I’m afraid that’s all I have, so I published it as is, many warts and all. I can’t see a "Location:" field in that lot that uses the three words system (something that was new to me, my wife then explained it).
Initially I saw the following, with delight:
Where was the fault located ?: 743.02I thought that the number was some kind of TDR-returned distance along the cable. But then I noticed similar numbers associated with adjacent records, so it seems my initial thought about cable distance was hopelessly over-optimistic.
Burakkucat wrote:
> Let's hope it is for good . . . For good until another defect occurs, of course.
I am cautiously optimistic this time because at least (i) the engineer found something non-trivial and ‘real’, and (ii) actually made
a change - he fixed it. The many other call-outs to HCD complaints have most often been cured by an engineer seemingly doing nothing at all. Hence theories about how
- the fix could be due to phoning the problem line, thus applying ring voltage, or
- the fix could be to do with turning modems off for a while then back on again - this requires bad modems. However it would seem the bad modem theory is ruled out now following a thorough modem swapout.
[digression]When confronted by problems that are very very hard to debug, many years of experience has taught me to consider multi-bug scenario, with different problems simultaneously presenting different appearances so that rule-outs can mislead the investigator completely. "It can’t be x, because…”-type ‘negative’ reasoning.[/digression]