[plug] [OT] Possible fire hazard

[W.Kenworthy]

Actually, not in my experience at a gov installation where fixed cabling
had to be done by an AUSTEL licensed tech (or be supervised by).  The
problem was the AUSTEL definition of fixed.  If equipment was mounted in
a rack (router, switch etc) and Telstra was in the circuit somehow, we
could only patch to it.  30 plus meters of cabling was not a patch
cable.

Mind you this was where we had to get a limited electrical licence to
work on PC's because there was 240Vac inside the cover.  Again
interpretation (WA gov <-> commonwealth) - dont get gov departments
talking to each other as to what qualifications do we need to "do this":
you wont like the answer!

I did do some study to get AUSTEL qualified, but didnt bother to sit the
test.  This was some ~10 years ago now so I'am not sure of the current
status, but think its more swept under the carpet than sensibly
resolved.

BillK


On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 18:16 +1000, Onno Benschop wrote: 
> W.Kenworthy wrote:
> 
> >Mind you I think AUSTEL are picky if you have any cabling that isnt
> >installed by them, and is attached to Telsta stuff, even remotely.  So
> >they may come down on the agents side - if installed by someone without
> >an AUSTEL licence, it is hazardous by definition from their lofty
> >position.
> >  
> >
> IMHO, this is rubbish. Ethernet cables are not in any way connected to 
> Telstra stuff. The law applies to the stuff before you get to a 
> wall-socket - between the exchange and the wall in your house.