HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: carlson@steam.Xylogics.COM (James Carlson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers,comp.sys.sun.hardware
Subject: Re: Terminal servers and modem control?
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:02:04 GMT
Reply-To: carlson@xylogics.com
Organization: Xylogics Incorporated

Randy Jarrett (rsj@wa4mei) writes:
[...]
>  Their support has been exemplary in all instances but one.
>They still havn't gotten their rtelnet program to consistantly work
>properly. 

These rtelnet problems are being addressed, and have been solved for a
significant variety of hosts.  For more information, please send a
message to annex-support@xylogics.com or call for technical support.

--
James Carlson <carlson@xylogics.com>            Tel:  +1 617 272 8140
Annex Software Support / Xylogics, Inc.               +1 800 225 3317
53 Third Avenue / Burlington MA  01803-4491     Fax:  +1 617 272 3159
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
From: usenet@utkux1.utk.edu (USENET News System)
Subject: {
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
{x{qfrom: skyberg@utkvx2.utk.edu (Skyberg, David V)xD{t(
Organization: University of Tennessee Computing Center
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 01:26:00 GMT

This article was probably generated by a buggy news reader.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers,comp.sys.sun.hardware
From: mvore@access.digex.com (Michael Vore)
Subject: Re: Terminal servers and modem control?
Organization: Mid Atlantic Soaring Association, Fairfield Pa.
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 19:33:11 GMT

ajc@mcm.com (Alan Carpenter) writes:


>Another quirk is that the Annex line offers only the amphinol(sp?)
>50-pin serial connections that force you to purchase special
>cables (or make your own). A problem with one of those cables
>(like we experienced) could really set you back a few days while
>you try to scrap one up.

>We didn't have the support contract and Xylogics refused to get us
>a good cable (so did the distributor who sold it to us.)

WE found a good line of thoes 50-pin fan out cables, with RJ-45's on the
end.  And they were at a reasonable price!  With a handful of RJ-45/RS-232
plugs - they can be configured as you want, the price was still way lower
than the XYLOGICS $upplied connector, and a lot more versitle!!  

This was at the suggestion of one of the Xylogics VARs in the area

- mike



-- 
/*------------------------------+----------------------------------------*/
  Mike Vore  W3CCV              |    DC - Food-SIG
    mvore@digex.com             |    Ka-8  MU at W73
    mvore@fedix.fie.com         |    Mid-Atlantic Soaring Association
/*------------------------------+----------------------------------------*/
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.servers:96 comp.sys.sun.hardware:4751
From: rsj@wa4mei (Randy Jarrett)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers,comp.sys.sun.hardware
Subject: Re: Terminal servers and modem control?
Date: 2 Oct 92 02:25:28 GMT
Organization: Amateur Radio Gateway WA4MEI, Chamblee, GA

In <1992Sep28.183527.24570@mcm.com> ajc@mcm.com (Alan Carpenter) writes:

>In article <1992Sep23.181448.17476@wa4mei> rsj@wa4mei (Randy Jarrett) writes:
>>
>>Take a look at Xylogics Annex III series of terminal servers.  They support
>>hardware (cts/rts) flow control and/or software (xon/xoff) on all ports.
>>-- 
>>Randy Jarrett  WA4MEI 
>>UUCP  ...!{emory,gatech}!wa4mei!rsj   | MAIL: 54 Patterson Rd.
>>PHONE +1 404 822 4073		      | Lawrenceville, GA 30244

>Another quirk is that the Annex line offers only the amphinol(sp?)
>50-pin serial connections that force you to purchase special
>cables (or make your own). A problem with one of those cables
>(like we experienced) could really set you back a few days while
>you try to scrap one up.

>We didn't have the support contract and Xylogics refused to get us
>a good cable (so did the distributor who sold it to us.)

I personally like the 50 pin connectors that they use.  The extension
cables, fanouts, and other connection systems that work with these are
available from many sources and are a lot lower cost than if the same
systems had db25 connectors.  This system is great for wiring either
patch panels or direct connection wiring.

Randy

-- 
Randy Jarrett  WA4MEI 
UUCP  ...!{emory,gatech}!wa4mei!rsj   | MAIL: 54 Patterson Rd.
PHONE +1 404 822 4073		      | Lawrenceville, GA 30244
From: s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Craig Macbride)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Output to remote printer truncated
Date: 30 Sep 92 13:24:19 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre
NNTP-Posting-Host: minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au

I have recently seen a problem whereby a SCO Unix box, sending to a
printer through a Synoptics terminal server, ends up with truncated
printouts. Is there any easy modification to the "software" (ie.
source in the manual) provided with the Synoptics box that will make
this problem go away?

-- 
 _--_|\		Craig Macbride	<lhscmc@luxor.latrobe.edu.au>
/      \			<s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
\_.--.*/
      v
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
From: charles@wimsey.bc.ca (Charles Kwok)
Subject: Standard method of Host to T/S device communication
Organization: BC News and Mail
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 20:42:10 GMT

Is there a standard way of establishing a TCP/IP connection from a (Unix)
host to a terminal server device?  Is it the same method for all terminal
servers or is it dependent on the terminal server?

I am trying to create a pseudo-device on a Interactive Unix 486 system
which will open a Xyplex port for reading and writing binary data.
To connect to the Xyplex involves sending vendor specific information
to the terminal server in the UDP packet that establishes the connection.
From: bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Re: Terminal servers and modem control?
Date: 4 Oct 92 01:37:00 EDT
Followup-To: comp.dcom.servers
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.

(see below for some ftp'able documentation)

In article <23Sep12346@arizona.edu>, leonard@telcom.arizona.edu (Aaron Leonard) writes:
> In article <1992Sep23.023824.13179@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, 
> aburt@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu (Andrew Burt) writes:
> | 
> | whether we need "full modem control" or not (given that a v.32bis modem
> | likes to have cts/rts flow control).  What kind of terminal servers are
> 
> In order properly to hook up a V.32bis/V.42bis modem to a serial
> port, the port should support BOTH "full modem controls" (dtr/csr)
> AND hardware flow control (cts/rts) SIMULTANEOUSLY.  
> 
> You need the modem controls so that your host or terminal server 
> will kill the connection when the phone hangs up, obviously.  
> 
> Less obviously, you need (or want) hardware flow control.  This is
> because your modems will be talking to each other at 14.4Kbps
> (V.32bis), but each modem will be talking to the DTE at 38.4 or
> 57.6Kbps (using V.42bis compression.)  Thus, the modem will need

Or even 115.2kb with DEC's DS700 and the latest modems from several
vendors all getting ready for v.fast where 115.2 will be needed.

> Not all terminal servers support modem control and hardware flow

It at first seems puzzling that DEC offers an 8 port DS700 with full
EIA RS232 connectors, and then offers a 16 port version with RJ45
jacks that they claim gives you all you need with a modern modem
for both disconnect supervision and out of band flow control.

The full EIA connector version is for those few countries where the
local PTT (state run TELCO) dictates (carefully chosen word...)
needless functionality or compliance. The 16 port version with RJ45s
is fine, and you will have similar software settable which-lead-does-what
issues with something like a cisco Trouter, so DEC is hardly alone.

I was emailed a DEC internal memo that is MOST enlightening about
the use of these leads, and it has been posted on DECUSERVE,
and I have left it for FTP in the [.DS700] directory at cca.camb.com
along with assorted other DS700 info including a .PS file of a 
DEC manual even showing DEC's RJ45 to RS232 adapters. There is
also info on connecting 2 lans via a SLIP connection between DS700s.
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992  20:02:04 EDT
From: Paul Robinson <FZC@CU.NIH.GOV>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cellular Phones With Deals Attached
Reply-To: tdarcos@mcimail.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 748, Message 4 of 12

On page B5 of today's (9/29) {Washington Post}, a place is offering a
cellular phone for a low price provided you take a one year contract
with Cellular One.

In the fine print it notes that "installation and antenna not
included, must be installed by" the selling company.

The current price is $9.95 for the phone.

I know that in places like California and North Carolina, tie-ins like
this are not permitted so phones sell at list price.

I'm not interested in getting a cellular phone, but just for inquiry,
does this seem reasonable if you were planning to use the particular
carrier anyway (I know the carrier gets you by offering a kickback to
the seller to get a customer on the assumption the customer will run
up charges with the carrier.)

Second, for anyone that has an answer, what is the maximum number of
nams you've seen for a single telephone.  Because of roaming and dual
carriers, I saw an ad in the {Los Angeles Times} which showed a cell
phone with QUAD nam capability.


Paul Robinson    Opinions not necessarily that of the owner of this account


[Moderator's Note: Cellular One here in Chicago is always running
deals like you mention. The other day an ad in the paper offered a bag
phone for a penny (yes, one cent!) provided you signed a contract with
Cellular One for some period of time. The most nams I have seen in a
phone was four. That seems to be about the practical, if not
theoretical limit.    PAT]
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 03:58:25 -0400
From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 735, Message 7 of 13

In article <telecom12.729.12@eecs.nwu.edu> msb@sq.com wrote:


> Clearly, if you have measured service, there *is* no such thing as a
> local call, and therefore you should be required to dial 1 before
> *all* calls. :-)

  Then can I choose my Equal Access Local Carrier ? :-)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 12:00:20 -0400
From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 750, Message 8 of 13

In article <telecom12.746.5@eecs.nwu.edu> DLynn.El_Segundo@xerox.com
writes:

> However, dial zero first is a different can of worms.  Dialing zero
> before a phone number always meant you wanted assistance from an
> operator (or a mechanized one), not that you were necessarily going to
> dial an area code.  So area codes and N0N/N1N exchanges have always
> been distinguished on zero-first calls in Los Angeles by timeout.
> Dial zero, seven digits and wait awhile.  Of course if the second
> digit after the 0 is non-zero/one, the timeout becomes unneeded, but I
> don't know if all dialing equipment in use here is that smart.
> Besides, timeouts will be necessary in this case in the future when
> area codes start using non-zero/one second digits.

Not unless your telco continues to botch this.  Southern Bell already
gets it right (at least in the Raleigh area): *no* eight-digit dialing
is ever needed or supported.  All direct long distance calls,
regardless of whether they cross an area code boundary, must be dialed
as 1-NPA-NXX-XXXX.  All operator-assisted calls (LD *and* local) must
be dialed as 0-NPA-NXX-XXXX.  (Direct intra-NPA local calls continue
to be dialable as NXX-XXXX.)  No ambiguities are possible, so no messy
timeouts are needed (other than the usual one after the initial "0" in
operator-assisted calls).


Bob Goudreau		Data General Corporation
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com	62 Alexander Drive	
+1 919 248 6231		Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 15:03:54 GMT
From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: AT&T Wants $3 For International DA
Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 732, Message 8 of 8

Why doesn't AT&T just use Minitel for DA on calls to France?  Surely
they do enough volume to justify the cost.


[Moderator's Note: I dunno. Maybe they have to give a cut or a piece
of the action to France's Telecom, or maybe they have a deal with them
on DA given out in this country to callers from France.  ??   PAT]
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 15:45:46 GMT
From: knop@dutecag.et.tudelft.nl (Peter Knoppers)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Stop the Presses, Call the Police!
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 733, Message 9 of 13

Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL> writes:

> To summarize: 650611 in the Netherlands (at Amsterdam?) got a lot of
> calls, and on many of them only the last 4 digits got through, causing
> many calls to reach police at the 0611 emergency number.

This was not in Amsterdam. All numbers in Amsterdam that start with
the digit 6 are seven digits long. The national 0611 number is for all
kinds of emergencies, not just the police.

> What kind of exchange is it that strips some leading digits off and
> processes the remaining digits, within what is apparently only the
> local phone number?

A plausible way to achieve this type of error is when the number is
busy and you redial it repeatedly without checking for the dial tone.
If dial tone happens to appear right after the second digit: bingo!
(Dial tone may not appear at once, especially when the exchange is
heavily loaded, as was the case.)


Peter Knoppers - knop@duteca.et.tudelft.nl
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 14:59:14 GMT
From: neihart@ga.com (Carl Neihart)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder
Organization: Gerber Alley Technologies
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 735, Message 11 of 13

In article <telecom12.697.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, Chris Schmandt <geek@media.
mit.edu> writes:

> I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The
> function of this device is to route the incoming phone message
> directly to either an answering machine or a modem.

I have purchased such a unit from Home Automation Lab, 1-800-HOMELAB

I am very happy with it.

They also have lots of other neat gadgets for the home telephone, such
as Friends Only, where only those people you authorize can call you


Regards,

carl neihart
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 9:41:52 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 516-711 Exchange
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 739, Message 5 of 17

Because of the recent messages regarding 711 being among a list of
prefixes recited on a recording for the Hicksville (516 area, N.Y.)
exchange, I did some testing from Newark, Delaware, with default
carrier MCI:

1-516-938-9901 got that same recording.

1-516-711-9901 and 10288-1-516-711-9901 could not be completed as
   dialed.  They got the respective carriers' intercepts.  A side
   note: the AT&T message, as I have received at least once before
   recently, was from "410-1T" and not from 215.  (Newark is next
   door to Maryland but has no local service to Maryland.)
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:03:28 GMT
From: joel@wam.umd.edu (Joel M. Hoffman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: X.25 Connections From Commercial BBS's?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 762, Message 7 of 16

In article <telecom12.761.3@eecs.nwu.edu> Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.
n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein) writes:

> Joel M. Hoffman asks:

>> Does anyone know if there are commercial BBS's (like CompuServe,
>> etc.that provide outgoing X.25 connections?  

> What do you mean by outgoing X.25 connection?  Do you mean X.25
> outdial service? Check with Compuserve, BT Tymnet, and Sprint
> (Telenet), and possibly GE.

Yes, that's what I mean.  And CompuServe doesn't offer it.


Joel
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 01:43:01 -0500
From: Joseph.Bergstein@p501.f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Joseph Bergstein)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 734, Message 11 of 13

> Will you please comment?

> Anecdote 1: ....  After many such attempts, I overrode the default
> carrier MCI and dialed via AT&T.  Viola!  Success!  I tried MCI and
> AT&T a few more times to convince myself that MCI was indeed the
> problem.

Wasn't MCI's original name Microwave Communications Inc.?  Until a
year or two ago, MCI still ran portions of their network on microwave.
Some was digital; but, yes, there was still some analog microwave.
Several years ago I worked for a firm whose fax, modem and voice calls
from California to Pennsylvania failed every time it rained out west.
MCI admitted that these calls had been routed from Omaha to Sacramento
on one of their last analog microwave routes.

> Anecdote 3: I just saw a posting in another newsgroup -- someone
> had trouble reaching a BBS somewhere, and had symptoms like I'd had
> in anecdote 1.  I suggested that he try AT&T, and he replied that
> my suggestion worked!  It turns out his default was Sprint.

Although Sprint was first to complete 100% digital fiber backbone, in
many locations their POPs where quite far end users and they
contracted for local service via TELCO tandems.  So although you may
have been using Sprint digital fiber backbone, a fair amount of
distance may have traversed non-Sprint facilities (the infamous "last
mile").

> Can I safely extrapolate -- AT&T LD quality is superior ?

In general this is probably true, although at an often higher cost.

{Data Communications Magazine} runs a survey each year with users
rating the various LD carriers on data transmission.  AT&T is usually
on top!.
Date: 28 SEP 92 20:52   
From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Brooklyn Bridge Phone Episode
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 744, Message 4 of 14

On Saturday's episode of Brooklyn Bridge, the central family finally
gets a telephone (big argument on where to have it installed).  (They
gave the phone number as "KLondike-5 xxxx").  The family tries to
arrange a code with the grandparents, who live downstairs: when the
family should go down to the grandparents, the grandparents are to
call, hanging up after the second ring.  This is to avoid a toll.

I thought a charge for a local call was something new, made possible
by new technology which could meter all calls.  Is this not true?
Were local calls charged for in the fifties (I think this is when the
show is set)?  Or were the characters confused about local vs toll?


Randy Gellens            randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself


[Moderator's Note: No indeed. We've had measured service in Chicago
for a half-century; so has New York City. Until the past few years
they could not tell you *exactly what number* you dialed ... just
that you did.  If you protested, the next month they'd put a pen
register on the line to keep track of it for you.  PAT]
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 16:08:59 GMT
From: wolves!ggw@duke.cs.duke.edu (Gregory G. Woodbury)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Durham Phone Service
Organization: Wolves Den UNIX
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 745, Message 10 of 10

In TELECOM V12 #740, Paul Robinson replies to:

> In TELECOM V12 #735, Gerald Ruderman said:

>> I believe that the local carrier for Research Triangle Park is GTE.

It is, but it's under a wierd arrangement. The RTP exchanges are local
to Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill and a whole number of other exchanges
that are not local to each other.  This requires that four LECs have
to work together to handle the local coordination for RTP.

GTE South finally went and upgraded the RTP switch a few years ago so
that there are several CO numbers assigned to the Park now, instead of
the ONE that it had for years.

> Could that be where that famous old song, "I've gotta leave old
> Durham Town ..." have come from?

	Heck, depending on you point of view, Durham is heaven or hell
telephone wise.  I read all the horror stories that Higdon et al tell
of GTE and wonder if I'm using the same company.  I've had to "push" a
time or two to get GTE to give me information, but I've consistently
found the Durham GTE folks easier to deal with than the Raleigh and
Chapel Hill Southern Bell folks.
 
> [Moderator's Note: Cute. I've actually heard of companies which felt
> their phone service was so bad they moved out of the area -- on that
> reason alone, the phone service. To me, that seems incredible, and I
> have worked in a few large phone installations in my lifetime.  PAT]

	Before GTE upgraded the switch, the PUC was considering the
radical move of allowing LEC competition in the RTP!  Companies were
locating outside of the RTP proper so that they could get the
telephones they needed but still be in proximity to the action.  IBM
nearly left RTP because GTE couldn't give them more lines.

	For those interested: Research Triangle Park is a special
creation of the NC Legislature.  It isn't a city, but it isn't allowed
to be annexed by any city either (Raleigh was threatening from the
east, Morrisville from the south, and Durham from the north and west.)
Phones in the RTP COs are limited to companies physically in the RTP.
Durham gets stuck with providing water, sewer and other services,
without being able to annex the properties for property tax purposes.

	There are some other interesting differences in the phone
service in the area as well.  For example, SBT customers can get a
true flat rate extended calling plan (unmeasured), while GTE folks can
only get measured service on the extended calling area plan.  (Hmm,
perhaps I need to check the tariffs!)  FTX lines are still popular in
the area because of the problems.


Gregory G. Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC
UUCP: ...dukcds!wolves!ggw   ...duke!wolves!ggw           [use the maps!]
Domain: ggw@wolves.Durham.NC.US  ggw@cds.duke.edu  ggw%wolves@duke.cs.duke.edu