HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:27:12 GMT
From: bwhitlock@uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: AT&T to Offer a 900 MHz Cordless Phone
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 851, Message 1 of 6

I saw a post in another group saying that AT&T will be offering a
900MHz cordless phone soon.  I was wondering if anyone else has more
information about this.  I apologize if this was already discussed
here; I haven't read this Digest for a while, and I don't have access
to any archives (at least none that I am aware of.)  Thanks.

 --- INCLUDED MESSAGE FOLLOWS ---

 From: grund@calypso.som.cwru.edu (Victor Grund)
 Newsgroups: misc.consumers
 Subject: AT&T to offer 900Mhz Cordless Phone
 Date: 13 Nov 1992 05:15:57 GMT

This evening I asked about 900Mhz cordless phones at my local AT&T
Phone Store.  I learned that AT&T indeed has developed a 900Mhz model
but has delayed introduction due to last minute changes in the FCC
rules for the new frequencies.  Look for an AT&T version in January,
priced at approximately $280.  They also claim a 1-2 mile range.
Yeah, right.  I'd like to see that in writing!  They didn't know if
the AT&T model would be standard analog, like the Panasonic, or
digital, like the VTECH Tropez.


Victor D. Grund        | grund@pyrite.som.cwru.edu 
IBM Cleveland Mktg Ops | grund@vnet.ibm.com        
RISC System/6000 & AIX | DETVMIC6(VGRUND)          
(216) 664-7381         | FAX: (216) 664-7348       

 --- END INCLUDED MESSAGE ---

    * * * * * * --> DISCLAIMER:  I speak only for myself. <-- * * * * * *
Brent Whitlock		Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology
bwhitlock@uiuc.edu	Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering
			University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


[Moderator's Note: You have access to the Telecom Archives, where all
back issues of this Digest (eleven year's worth!) are stored. You can
use anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. Then 'cd telecom-archives'.   PAT]
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 09:35:17 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <acg@hermes.dlogics.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Airfone -- Phooey
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 846, Message 5 of 13

henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) writes:

> Is anyone happy with these things?  I've never gotten one to work to
> my satisfaction ...

Happiness is in the eye of the beholder, but I find the process of
setting up a call to be a bit counterintuitive at best. I had to read
the directions several times to comprehend them, and as a computer
programmer I don't feel I'm particularly dense in these matters. If
memory serves, you have to wait until a green light stops blinking
before swiping your credit card through the handset, THEN you have to
wait until the green light goes OUT before dialing. Something like
that. As someone else pointed out, you must wait for a collection of
beeps and boops to finish, then dial the call; the delay seemed to be
due to the phone trying to get an authorization from my AmEx card
before proceeding. After following the instructions to the letter and
dialing very slowly, it still took two or three attempts before I got
through.

I chalked up the experience to Early Technology and took comfort in
the fact that a few years earlier, I would have had no means of making
the call at all.


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: acg@dlogics.com
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: (312) 266-4473
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 14:57:02 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <monty@proponent.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Moving and Trying to Keep Phone Number
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 863, Message 8 of 10

[Moderator's Note: Monty passed this along from another newsgroup. PAT]

 From: borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden)
 Subject: Re: Moving and Trying to Keep Phone Number - Need Advice
 Date: 19 Nov 92 18:57:10 GMT
 Reply-To: borden@m5.harvard.edu
 Organization: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, MA,  USA


In article <1992Nov19.172109.9888@m5.harvard.edu> borden@m5.harvard.
edu writes:

> I'm trying to find out if I have any options for keeping my current
> phone number if I move out of town.  My situation is: I live in
> Central Square, Cambridge.  I really want to find another apartment,
> and it has to be cheap, which makes it harder to find something in
> Cambridge.  I have a freelance business (I play piano), and there are
> hundreds of flyers and cards out there with my Cambridge phone number
> on them.  I need to keep this number active in some sense, for an
> indefinite period of time, maybe permanently.  New England Telephone
> will only put a message on the number for a few months, then they
> recirculate the number; to get a Cambridge number in anyplace other
> than Cambridge is extremely expensive.

> So the question is: does anyone know a way to keep a phone number
> without maintaining a residence?  Thanks in advance for any help you
> are able to give.

I've been able to answer my own question since I posted this.  In case
anyone is interested, here's the answer: There's a service offered
through New England Telephone's business service office (737-7000),
which is also available to residential customers, called Remote Call
Forwarding.  This allows one to keep one's old phone number without
the phone line, and have the calls forwarded to a new phone number,
any number you want.  You pay $41.54 for installation, $16.97 per
month for the service, and for the phone line usage, whatever the call
would normally cost, from your old number to your new number.  For
example, if you Cambridge to Somerville, as I might do, and someone
calls you at your old Cambridge number, you would pay the local
message units charge on their call.

Hope this is of use to someone out there.


Dave Borden    borden@m5.harvard.edu
From: phil@wubios.wustl.edu (J. Philip Miller)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Conference Calls
Date: 21 Nov 92 14:32:07 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 864, Message 9 of 15

We frequently have the need to set up conference calls involving 10-15
individuals scattered through the US.  We have generally been using
AT&T, but I had never looked carefully at the charges.  We just
finished talking with the Atlanta conference center.  They charge
$10.00/party plus $.49/minute/party for each call.  It does not matter
where the call originates or what conference center it is made from.
This is about double the rates of standard long distance connections
from each participant to Atlanta (or whichever center is being used).

A 60 minute phone call will cost $39.40/person, no matter where they
are located, so that a 10-15 person conference will cost $400-$600.
Our local switchboard cannot support conferences of this size.  Are
there alternatives which we should be looking at that will give us
good quality connections at a more economical charge?


  J. Philip Miller, Professor, Division of Biostatistics, Box 8067
      Washington University Medical School, St. Louis MO 63110
  phil@wubios.WUstl.edu - Internet  (314) 362-3617 [362-2694(FAX)]
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 14:37:39 GMT
From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
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 848, Message 7 of 10

In article <telecom12.839.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes:

> First, let me clarify exactly what I meant.  The point I was making is
> that a switch need not know that anything has happened.  

> Equipment to do this DOES exist.  I work for a railroad, in the
> telecommunications department (although not the switched network
> group), and we have equipment (I can't remember the name - I'll refer
> to it as a DACS, although that is not really an accurate name) that
> does this.  

If railroad signaling (I'm a RR wannabe as a hobbyist) is what is
carried, it is natural to have protection switching (What the telecom
industry calls its schemes to maintain reliable transmission
facilities) in place for safety reasons. In the public switched
telephone network (PSTN), the consequences of dropping a connection
are not as severe.

> I an fairly certain that supervision on the trunk will not be lost
> during the interval that the trunk is being rerouted.  If it was,
> then, of course, the call would be dropped, but there are easy ways
> around that.  (This post is long enough without the details).

The previous post (this issue) from Al Varney about signaling on DS1
indicates a very short (less than 125 us) interval needed to maintain
supervision.  Protection switching operates with switching times of at
least two orders of magnitude higher. As such, it is highly unlikely
that individual circuit supervision will survive such a switch.
Moreover, in current digital facilties (FT3 comes to mind), this
protection switching is built in to automatically switch to a spare
line when the BER exceeds 10-6(?).

> Do any telephone companies actually use this for voice circuits?  I
> don't know, but my point was that it could be done if they wanted to.

Now that we've beaten this to death, I reiterate that I know of NO
telephone companies (this doesn't mean that none exist!) that use this
approach.

BTW, I think DACS is a trademark of AT&T (Before trademarking it stood
for Digital Access and Cross-connect system). Any of you Baldrige
award winning AT&T transmission folks wanna help out here?


Jack (John) Adams		Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
(908) 758-5372 {Voice}		(908) 758-4389 {Facsimile}
jadams@vixen.bellcore.com	kahuna@attmail.com
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 05:15:03 -0500
From: shri%legato@cs.umass.edu (H.Shrikumar)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Sorry For My Slip Up in Cellular Privacy
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 842, Message 11 of 14

Hi PAT,

  I seem to have implied and said a statement more stronger than my
thoughts about encryption for cellular phones in my post, as I
realised when I got this mail from brumba@rtsg.mot.com ...

> I think that you jumped in over your head on this one -- there is
> encryption available for cellular phones.  The biggest drawback is
> cost.

  That is true ... I do know that about existance of the encryption
scheme that is included in the IS-54B standard which I have heard
governs cellular phones. And if no one else flames me on my mistake,
please include this in the digest to correct my error. My apologies.

  However, my sentiment was directed at the fact that this encryption
is not "known for any strength" ... and what amount of security it
will provide is yet to be seen to be believed.


shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 08:59:48 GMT
From: exujbl@exu.ericsson.se (Jerry Blackerby 214-907-7810)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: No Caller-ID in Texas
Reply-To: exujbl@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 843, Message 4 of 11

Maybe if people in Texas would find out the phone numbers of the PUC
(Public Utility Commission) members and everyone start calling each of
them at "odd hours", they might decide there could be a reason to have
Caller-ID.


Jerry
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 11:48:32 GMT
From: tpang@sfu.ca (Tsui Ting Debbie Pang)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Who Are the Major Players in CT2 Phones and Equipment?
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 869, Message 8 of 8

CT2 has been testing in Hong Kong for a while, but handheld cellular
is by far still most popular.


David Tse
From: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Administrivia: Article/Subject Headers
Date: 22 Nov 92 04:26:14 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 863, Message 1 of 10

Lately I've been receiving a lot of items from people who reply to the
newsgroup rather than send their submission via email. Then there are
people who send articles via email, but reply to the subject rather
than construct it correctly.

For example: "Re: TELECOM Digest V12 #850" is <<not>> an acceptable
title for an article.  Neither are blanks where the subject is left
out entirely.  Since I don't have time for anything except a brief
screening of articles, I will just skip over those that don't have
subjects from now on.

Likewise I am getting tired of people cross posting to a dozen other
groups as well as telecom, and a variety of other articles which come
here totally unedited, rambling on and on, etc.

If there is no subject header, or the subject simply refers to an issue
of the Digest, it won't get published.

If the article comes to me from 'news@wherever' (meaning someone tried
to post it to comp.dcom.telecom and it got caught and sent to me in
multiples), then it won't get published. I am arranging my filtering
program to take articles like these and dump them unread.

I don't need a hundred plus articles daily to go through and not be
able to arrange them by subject because the writer did not bother to
include one.

The one and only way to submit articles here is by addressing them in
email to 'telecom@eecs.nwu.edu' AND including a valid subject header
which either matches an earlier one with a 'Re:' in front, or by
creating a new header entirely.

I've got a couple dozen articles waiting for review now with no
subject and my solution is to toss them out. This also applies to
articles where the person simply captured the entire Digest as part of
their reply, leaving me to yank a couple hundred lines out with my
editor after reading it all to see what part he was replying to, etc. 


Thank you.

Patrick Townson
From: omar@osf.org (Mark Marino)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: HELP! Need Pointers to Info on Frame Relay, ISDN
Date: 15 Nov 92 17:27:51 GMT
Organization: Open Software Foundation
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 850, Message 5 of 13

Hi all,

   I'm investigating the possibility of supporting remote connections
to our network via methods other than FracT1 and DDS2.  Unfortunately,
I'm not well versed in the other methods.

   If someone could give me a pointer to a paper, article, or book
which describes any one of the following, I'd be forever indebted:

	* Frame Relay
	* Switched 56
	* ISDN
	* X.25

Are there any other newsgroups other than those I posted to where this
info might be discussed?

Please reply via e-mail.


Thanks,

Mark Marino              | omar@osf.org        | uunet!osf!omar   
Open Software Foundation | 11 Cambridge Center | Cambridge, MA 02142
Date: 15 Nov 1992 01:44:05 GMT
From: dhclose@cco.caltech.edu (David H. Close)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Personal 800 Numbers
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 846, Message 8 of 13

Tansin A. Darcos & Company <0005066432@mcimail.com> writes:

[ a list of 800 vendors and prices ]

Just FYI, "Call Home America" offers unpublished 800 service (real
number, no password after connect) for $3.75/month plus usage between
16c and 25c/ minute.  Full ANI billing, charged to your credit card.
Portable in that you can change the destination number anywhere in the
US.  IMHO, a terrific deal, cheaper than collect or calling cards
(especially if an AOS gets involved), can't be abused like the Call-Me
card.  Great for college students.

CHA is at 800 594 3000.  I'm only a satisfied customer.  True, they
would offer me a rebate for referrals, but only if you knew my account
number.


Dave Close, dhclose@alumni.caltech.edu, BS'66 Ec
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:54:54 -0600
From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: AT&T's COLOR Videophone With Motion
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 844, Message 1 of 12

In a previous posting, Wayne Geiser was quoted as saying:

> we are trying to eventually get to THIRTY frames per
> second.  Thirty frames per second is the same as the number of
> animation stills they use in cartooning.  Supposedly, one cannot tell
> the difference between live video and thirty frames per second video.

Standard NTSC television is thirty frames per second.  There may be a
bit of confusion, here, because each video frame is divided into two
fields.  The odd-numbered lines make up one field and the even lines
follow, next.  This produces a frame rate of thirty, but a field rate
of 60 per second.  Each field contains half the 525 scan lines,
scanned such that they interlace.  This makes the picture flicker less
than it would if the entire image was scanned straight through from
top to bottom.

	The video systems used in much of the rest of the world are
based on a 50HZ standard and contain 25 frames per second, scanned
just like the NTSC frames.  Movie projectors which interface to film
chains have to do some fancy optical framing with their shutters to
match the 24-frame per second film speed with television frame rates.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group
From: bagus@elixir.e.kth.se (Chris Bengtsson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Telephone Costs?
Date: 21 Nov 92 15:03:01 GMT
Reply-To: bagus@elixir.e.kth.se (Chris Bengtsson)
Organization: U s e U S, Sweden
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 864, Message 7 of 15

In Sweden, the telephone company charges nearly US$30 to give the
taxing-meter reading, inbetween billing periods.

Does anyone know of a (cheap) device that can monitor taxing, allowing
me to continually know what my telephone bill be, as well as
controlling my telephone bill.

I make a lot of overseas calls and hate the suprise of my telephone
bill. (In Sweden the telephone company bills every three months.)
 

Thanks in advance for any response!


Chris Bengtsson
voice/fax:  +46 8 195904
email:  Bagus@elixir.e.kthe.se
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:03:48 GMT
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 854, Message 6 of 12

DTMF requires both tones, no question there.  But my ancient physics
memory recalls that when two waves are combined, the resulting output
is (unless filtered) four tones: the original two, another that is the
sum of the first two, and a fourth that is the difference between the
original two.  Do I have this wrong?


Joe    jmalloy@hamilton.edu
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 00:05:00 GMT
From: mike@percy.rain.com (Michael Heggen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Only One Phone Works ... Help!
Organization: /etc/organization
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 870, Message 7 of 7

awolf@cit.hmc.psu.edu (Andy Wolf) writes:

> I have a problem in an apartment that I recently moved into.  There is

[stuff deleted]

> 2. In a rental situation, is it typical that the apartment company
> should fix this problem, or do I have the burden?

> [Moderator's Note: Have you tried other instruments in BR- to see if

[stuff deleted]

> The landlord does not have to fix the problem.  Telco is not as easily

With all due respect to the Moderator, I would suggest that Andy Wolf
check his rental agreement as well as the landlord-tenant law in his
state. In Oregon telephone service can fall under the portion of the
landlord-tenant law regarding maintenance of necessary services.  This
is sort of a grey area, as I discovered with a somewhat senile (but
definitely obnoxious) landlady at a previous residence. I had had a
second line installed. The apartment complex was wired using
multi-pair cable (8-pair? Don't remember ...) and there were twelve
units in the complex. The phone guy just found an unused pair and we
hooked that up as the yellow-black pair on our regular jacks in
apartment. After a few weeks, I started getting noise on the line and
it degraded to the point that you couldn't hear dialtone. I spoke to
my landlady about it and she said that it was her responsibility to
keep the wiring maintained, so she would pay to have it fixed if it
was determined that that was where the problem was. Great!

So I called the phone company (Pacific Northwest Bell) who came out
and determined that the problem was probably at a junction somewhere
in between the first and second floors. They also discovered that all
the rest of the unused pairs were just as bad as mine was (if not
worse) and that the wiring was really awful (complex was probably
wired by a independent contractor during construction). It would
require that they go into several other apartments, etc. and would run
a couple of hours time in all (in addition to the $90 already spent to
track down the problem).

Now the fun starts: my landlady claims that the installation of a
second line was "an unauthorized modification" to the apartment. She
claimed that it was "tampering" and therefore in violation of the
lease. She claimed that her responsibility was only for my first line
and that she would not pay for the repair service (any of it), nor
would she allow repairs to be made.

End result: I had to disconnect my second line and pay a $90 repair
bill (the phone guys -- yes, there were two of them) were nice enough
to knock an hour's time off the bill, but it was still $90.  And, I
had no data line.

Storal of the mory: get it in writing from your landlord beforehand.


Michael Heggen <mike@percy.rain.com>
From: tcora@pica.army.mil (Tom Coradeschi)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Headsets etc.
Date: 21 Nov 92 16:18:17 GMT
Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 866, Message 2 of 12

Cliff Sharp <clifto@indep1.chi.il.us> writes:

> If anyone knows where I could get another Nady Systems headset, I'd
> enjoy knowing, since this one is years old and may not last too many
> more decades ...

Surprisingly enough, I'd suggest that you start at your nearby
motorcycle dealer! Nady is (big time) into wireless communication
systems geared toward folks riding in groups. Ought to get you their
address/phone, at the least.

Better yet: a quick ftp check on the rec.motorcycles ftp site
<cerritos.edu>, grab the "yellow pages" and ...

Nady Systems 
510-652-2411
6701 Bay St.
Emeryville, CA 94608
catalog free  accessories--electronics
 

tom coradeschi    <+>    tcora@pica.army.mil