[30367] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NFPA 76 Standard for the protection of telecommunications facilities
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Shields)
Sat Jul 29 12:59:04 2000
To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
From: Michael Shields <shields@msrl.com>
Date: 29 Jul 2000 16:57:12 +0000
In-Reply-To: Sean Donelan's message of "28 Jul 2000 20:18:34 -0700"
Message-ID: <87n1j0an87.fsf@challah.msrl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
In article <20000729031834.23310.cpmta@c004.sfo.cp.net>,
Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com> wrote:
> See that word "Internet." While they may have intended to only
> apply it to the traditional telephone Central Office, the scope
> statement is far too broad for this standard.
I'm not sure why colo facilities should be held to lesser fire
protection standards than COs. Although the standard as written may
have problems as a document, many data centers could certainly benefit
from a more rigorous and professional approach to fire safety.
> You can tell the document was written by a bunch of old-line telephone
> folks. They make distinctions between ILECs ("These companies, who
> have been in business for many years,") and CLECs ("The companies are
> primarily start-up companies"). Such distinctions have no place in an
> consensus standard document. Industry standards should apply equally
> to all companies within an industry.
Precisely. If the requirements are onerous, perhaps we are building
COs that are expensively overprotected.
--
Shields.
