Charles Wyble wrote:
So allow me to think out loud for a minute....
1) Why wasn't the fiber protected by some sort of hardened/locked
conduit? Is this possible? Does it add extensive cost or hamper normal
operation?
Some people do lock their vaults/pits/manholes. But, to be honest, I'm
not sure it helps a lot. How many passersby would stop someone
appearing to be in a phone company/telco high-vis vest using bolt
cutters - telling them the lock had seized?
(I can also think of quite a few options which don't require opening a
lid, but here's not the place to discuss!)
2) Why didn't an alarm go off that someone had entered the area? It
was after business hours, presumably not in response to a trouble
ticket, and as such a highly suspicious action. Does it make sense for
these access portals to have some sort of alarm? I mean there is fiber
running through and as such it could carry the signaling. Would this
be a massive cost addition during construction?
Alarms mean power. Adding power to hundreds of km of a route to every
pit/manhole would cost a lot - it's underground and often quite wet.
Better to provide diverse route protection for the same cost - then you
protect against accidental external aggression. Maybe you could do
something neat with fibre and some of the active monitoring stuff to
detect pit openning passively, but you'd want it to be pretty good and
reliable. Lots of false alarms lead to NOCs not caring.
3) From what I understand it's not trivial to raise a manhole cover.
Most likely can't be done by one person. Can they be locked? Or were
the carriers simply relying on obscurity/barrier to entry?
Obscurity and that most people are blissfully unaware of manholes and
other street furniture. Locking is certainly possible but I'm not
convinced it adds a LOT (see above).
Accidental external aggression is far more likely. Backhoe fade and
equipment failure is a bigger problem than vandalism.
MMC
