HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:58:24 GMT
From: bakerj@gtephx.UUCP (Jon Baker)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Why Can't I Break Dialtone?
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 647, Message 11 of 11

In article <telecom12.638.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, friedl@mtndew.Tustin.CA.US
(Stephen Friedl) writes:

> What would cause a central office to reject Touch Tones?  I have
> sporadic problems with TT not breaking dialtone on several of my lines.

> [Moderator's Note: Your CO has a bad piece of equipment which it is
> offering to you and other callers who go off hook. Probably all the
> subscribers in your CO get it from time to time. When they can't cut
> dial tone they hang up, then go off hook and try again.
> Problems in the common equip-
> ment in the CO are hard to find and difficult to get a repair clerk to
> open a trouble ticket on.  After all, what would you know about it?  PAT]

Pat, I concur that this sounds like a bad receiver, but it should not
be so difficult for the CO to detect a bad receiver.

In the scenario you described:
  
   'When they can't cut dial tone they hang up, ...'

This action, of going offhook, being connected to a receiver, then not
dialing any digits, is detectable and measurable by a central office.
After this happens too many times for a particular receiver or line,
the CO may report the problem to maintenance personnel and/or take
corrective action (remove the receiver from service).

  It is reasonable to expect the CO switch to detect and report this
type of problem, and for the telco to fix it, without the subscriber
having to dork around with a repair clerk.  Unfortunately, it seems
that this has not happened in Mr. Friedl's case.  Fruitless as it may
be, he will probably have to go through the telco's repair clerks.


J.Baker   enuucp!gtephx!bakerj
I am not an official representative of AGCS.
From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies
Date: 21 Aug 92 14:50:00 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 650, Message 9 of 10

Monopolies are not necessarily bad.  In fact, the patent system is a
way of granting monopolies.  But patents have a limited lifetime.
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 10:29:51 PDT
From: lars@CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Unreliable Call Return Feature on Southwestern Bell
Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 643, Message 2 of 13

In article <telecom12.634.1@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:

> I originally posted this article to the Risks Digest, where it
> generated a lot of comment and questions.  A fellow reader suggested
> that the conversation be moved here so it could generate more light
> than heat.

Indeed, the TELECOM list would have more readers with specific
telephone knowledge than would the RISKS list. However, you should be
forewarned that the TELECOM Moderator has had more than his fill of
Caller*ID mail and now routinely refers all such discussions to the
telecom privacy group on USENET.

> I was using my modem and computer to telecommute on Sunday afternoon.
> Shortly after hanging up, my phone rang.  The caller asked with whom
> she was speaking.  I responded by asking who she was trying to reach.
> It turned out that she had just been the victim of a harassing phone
> call.  Southwestern Bell has a phone feature (call return) that allows
> a person to press a star-sequence (i.e., *1) to call back the last
> caller.

The activation code for "Call Return" is usually *69.

What you probably witnessed is known as a "service interaction"
between the service features "Call Return" and "Call Forward". Some
prankster registered a "Call Forward" on his phone, requesting that
all calls to his number be sent to you instead. He then made a
harassing phone call.  The victim used "Call Return" and the return
call was forwarded.

Both features worked as designed.

I am cc-ing RISKS.


Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer	Internet E-mail: lars@CMC.COM
CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l	Telephone: +1-805-968-4262	
Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083		TeleFAX:   +1-805-968-8256
From: dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET (Bill Sohl)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cellular Telephone Eavesdropping Scandal in Minnesota
Date: 15 Aug 92 14:33:29 GMT
Reply-To: dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 633, Message 7 of 10

In article <telecom12.620.6@eecs.nwu.edu> bruce@zuhause.mn.org writes:

> Here in Minnesota, there's been a political scandal over the
> dissemination of a tape recording of a cellular telephone
> conversation.  The person who was recorded was someone (I believe a
> lawyer or lobbiest) who was hoping to get a job from the state
> administration, the person recording it was a state department of
> transportation (DOT) employee (who recorded it at home), and it was
> passed around the DOT.

Stuff about political race deleted ...

> Unfortunately for Grundseth (former gobernatorial candidate) , the
> major repercussion seems to have fallen upon him and the man who taped
> the conversation in the first place.

More stuff deleted ...

> There's been some thought to prosecuting Grundseth for sending
> copies all over the place, but I don't think there have been any
> formal charges yet.

I'm not an attorney, but what could they prosecute Grundseth for?  The
only lawbreaker (ECPA violations) I can see is the guy that actually
listened to and taped the cellular call.  Possession of and/or
distribution of copies of that recording wouldn't (to the best of my
knowledge) be a violation of the law.  Any attorney types out there
that can shed more light on this.  At worst, I'd say that Grundseth
was "guilty" of unethical/dirty politics if he was involved in the
passing around of the tapes, but that is all.


Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.

Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 12:03:25 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <acg@hermes.dlogics.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Peculiar Event During Phone Call
Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 654, Message 9 of 10

Bryan King writes:

> During the conversation his line went silent a couple of times. It was
> as though I was on the 'waiting' end of call waiting.  The line has
> call waiting but no calls came in during our conversation. [...]
> I'm curious what would cause this and what the problem is?

Has he also got three-way calling? I had the same problems a while
back, caused by a loose line connection in my phone. Pulling a bit too
hard on the phone momentarily broke the line, which the system
naturally interprets as a "flashed" switchhook. At that point it would
put the incoming call on hold and give me a new dialtone. When I
figured out that I was putting Party A on hold, not cutting them off,
another flash on the switchhook would bring them back.

I'm not sure that having three-way calling is strictly necessary for
this, but the ringing you heard at one point was your caller thinking
he'd lost you altogether and hanging up his phone, at which point it
began ringing to remind him that he had (unknowingly) got you on Hold.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: acg@dlogics.com
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: (312) 266-4473
Date: 18 Aug 92 20:49:00 GMT
From: perl@dwrsun4.UUCP (Robert Perlberg)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: What are Personal Communication Services (P
Organization: Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., New York
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 641, Message 7 of 13

I have seen mention in many industry magazines of Personal
Communication Services (PCS).  The major discussion at this time seems
to center on the allocation of frequencies for these services, but I
haven't read or heard anything about what these services are.  They
keep alluding to the concept of people being able to carry around a
telephone in their pocket.  But I've already seen people with pocket
sized cellular phones.  How is PCS different from/better than
cellular?


Robert Perlberg    Dean Witter Reynolds Inc., New York
{murphy | philabs}!dwrsun4!perl
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 19:46:14 GMT
From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost?
Organization: AT&T
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 645, Message 16 of 17

In article <telecom12.638.6@eecs.nwu.edu> hgschulz@gaia.cs.umass.edu
(Henning Schulzrinne) writes:

> Just curious: how much does a CO switch cost? I realize that this
> question is about as precise as asking "how much does a car cost"...

Actually, I think it's more along the lines of asking "how much does
an airplane cost?"  Depends -- are you talking a Cessna 172 or a B2
Stealth Bomber?


David G Lewis                              AT&T Bell Laboratories
david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej     Switching & ISDN Implementation
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 05:22:14 GMT
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Local Call Determination
Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 632, Message 3 of 13

Peter M. Weiss <PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

> It is my understanding that here in central PA (USA), that a call from
> the 814-383 (Zion) exchange to 814-238 (State College) is a local
> call, but vice versa is TOLL (intra-LATA).

Such arrangements don't last too long. At least not once people figure
it out. Here in Oregon, there was a similar situation between a couple
of suburbs of Portland (back in the early 70s). Folks I knew in Tigard
would call their friends in Milwaukie for free. If the friends wanted
to call, they'd call up and say "Call us!". And then the real call
would be free ...

BBS operators use similar "tricks". Since you can call out on a line
that has call forwarding without interfering with the forwarding,
sysops in the "fringe" areas, get someone in the "core" area to set up
a line that is call forwarded to their BBS. This lets folks in the
*rest* of the fringe areas (which are usually toll calls from other
fringe areas) make a free call to the core area.

I recently heard of a BBS in CA (Long Beach?) where the sysop has such
arrangements with people out to quite a distance. The person
describing it on Fido said that the call went through four hops
between his house and BBS!


Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/51	 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)


[Moderator's Note: I did this for awhile with my recorded message
service back in 1973-74. Someone living in Joliet, IL had a metro area
unlimited line which included all of northern Illinois and Chicago. I
paid the cost for a real cheap incoming only (no outgoing calls
without extra expense) line for him to receive calls on. He made his
outgoing calls on the unlimited line which he also left forwarded at
all times to my number in downtown Chicago. People in Aurora, Joliet
and Will County called that number locally. Eventually IBT got sore
about it and we turned it off rather than argue with them.   PAT]
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 11:53:40 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <sichermn@csulb.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS
Organization: Cal State Long Beach
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 650, Message 2 of 10

In article <telecom12.649.1@eecs.nwu.edu> mdw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com
(mark.d.wuest) writes:

> I think another side effect of the break-up is the shift away from
> pure research at Bellcore.  They're laying off more people as I type.
> Bell Labs is rumored to be headed toward a market-driven approach to
> development (but *that* rumor's been flying around for awhile now ...).
> Who know what the end result will be?

  I'm not sure from the tone of this post whether there's any sadness
and nostalgia for the 'good old days' in it. If there is, it's not
very to me that much of that research found it's way into the actual
domestic phone system under the pre-breakup regime. That's not to say
that they weren't doing great science or serving a valuable societal
function, but was it appropriate to be funded by our payments to a
regulated monopoly when the results weren't generally and aggressively
applied to the improvement of service?

> OTOH, as American business (hopefully) shifts more toward long-term
> goals (thinking in terms of 10 years instead of quarters), the
> "market" may demand more pure research.  Most anyone would agree that
> Japan is doing more pure research now than ever before ...

   Probably, but what is more outrageous and self-defeating for
ourselves is that they are buying semi-exclusive access to the results
of American university research on the cheap by partially funding such
research at institutions which are hungry for the money. That's OK,
they'll make more products based upon the technology and sell it back
to us. Now tell me, where is this long-term thinking really happening
in the U.S.?


Jeff Sicherman
From: mc/G=James/S=Arconati/OU=0105390@mhs.attmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Not Yet Anyway
Date: 18 Aug 92 13:53:33 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 641, Message 13 of 13

In TELECOM Digest V12 #636, Esteemed Moderator is comenting on credit
and SSN:
 
> Please note no SSN is required when calling from a payphone and
> paying with coins.
 
To which I absolutely must add  --->  YET !
 
[Standard disclaimer - my opinion only.]
 

[Moderator's Note: What do you think they will do, have a recording
come on saying 'enter your social security number now' ... 'please
hold while we verify the number you have entered' ... 'Sorry, you
have not been authorized by the government to place calls from coin
operated telephones ... Press 1 if you are Socially Responsible; Press
2 if you wish to announce your identity to the number you are calling;
Press 3 if you intend to hack whatever answers at the other end."  PAT]
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:02:08 PST
From: Mark Lottor <mkl@nw.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 641, Message 2 of 13

The Sony IT-A4000 has been out for a while now.  It is a speakerphone
and digital answering machine.  It has a very hi-tech design and a
real nice backlit LCD display.  The answering machine has three
outgoing messages, which can be your own or ones from ROM.  The first
is the normal please leave a message message.  Another is for when
your recording memory is full.  And another is for when you put the
machine in announce only mode.

When leaving a message, a caller can push *1, *2, or *3 to have the
message tagged for a particular recipient.  The phone does not tell
them to do this, you put it in your message if you want to, otherwise
things go into box one by default.  The phone has three LEDs on three
buttons; the corresponding one blinks when a message is left "in" a
particular "mailbox".  Also, the display shows how many messages are
in each box.  Then the recipient can just hit one of the buttons to
play back that box.  However, don't get the impression that this is a
voice-mail system.  Messages are time and dated.  A memo button lets
you record from the local speakerphone mic or the current phone call
into message area three.

The phone can also be set to call another number after a message is
received.  It will try calling every 30 minutes until you answer (or
read the new messages).  It plays a recorded message (your own or from
ROM) and waits for your password to access it.  You could potentially
record touch-tones into your "remote access" message if you wanted it
to call your pager, although I haven't tried this.  The remote mode is
voice-synthesized but has only minor prompting.  You can do most
functions from the remote mode, including turning the machine on/off,
call transfer on/off, change transfer number, and change OGMs.
However, you can not delete individual messages, only complete
mailboxes (you can play, delete, and skip individual messages from the
front panel).  It is slightly annoying when you call it because it
doesn't tell you if there are new messages or not; you need to try the
play command (or use toll-saver mode).  Also, it will only listen to
DTMF commands when it is finished prompting you, which can be annoying
but the wait is never more than a second or two.

The sound quality of digitized messages is OK but not great.  However,
it does hold up to 16 minutes worth of messages.  The phone has CPC,
toll-saver modes, and speed dials.  The LCD display shows time, modes,
number dialed, minutes talking, and number of messages.  It can only
be set to answer after three or five rings, or TS mode.  In summary,
its a nice phone.  It has some minor annoyances, mostly because you
know they could have just added a few lines of code to make it do
something differently.  However, it easily beats having a machine with
tapes or paying someone for voice-mail service.  It sells for around
$199.
Date: 14 Aug 1992 08:47:24 GMT
From: stoll@ocf.Berkeley.EDU (Cliff Stoll)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 626, Message 15 of 15

How do you get your modem to dial your pager?

Oh, I could write a book about this.

On the Macintosh, the program Notify! schedules and sends numeric or
alphanumeric messages.  Works like gangbusters.


Cliff Stoll
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 11:43:50 GMT
From: Rohed_Jon@macmail.rtsg.mot.com (Jon Rohed)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Looking For Bell Labs Writeup on Cellular
Organization: Motorola Cellular Subscriber
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 647, Message 3 of 11

In article <telecom12.641.12@eecs.nwu.edu> ddodell@stjhmc.fidonet.org
(David Dodell) writes:

> Last year, someone sent me email telling me about the Bell Lab
> monograph that explained the workings of cellular.  I actually think
> it was a publication in the format of a book about 150 pages long.

> I was also given the number of Bell Labs to order this monograph.

> If anyone is familiar with this, I would like to order a copy again
> and would appreciate the help in tracking this down.

Perhaps what you are looking for is {The Bell System Technical
Journal} dated:

January 1979,
Volume 58, No. 1, ISSN0005-8580 
Topic: "Advanced Mobile Phone Service". 

It is about 278 pages long, very useful.


Jonathan L. Rohed	Amateur Radio: N9NJB
Electrical Engineer	Tel.: 708-632-2047 Motorola Inc.
International Cellular Subscriber Div.	 Arlington Hts. IL 

Disclaimer: I speak for myself only.  I have no idea what my employer
thinks.
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 01:06:09 GMT
From: mrose@prufrock.stsci.edu (Mike Rose)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What Number am I Calling From?
Reply-To: mrose@stsci.edu
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 631, Message 7 of 13

In article <telecom12.614.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, ricochet@spatula.rent.com
wrote:

> Is there a way to get the number of the phone you're calling from?
> For example, the payphone in my laundromat isn't marked and the store
> owner says he doesn't know what it is. There's times when it would be
> more convenient to have somebody call me back, but if I don't know the
> number, how can they?

Here in Baltimore (C&P telephone), 200-212-1212 will tell you.

Does anyone know how universal this is?  Is it just a number C&P made
up for the convenience of their installers?  Perhaps anyone with
caller-id and a voice-synthesizer could provide it.


Mike Rose, mrose@stsci.edu, 410-338-4949


[Moderator's Note: This number changes in every community. No two
places are the same.  PAT]
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 12:41 EDT
From: fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us (Scott Fybush)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How Do I Run This Line?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 632, Message 12 of 13

I guess I'm lucky.  It's been my experience with New England Tel that
what they call "dual service" is automatic when you move.  On my last
move three months ago, the number rang in both locations for three
days, and on my next move next week, it will ring two places for a
week.  And unlike our Moderator, NETel does it for free!  (or at least
without charging anything above the $60 or so moving cost).

N.B. These moves were/will be within the same switch, keeping the same
number, so I don't know what NETel's policy is for moves to a
different switch area.
From: rah@btr.com (Richard A Hyde  rah@btr.com)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Fiber-Optic Cable Demo
Date: 16 Aug 92 03:14:35 GMT
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, MtnView CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 633, Message 3 of 10

I was walking along the CalTrain commuter line the other day, admiring
the ATT, MCI *and* Sprint signs warning me not not dig up their fiber,
when a question came to mind ...

Suppose, on a dark night, (hypothetically, mind you), I dug up a major
fiber trunk and sliced it in half.  What would I see?  Could I use it
like a flashlight?  Would the cut end sparkle (assuming that the
computer continued to send data)?  Would there just be a dim glow?

Enquiring minds, and all that...  :-)


Richard Hyde  |  RaH@btr.com