable. Chances are it'll work 
>>> fine.
>>
>>
>> Hello Ed:
>>
>> I think I need to describe the situation a little
>> more clearly, given your reply and several others.
>>
> ..................................................
> 
> ...................................................
> 
>> So, thank you all for your suggestions and
>> thoughts on this rather confounded question!
>> I'll try the installation using the coax and
>> revert to replacing (or adding a run of phone
>> cable in parallel with) the coax if it does
>> not work.
>>
>> Again many thanks! There is so much knowledge
>> available on this list!
>>
>> - Mark
>>
>> Mark Henigan
>> -- 
>>
> 
> Mark - I think in this situation, where this is going to only have your 
> office on the co-ax, I'd certainly say try it ! There's a good change 
> it'll work.
> 
> Am I right in assuming that the co-ax is not run through some sort of 
> trunking but rather, simply fastened to the outside of the house ? If it 
> does use trunking, you could use the co-ax cable as the "draw-cord" to 
> pull the phone cable trough to where you need it.

Hello Ed:

Unfortunately, it is simply cable stapled to
the side of the house without conduit.  I
would simply staple the telephone line next to
it, or possibly house it in narrow diameter
flexible shielding.  The repair person told me
that simply stapling it to the exterior of the
house would be fine because of its low power.
He also said that there are no important code
restrictions on phone line installation for the
same reason.

This is a crazy place -- the Central Valley of
California -- where water to the house is
connected with relatively small PVC pipes
buried only a few inches deep.  In my native
Missouri this would be considered not only a
violation of code but stupid, since even
fairly deeply-buried cold water supplies will
freeze and rupture during the cold winters.
I suppose global warming will float all ships.
Perhaps they will be able to take similar
risks in Missouri in a few year.  :->

Thanks again for your thoughts!

- Mark

Mark Henigan
--