Reply to post: Re: Remember 56K?

2550100 ... An Illuminati codeword or name of new alliance demanding faster Ethernet faster?


Re: Remember 56K?

You mean as opposed to the result of robbed-bit signaling used with channel-associated signaling T1s? Yeah, sure.

Another one who has a better understanding of communications standards that the poster (s)he was replying to. Perhaps he ought to read up on T1 standards:

And for the lazy among us (the "money" part):

The optimum bit rate was chosen empirically—the capacity was increased until the failure rate was unacceptable, then reduced to leave a margin. Companding allowed acceptable audio performance with only seven bits per PCM sample in this original T1/D1 system. The later D3 and D4 channel banks had an extended frame format, allowing eight bits per sample, reduced to seven every sixth sample or frame when one bit was "robbed" for signaling the state of the channel. The standard does not allow an all zero sample which would produce a long string of binary zeros and cause the repeaters to lose bit sync. However, when carrying data (Switched 56) there could be long strings of zeros, so one bit per sample is set to "1" (jam bit 7) leaving 7 bits × 8,000 frames per second for data.

ICON for the original poster not the person I replied to ---------------------------------->

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022