Very good points, but that works for regular phone service as well.
A couple of weeks ago, about 3 days I after I got my DSL connection
put in the local phone company did some work on the switch that serves
Pleasant Hill.  This was around 2:30-3:00 in the morning.  After that
work was completed, EVERY ISDN line in Pleasant Hill was dead.  I called
in shortly after 7 that morning on my PCS phone to report it, and before
9 I had determined that ISDN was out all over town.  I also confirmed
that
there had been work done on the switch early that morning.  The people
at
the Sprint Local repair center noticed that they seemed to be getting an 
awful lot of calls from Pleasant Hill, but apparently the people at the 
Network Operations Center in Gardner didn't find out until around 3:00 
that afternoon when I called from Kansas City to get an update on the 
status.  All my voice service is ISDN (I have four numbers - two ISDN 
lines - one business, one residential) and my service did not get
restored 
until about 10:30 that night.  My SDSL service never hiccuped.  I had 
planned on converting my email service to use my new connection over
that 
weekend,  but ended up doing it under duress that day.  Redundancy is a 
great idea, but if you're in one location, you're at much greater risk 
than if you've got replicated bandwidth, storage, and processing power 
at different locations.  Unless you've got three or four different lines 
coming into your facility from different directions, one careless
utility 
repair crew can wipe out all your connections with a little backhoe
action.  
And you're still subject to woopsies from the local phone company if you 
rely on their equipment.  And we all do.  The folks on the front line
are 
doing their best, but they're not getting the kind of support they need 
from their own companies to be able to keep up with all the changes in 
the industry.  I think the 'grunts' are doing a fantastic job with
little
support from their multi-billion dollar communications giant du jour. 
And 
in fairness to the companies themselves, I'm sure their heads are
spinning 
with the pace of change in the industry.

Bradley Miller wrote:
> 
> One thing that I might point out -- some DSL provider companies frown on
> running your own mini-network . . . or hosting shop on your DSL line.  I
> don't neccessarily agree with the policy, but I can certainly see the point
> in their eyes.   I've got a little test server up that I play with, but I
> would never repoint any of my domains.  Of course, it could be that I have
> a server in St. Louis already -- but I really feel that a local DSL
> connection shouldn't be used for serious hosting needs.  I would classify
> the KCLUG site as a serious hosting need also.   Even though it's just a
> user group, you want it to be available at anytime from any where.   If
> your neighbor plows your telephone (DSL) connection . . . what happens?
> 
> I got into the same type of scenario with putting a server down at Lake of
> the Ozarks.  I could have my hardware and do-it-myself, but putting in just
> a T1 connection and having the possibility of someone accidently taking it
> out was too great of a risk.  Especially when you have customers depending
> upon a server.
> 
> There is somewhat of an idea there still -- I think I could get a Cobalt
> RAQ server for around $300/month.   It doesn't take but about 30 people
> wanting hosting at $10/month to make up the costs.   Anyone game?
> 
> -- Bradley Miller
-- 
Dave Parker/DLP, Inc.    dlparker@dlpinc.com    www.dlpinc.com