HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 09:46 PDT
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Old Telephone Wiring at Network Interface
Reply-To: John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com>
Organization: Green Hills and Cows
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 783, Message 3 of 10

arnold@Synopsys.COM (Arnold de Leon) writes:

> On the old cables I could not find the black wire.

If the cable is old enough, it will not have a black wire. The very
old station cable had only three wires in it.

> Can I simply take the yellow wire from the other cables and use them
> for the second line?  I am assuming that I can find the black in the
> sheath.

I would not do this if I were you. Ordinary jacketed station wire is
not "twisted pair" and its use for two lines over any distance is an
invitation for crosstalk. If you go back through the issues of the
Digest, you will find article after article complaining about
crosstalk between two lines in the home and the cause in most cases
turns out to be the use of D station wire for two lines.

> Should/can I ask PacBell to move both my lines to the new network
> interface box?

There is a down side to the new box. It has circuitry in it that
enables telco to isolate the pair from your equipment. Sometimes this
circuitry becomes flaky and is itself a cause of trouble. If there is
no trouble with the old protector, telco may charge you to replace it.

> Any general comments?  Any recommended reading for someone doing
> inside phone wiring?

If you are going to run multiple lines around the house in the same
cable, be sure that the cable is "twisted pair". This is usually
identified by wires bearing the colors: white/blue, white/orange, etc.
If it has red/green/yellow/black, do NOT use it to carry more than one
line.


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115     |       FAX:
john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:30:44 GMT
From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: "...is the Highest Law of the Land..."
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 782, Message 12 of 12

> [Moderator's Note: That is a very interesting finding ... where the
> state constitution is a bit hard to change, public utility commissions
> are bought and sold all the time.  :(   PAT]

The state constitution may be hard to change in many states, but not
in California.  One of the ways is a simple majority of the voters on
a ballot initiative.  Some constitution!


Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 9:59:44 MST
From: gtephx!carpenterj@enuucp.eas.asu.edu (Jim Carpenter)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Caller ID Approved In Arizona
Reply-To: carpenterj@gtephx.att.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 770, Message 2 of 11

[Moderator's Note: Unfortunatly, Mr. Carpenter did not tell us *where*
this article came from. It appears to be issued by US West, but
neither the date or source was given in the article sent here
yesterday.  PAT]

   The days of anonymous phone calls may be nearing an end.

   The Arizona Corporation Commission on Wednesday approved "Caller
ID", a controversial device that flashes the caller's name and number
on a screen when a phone begins ringing.  The commission also approved
several other new services for U S West Communications, including the
option to block the identification.

   U S West is scheduled to begin the service on Feb. 1 in the
Phoenix area and sometime in 1994 in Tuscon.

   But the commission also will require U S West to conduct a
widespread education campaign and offer free line blocking until early
May.

   "I still think it's just another intrusion in people's private
lives," said Terrance Mead, an attorney who represents the Arizonal
Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

   But Tony Seese-Bieda, director of public relations for U S West,
said the company is doing everything it can to protect privacy.  All
customers can keep themselves from automatically being identified by
dialing "*67" before the number, he said."

                             --------

The article continues to discuss the privacy issue, gives a history of
caller ID in Arizona, and incudes basic Q & A's on Caller ID usage and
the associated SS7 features (e.g. "Selective Call Forwarding").


Jim Carpenter, AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, AZ, USA
        ** my opinions are only my opinions **
From: lauren@cv.vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes -- Radio, But Not All Cellular
Date: 12 Oct 92 07:25:00 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 774, Message 4 of 14

Greetings.  Not all of the call boxes with the short antennas are
"cellular phones" -- at least not in the conventional sense.

Around the L.A. area, there has recently been a massive upgrade of the
call box system.  Along major freeways, where there have mostly been
wired call boxes for many years, the new radio/solar units were
recently installed and the older units pulled.  At the same time,
identical radio call boxes appeared in some canyon areas which have
never had call boxes before.  However, since there is no cellular
coverage in at least some of the areas where these canyon boxes are
located, they must be other than cellular phones.  Presumably they
operate in a commercial or government service band.


 --Lauren--
Date: 12 Oct 92 19:07:50 EDT 
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Organization: I.E.C.C.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 776, Message 13 of 14

In article <telecom12.770.10@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:

> The "Subject:"-line asks it all -- if there are any fax-transmission
> store-and-forward services (doing for FAX what MCI's Messenger and
> AT&T's voice-store-and-forward do for voice), how do I find them?

A recent article in TELECOM Digest announced AT&T's Fax Mailbox
service.  They assign you a ten-digit fax mailbox number, which is
typically the number of your office or fax machine.  Then callers can
send you a fax by calling +1 314 298 8010, dialing the mailbox number,
optionally leaving a voice message, and sending the fax.  If you have
a beeper, they can call it when a fax arrives.  You pick up faxes by
calling an 800 number, listening to the messages, and telling it the
number to which to forward stored faxes.  You can discard unwanted
faxes if you want, and everything seems to be discarded after eight
days.

The charge is 30 cents to listen to the message, and 70 cents/page to
retrieve a fax, plus a fairly hefty surcharge if forwarded outside the
U.S.  There is no charge for faxes that you don't choose to deliver,
and no monthly fee.  It's all charged to your AT&T calling card.

Call (800) 446-2452 to sign up.  If you have an AT&T card, you can
sign up immediately.  I've signed up but haven't had occasion to use
it.  (I have a fax card on my PC, so it'd only be useful to collect
faxes while I'm travelling.)


Regards,

John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
Date: 14 Oct 92 16:10:08 GMT
From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Answering Machine CPC?
Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 782, Message 8 of 12

On my home phone answering machine, if the machine is active,
additional callers get a busy signal even though we have call waiting.
I don't know exactly why.  BTW, as stated in one of my answering
machine manuals, CPC doesn't work well in some exchanges where the
line voltage is not properly regulated.  They suggest you turn it off
if people complain that the answering machine is hanging up on them.


Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything
important.


[Moderator's Note: It is interesting you mention that callers get a
busy signal while the answering machine is taking a call. Usually
subscribers with call waiting will only return busy signal to callers
(instead of ringing tone and them receiving a call-waiting tone) when
the called subscriber is off hook (or otherwise connected to the
network but not off hook such as being signalled) and not supervised.
For example in the short period when you go off hook to dial a number
but before you have been 'supervised' by the central office then an
incoming call will receive a busy signal. Likewise this occurs if
someone is ringing your phone when a second party also calls you.  And
it won't even function like a 'real' busy signal at that; forward on
busy (for example to voicemail) will not work, nor will call waiting,
although hunting will. I have to wonder if somehow your answering
machine is tricking the network into thinking there has not been an
answer, in the style of the old (were they called?) 'black boxes'?
That would indeed be a curious bit of workmanship. Incidentally, I
have noticed in some Chicago CO's that if you are connected with a
phone number that does not usually supervise (such as the number for
the remote access call forwarding service) that incoming calls to you
during that time will get a busy signal in the same way.  PAT]
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 20:10 GMT
From: Richard Cox <mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Touch Tone Question                     
Reply-To: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 782, Message 6 of 12

Tom asked about suppressing tone-to-pulse-conversion.

We do it where necessary by using the PABX hold facility, and then
picking the call back up from hold.  At that stage the "register" that
detects the MF digits will have been dropped, and your MF should go
out unimpeded.

*Should*, I said!


Richard Cox

Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF
Voice: +44 222 747111      Fax: +44 222 711111      VoiceMail: +44 399 870101
E-mail: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1992  17:35:07 EDT
From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: "...Because there is a difference..."
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 766, Message 8 of 16

 "...Because there is a difference..."

The AMC theater chain uses that servicemark to identify its movie
service.  The same term could be applied here to Touch-Tone* on
Centrex supplied by C&P Telephone Co.  Here's why.

Currently, in this area, one can block Caller-ID by dialing *67, even
on Centrex.  (This has to be done BEFORE dialing 9 for an outside
line.)  If you are on a pulse dial phone, you dial 1167.

Diaing *67 gives a "stuttered" dial tone.  But Touch-Tone dialing of
116 gives reorder.  From a phone that can generate pulse or tone,
pulse dialing 116 gives the stuttered dial tone, as does *67.
(Apparently since return call and other *6x codes are not used, it
doesn't require or permit the 7 to be dialed; on the other hand 116
could be a feature group; where *72 and *73 are used on other phones
to set up and tear down call forwarding, 172 and 173 must be typed
from a Touch-Tone phone.

So it is interesting that depending on whether the phone can generate
Touch-Tone or not determines whether 11 before a code works.  This
difference is not evidenced on my POTS line at home where I can use *
or 11 on Touch-Tone to signal a feature group.


Paul Robinson   TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM
* Touch-Tone is a trademark of AT&T.
These opinions are my responsibility alone and nobody else's.
Date: 12 Oct 1992 21:13:26 GMT
From: rdargahi@wilkins.iaims.bcm.tmc.edu (Ross Dargahi)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: PC Communications
Reply-To: rdargahi@wilkins.iaims.bcm.tmc.edu (Ross Dargahi)
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 778, Message 7 of 9

I have a project which has presented me with a dilemma. Let me briefly
outline what the application needs to do:

1) contact NSB via modem and sync clock with atomic clock
2) connect to several bbs via modem and download data
3) validate data (for data entry error on bbs side)
4) merge data into a database (Foxpro)

The app must be robust enough so that communication failures such has
modem hangups, lost carriers will not effect it. i.e. it should be
able to recover from such scenarios. The keyword for this system is
robustness.

I have thought of several scenarios:

1) code the whole nine yards myself. This would include the
   xmodem /xmodem crc stuff, low level comm libraries etc.. etc..

2) get hold of libraries that give me serial communications
   functionality, file transfer funcitonality etc...

3) Buy a package/packages that let me do most of this stuff

Time as always is a factor, so solution three is most attractive
followed by two then one.

Coming from a Unix background, I am not a PC/DOS guru so I would
really appreciate any and all input from you experts out there.

Thanks for your help in advance.


Ross Dargahi     rdargahi@bcm.tmc.edu
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 12:00:39 PDT
From: mainecoon!chris@bit.bit.com (Chris Kennedy)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Seeking Advice on Remote Telecom System
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 769, Message 4 of 9

I recently purchased a hunk of land in more or less the middle of
nowhere and am seeking alternatives to simply paying line extension
charges in order to meet my telecom needs.  By way of background my
current residential telecom mix consists of five voice and one 56Kb
ADN line, all of which I'll gladly trade for ISDN if and when I can
convince PacBell to either upgrade the Siemens/Stromberg-Carlson we've
currently got to support ISDN (or preferably admit to the fact that
they haven't a clue how to manage the switch and install something
like a 5E instead). I need to preserve more or less this level of
service in whatever solution I finally select.

The building site in question is several miles from the nearest
PacBell copper, which in turn is a SLC away from the CO.  Cellular
service is unavailable in the area and the cellular carriers can't
even find this *county* on their planning maps.  FM prop
characteristics in the area are good and with modest work I can get
line-of site to a commercial tower where rent is cheap and a PacBell
presence in place.

I've requested a quote for the installation of a bunch of centrex
lines in order to discover the line extension charge, but after
several weeks the (one) engineer in the local planning department is
still having problems putting the quote together.  He's making
grumbling noises about the ADN line and given past experience I've got
visions of a solution which incorporates load coils, bailing wire and
chewing gum ;-).

Seems like a good time to ask the net for alternatives.


Many thanks,

Chris Kennedy            | +916 283 4973      | chris@bit.com
BIT (Quincy), Inc.       | +916 283 0625 fax  | Standard disclaimers, etc.
1580 E. Main St, POB 4094| +916 283 5133 home | 
Quincy, CA 95971 USA     | +916 283 5140 fax  |
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 23:41:20 GMT
From: telb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lowe)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Host Controlled Data Switches Wanted
Organization: AT&T
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 765, Message 6 of 12

I am looking for a potentially large data switch that will allow me to
have a host computer controlling everything it does.  The host would
be able to tell the switch to connect port X to port Y, then later
connect port X to port Z.  Of course the different ports might have
different parameters such as baud and parity, so the switch would have
to handle that.  The trick is I don't want the user to initiate or
change the connections.
  
If anyone can suggest any vendors that may be able to supply such a
beast, I'd appreciate some email or a phone call.

Thanks in advance!


Tom Lowe   tlowe@attmail.com  or  tel@hogpa.att.com    908-949-0428
From: lars@CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones
Date: 12 Oct 92 19:49:57 GMT
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 775, Message 12 of 12

In article <telecom12.766.9@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:

> Does anyone know offhand what sort of signalling scheme ROLM uses
> between a telephone deskset and their digital pbx?  A cursory
> inspection of the innards of my telephone reveals an impressive array
> of custom transformers, two big LSI chips (one by Exar, one by TI),
> and the usual mess of discretes.  Is the signalling they use
> compatible with either ISDN S/T attachment, or perhaps like the
> Motorola UDLT format (B+D rather than 2B+D)?  The basic signalling
> cell seems to be about four microseconds.

There are many different models of ROLM systems, and each of them can
be coinfigured with different line cards to communicate with different
types of desk sets. Without specific model numbers, I doubt that
anyone can help you.

As you may know, ROLM has been the subjects of takeovers and
divestitures. At one time it was swallowed by IBM, and then sold to
Siemens. At the present time, I believe it is still owned by Siemens,
but does business under the Rolm name again.

The system that we use here, is a Siemens series 2000 PBX. Most of our
desksets are 2500-clones manufactured by Stromberg for Siemens (the
faceplate says Siemens) with message-waiting light. The more
featureful desksets are Panasonic KX-T2342 Easa-Phone speakerphones
with alpha display. They are definitely not ISDN sets: A standard 2500
set works on the same outlet. I suspect that these are similar to the
sets used with the small Panasonic hybrid PBX/KSUs (although they are
not compatible with the 308 and its sisters): The first pair is an
analog voice circuit, the second pair is a digital data link for the
"advanced" features.  


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: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: LEC Repair Disservice (was Happy With MCI)
Date: 11 Oct 92 21:31:45 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 773, Message 14 of 15

I recently called Ohio Bell to report that one of their machines that
generated SIT recordings wasn't operating correctly.  No matter how
many times I repeated myself, in successively simpler (non-telecom)
language, the teledroid at the other end couldn't understand what
trouble I was reporting.  I finally had to resort to the "let me speak
to your supervisor" approach to get anywhere.

The specific problem: on calls to invalid numbers, the recording was
quite garbled.  What the CSR at Ohio Bell thought the problem was:

	1) Are you sure it's not in your equipment?
	2) It's probably a problem with your long-distance company.

I honestly don't know how some people get jobs in the telecom
industry.


Steven S. Brack          sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu
2021 Roanwood Drive      STU0061@uoft01.BITNET 
Toledo, OH  43613-1605   brack@uoftcse.cse.utoledo.edu 
+1 419 GR4 1010    MY OWN  OPINIONS    sbrack@maine.cse.utoledo.edu
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 10:11:00 -0500
From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Question About ROLM PBX Telephones
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 775, Message 11 of 12

In article <telecom12.766.9@eecs.nwu.edu> rick@sbcs.sunysb.edu (Rick
Spanbauer) writes:

> Does anyone know offhand what sort of signalling scheme ROLM uses
> between a telephone deskset and their digital pbx?  A cursory
> inspection of the innards of my telephone reveals an impressive array
> of custom transformers, two big LSI chips (one by Exar, one by TI),
> and the usual mess of discretes.

The Rolm PBX'S are made by Seimens, as far as I know.  The signaling
format is proprietary and, as you said, totally digital.  Digital
phones must have an anallog to digital/digital to analog converter set
to handle the transition from the analog world of the handset to the
digital world which exists in the switch.  In addition, low-pass
filters are required to remove audio above the 3.1 to 4KHZ used as the
top end of the pass-band for voice-quality communications.  The Exar
chip is probably a phase-locked loop for recovering the data clock.
The transformers are for impedance matching and isolation.  There is a
lot of activity going on in a digital phone.  Besides the audio I/O
the phone must have the logic to receive and send all necessary
display and control signals.

	This prompts me for a question, also.  How electronically
similar are the Seimens/Rolm phones to those used on the Ericsson
MD110 type switches?  Many of the descriptions of the inside and
outward appearance of the two brands of phones are strikingly similar.
Even some of the glitches such as certain phones loosing track of the
digits being dialed if one pushes too many buttons in too short a time
sound very similar.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 11:54:54 -0500
From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: East German Pay Phone
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 781, Message 1 of 12

A few ways one could have a hook switch with no moving parts are:

	The ear piece of the handset could have a reed switch in it
and the hanger could be magnetic.  When the receiver was on the hook,
the reed switch could be pulled open.

	Another variation on that idea would be to have a Hall-effect
transistor as the switching device and the magnet in the hanger, as
before.  I have actually seen such a chip.  It is a three-terminal
device.  You put power on one pin, ground another, and the third one
is open until a magnet is brought near, at which time it suddenly goes
to ground.  It's really neat.

	Finally, it's possible that there could be a photo cell in the
hanger with a light source so that the handset blocks it when in
place.

	My own belief is that it is a magnetic switch.  It's quite
possible that the switching element is in the metal plate near the
hanger and that the permanent magnet in the ear piece of the handset
is what actuates it.  If a reed switch is used, the metal plate near
the hanger would be a better location for it because those things tend
to open and close when beat on.  The normal movements of a handset in
a user's hands would probably cause this to happen all the time which
would be quite frustrating to say the least.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group