Any way to make Verizon cure a bad DSL line?

[kramerjm at gmail.com (James Kramer)]

I have the same problem.  I would be nice to see the cities and towns
providing their own DSL service thus controling monopolies rule over public
telecommunication lines.
Jay

On 10/7/06, Richard Chonak <rac at gabrielmass.com> wrote:
>
> Is there any way to get Verizon to fix DSL line problems when it is not
> the ISP?
>
> I've been a satisfied subscriber to DSL service from Speakeasy for a few
> years.  However, the line quality has declined to the point where I
> can't get stable service any faster than 384/384 kbps.  (I'm paying for
> 1.5M/384.)
>
> My apartment is 15,000 feet from the CO in Wakefield, which tests out as
> 17,000 (somehow, "because the DSL modem adds 2000 feet").
>
> Provisioned rate        Margins, dB (down/up)   Stability
> 608/384                 8/10                    intermittent
> 384/384                 11/11                   steady
>
> In a recent effort to improve things, I ordered DSL service on a
> separate line; Verizon provided it, but the margins on that line weren't
> any better:
>
> Provisioned rate        Margins, dB (down/up)   Stability
> 1.5M/384                5/10                    none
>
> Covad declared the line unfeasible, so the new service was cancelled.
> From what Speakeasy tells me, Covad has no leverage to get Verizon to
> meet any quality standards.
>
> Do I have any options to make some improvement here?
>
> (I'm staying a Speakeasy customer, at least for now, because their T&C
> allows home servers.)
>
> Really, what I'd like is a way to get Verizon to acknowledge a problem
> and correct it.
>
> Thanks for any info, suggestions, etc.
>
> --RC
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at blu.org
> http://olduvai.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.blu.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20061009/6d5b13a6/attachment.html>