HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jrblack@csn.org (Roger Black)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Bizarre Answering Machine Behavior
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:07:19 GMT
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 640, Message 6 of 8

I am in desperate need of some help with an AT&T "Answering System
Telephone 1532".  It's a two-line answering machine that uses
minicassettes and has all sorts of fancy bells and whistles, all of
which seem to work fine except for the most basic and important
function -- i.e., answering the phone and taking a message.

The problem is this: When the unit hits the appropriate ring, it
dutifully answers the phone -- and then drops the line.  The caller
does not hear the outgoing message, does not get a beep, has no
opportunity to leave a message; all he/she gets is a deep silence
followed by a disconnect.  The little red "in use" light flashes as it
is supposed to while the phone is ringing, but goes out as soon as the
phone is answered and never comes back until the next call.

I have been through this several times with AT&T's 800 help number, to
no avail.  They were very kind and apologetic, and talked me through
all the standard stuff -- swapping the cassettes, resetting the
microprocessor, verifying all the switch settings, etc. -- but in the
end they gave up and said they didn't have a clue.  I also talked to
U.S.  West and even had a repairman come out and look at the line,
also to no avail.

Since it was still under warranty, I took the machine back and got a
replacement unit of the same model, but the new unit does exactly the
same thing as the old one.  Finally I borrowed a "PhoneMate" answering
machine (i.e, one *not* made by AT&T) and it seems to work just fine.
Unfortunately, I don't know whether that really exonerates U.S. West
and puts the blame on AT&T, or whether the PhoneMate just happens to
be a little more tolerant of some out-of-spec condition in the local
circuit that AT&T can't (but shouldn't have to) handle as well.

The people at AT&T did suggest that maybe the local line voltage was
too low, so I put a meter on it.  It shows 50 volts when waiting for a
call or ringing, but drops to about 8 to 12 volts when the phone is
answered.  I asked the U.S. West repair service if that was normal,
and they told me they didn't know anything about voltage levels and
had no way of finding out.  Ditto with the repairman.  As you can
imagine, that failed to instill in me a deep sense of security about
the quality of our local service.

Any of you phone wizards out there have any idea what the hell is
going on?  I'm about ready to swear off answering machines for life.


James Roger Black    jrblack@csn.org
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 17:27:57 PDT
From: Gary Morrison <morrison%noctiluca@hub.ubc.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: PC-based Automated Messaging Systems Information Request
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 634, Message 9 of 12

This is a request for information on the availability of electronic
voice messaging systems (both software and hardware).

I am looking for a system with the following capabilities:

- stand-alone PC-based VOICE MESSAGING for 3-5 users.

- IDEALLY, the system would use standard DAT technology recordings for input
(thus I could record the voice messages (approximately 1,000 minutes worth) on
any DAT machine, transfer them to the computer system, and store each message
in its own file).  The software would simply read the appropriate file as
input when relaying a message to the user.  AM I DREAMING?

     Q: Is software available to do this?  Where?  How much $$$?

     Q: Does each software vendor have their own "standard format" for
        storage of digital voice messages?  Is it typical to be locked into
        of particular vendor once software has been purchased (i.e. if I want
        to add more messages later can I do it myself or must I send the
        message to the system vendor to be converted into the appropriate
        storage format)?

- the system allows the caller (using a TOUCH-TONE phone) to select
various options and listen to the appropriate messages.

- must not be some monstrous PBX multi-user system (SIMPLICITY in
maintenance is very important to me ... I don't mind putting in lots
of time up front during implementation but after that I want to forget
about the thing).

- I'd rather have a one-user/one-line system than a high-maintenance
multi-user system.

If you have implemented a system similar to this, or know of a system
(and its associated problems) I would greatly appreciate your
suggeestions.

Software that resembled C would be preferred (but anything will do ...
how difficult can it be anyway!).

I'm in the dark ... please enlighten me ... thanks!


Gary Morrison
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 01:04:59 GMT
From: fff@microplex.com (Fred Fierling)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Good *Sounding* Answering Machines
Organization: Microplex Systems Ltd.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 632, Message 9 of 13

In article <telecom12.616.4@eecs.nwu.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu
(Gabe M Wiener) writes:

> Most answering machines made today sound like unqualified pieces of
> junk, particularly to the caller listening to the OGM.  The condenser
> mics in most machines sound tinny, and pick up motor noise.

I felt the same way last time I went shopping for a machine.  I found
that the Sony TAM-50 has pretty good reproduction and it's OGM is
digitally recorded so there's no moving parts nor tape to wear out.


Fred Fierling    fff@microplex.com       Tel: 604 875-1461   Fax: 604 875-9029
Microplex Systems Ltd   265 East 1st Avenue   Vancouver, BC   V5T 1A7,  Canada
Date: 13 Aug 92 21:05:06 GMT
From: Ken Thompson <kthompso@donald.wichitaks.NCR.COM>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Portable DTMF Generator With ABCD?
Organization: NCR Corporation Wichita, KS
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 627, Message 14 of 16

Radio Amateurs use DTMF's including the ABCD for remote control of
repeaters.  Does anyone have an answer to the first part of the
original question? Are there any portable tone generators available
these days that inclule all 16 tone pairs?


Ken Thompson    N0ITL  
NCR Corp.  Peripheral Products Division   Disk Array Development
3718 N. Rock Road  Wichita KS 67226   (316) 636-8783
Ken.Thompson@wichitaks.ncr.com
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 17:48:14 CDT
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Voice Messaging User Interface
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 623, Message 3 of 11

In article <telecom12.613.7@eecs.nwu.edu> naleks@harvard.edu (Norm
Aleks) writes:

> A while back I posted a query as to whether anyone knew details on
> VMUIS, the Voice Messaging User Interface Forum standards. ...

> "The specification covers core activities only, not options or
> prompting scripts, and it is not intended to homogenize the industry.
> It calls for vendors to use * to cancel or back up, 0 to ask for help
> or an operator, and # to terminate or skip ahead.  It further
> specifies a consistent way to handle Q and Z, which do not appear on
> Touchtone keypads.  Acceptance of VMUIS is limited; some vendors
> ignore it, others adopt just the parts they like."

   Disclaimer: While AT&T markets AUDIX(tm) and a host of other voice-
processing systems, I don't work on or sell them (except switches).
That said, I must say that the use of a single "*" or other key to
erase or do anything else that can't be "undone" is, to me, a mistake.
Talk-off and other studies show that human voices can imitate a
frequency pair fairly often; getting two in sequence (Audix uses "*D"
or "*3" for "delete") is very unlikely.


Al Varney - just MY opinion.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 3:10:01 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Area Code Changes in Georgia?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 624, Message 11 of 12

404/706 split was scheduled for full cutover on August 3.  That is,
you should no longer be able to use 404 for calls to area 706.  Ac-
cording to this Digest, the Atlanta local calling area stayed in 404,
and everything else in the former 404 went to 706.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 15:24:01 GMT
From: wex@cs.ulowell.edu (Paul M. Wexelblat)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS
Reply-To: wex@cs.ulowell.edu
Organization: Univ. of Lowell CS Dept.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 646, Message 3 of 10

In article <telecom12.642.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, aps@world.std.com (Armando
P. Stettner) writes:

> I remember a time when there was a great deal of determinism regarding
> how to dial a given phone number ...

> [Moderator's Note: But do you remember the Anti-Digital-Dialing League
> which formed in Berkeley, CA in the early 1960's to fight the
> conversion of named exchanges into three digit numbers?  PAT]

Indeed I do, I remember (in those days when operators asked for
numbers) that my number was:

Two billion, one hundred fifty-six million, six hundred forty five
thousand, four hundred thirty two" (last n digits changed to protect
my mother who still lives in (now) twelve billion, one hundred fifty
x) (Philadelphia)

Once or twice an Operator actually tried to parse the number -- I
think Philadelphia was amongst the last to do away with the letters.


Wex


[Moderator's Note: Indeed, Philadelphia was the last, with Pennypacker
and a couple other curious exchange names.  PAT]
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 04:58:12 -0500
From: Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Union Continues to Talk With Bell Atlantic
Reply-To: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 635, Message 2 of 7

UPDATE ON UNION TALKS WITH BELL ATLANTIC

WASHINGTON -- Union negotiators for the Communications Workers of
America and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
resumed bargaining with Bell Atlantic at 10:00 am Wednesday.
Following an afternoon break, negotiations resumed at 3:30pm and are
continuing at this time.

"We are still far apart on the major issues," said CWA spokesman Pat
Shelor, "and we are nowhere near reaching a settlement.  But we will
continue to negotiate as long as progress is being made."
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:08:00 -0400
From: grayt@software.mitel.com (Tom Gray)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How Do I Run This Line?
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 626, Message 10 of 15

In article <telecom12.618.1@eecs.nwu.edu> 71336.1270@CompuServe.COM
(tim gorman) writes:

[others writing on the problems of having a single line connected to
two distant locations]

> [Moderator's Note: Then how do answering services with bridged lines
> to their customers handle this problem?    PAT]

As others have said, this is not as simple as an extension circuit.
The impedance of the unused pair will bridge the used pair and cause
significant distortion in transmission and signalling.

In the case of the answering service the loops are supplied with
bridge lifters. These are high value loding coils which are easily
saturated. When a user goes off hook on one of the pairs, the lifter
on that pair is saturated and its impedance will collapse. The lifter
on the other pair remains unsaturated and its high impedance prevents
it from affecting the performance of the other loop.

The original questioner could not get service at two distant locations
because the telco would not put lifters on his circuit.


i.sinature
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 00:53:57 GMT
From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What Are People Using For "Telnet"
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 654, Message 3 of 10

> I got the latest and greatest from NCSA and went to Clarkson to get
> the "packet drivers", and found a "This Stuff is Outdated" file in
> Clarkson's telnet directory.  I went back to our overworked networking
> person to ask why NCSA has two different versions of Telnet for the PC
> and Mac (2.3, and 2.5), and he suggested using the Clarkson packet
> drivers only on the PC version of Telnet (version 2.3).

> Someone else is looking into the Mac version.  Well, here I am with
> limited access to either a PC or a Mac, needing Telnet for others who
> do have PCs and Macs to use to reach us.  What configurations are in
> use around the net?

> jmoore@pixel.kodak.com, PROFS: EKSMTP(JMOORE)  VMS: UX047A::JMOORE


Since you enclosed a VMS sig, I assume you have VAXs and DEC access. I
might suggest a look at DECs Pathworks TC-PIP package. The licenses
aren't too expensive @ $100 per machine and they have both MAC and PC
packages. We use both and they're stable and reasonably user friendly.
We use them to connect MACs to SUNs, PCs to SUNS, HPs and both
occasionally to our VAX cluster (although we're more likely to use
Pathworks/DECNET or LAT for that, but it works). It might require that
you have a Pathworks License for a VAX to get the PC/MAC pricing (I'm
not in that loop so I don't know), but can't hurt to check.


John Rice        K9IJ    "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was
                          MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially
                          Not my Employer's....
rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 05:50:27 PDT
From: HOWARD PIERPONT <pierpont@snax.enet.dec.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 653, Message 10 of 11

In Telecom Volume 12 : Issue 648 chiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu)
wrote about cable shows.

TELECOM Moderator noted:

< [Moderator's Note: Yeah, but not true with the Jukebox Channel or
< whatever it is called. I will defer to Bill Pfieffer here since he
< knows more about the one in Chicago, but I think you 'put money in the
< jukebox and make your selection' via a 900 number; eventually (a few
< minutes or so later) whatever you selected is played.  If two or more
< people selected the same thing, then like with a regular jukebox it
< still plays one time and lets each paying party assume *they* are the
< one who is paying. :) When (whatever you picked) is played, all
< pending requests for the same song are cleared from the stack.  PAT]

In Rhode Island the cable company has always played every request in
the order received. [The same Madonna video every second or third
video. The cable company houses the equipment but "rents" the channel
to an independent. They are both making big $$.


In upstate NY the cable company was told you play every request that
was paid for or refund all monies collected so far. They used to clear
from the stack, too.  Now we get the same video over and over.

Some folks never learn.


Howard Pierpont    DEC     All disclaimer apply


[Moderator's Note: I believe they pop the stack with multiple requests
for the same music once the selection starts playing and if someone
then requests it again two seconds later it goes back to the bottom of
the stack once more. So if they play the same video every third or
fourth time around, they may actually be getting two or three times as
many calls for that video as they are actually playing. Five people
ask for it while something else is on; once it starts all five
requests pop the stack; then a couple others are selected and three
more ask for the first one again ... PAT]
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 17:44:01 GMT
From: mailrus!gatech!eecom!wberbeni@uunet.UU.NET (W. Berbenich)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: New 900 MHz Cordless Phone
Organization: Georgia Tech
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 623, Message 1 of 11

In article <telecom12.613.1@eecs.nwu.edu> jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken
Jongsma) writes:

> In the August 3rd {Business Week}...

> Cincinnati Microwave, Inc. [the radar detector people] figures
> executives and consumers will pay a small premium for cordless
> privacy. The company has developed a phone, to be marketed in October
> by its Escort division for about $300, that thwarts eavesdroppers with
> "spread spectrum" technology, which is similar to the encryption
> method that the military uses in secure radios. The signals between

I believe there may be a misstatement of fact in the BW piece.  Is
there anyone who believes that spread-spectrum is a form of cipher or
encryption?  I am quite sure that it isn't.  The quotation above is
therefore a bit misleading.


Bill Berbenich - School of EE, DSP Lab
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 11:31:42 PDT
From: ted@airplane.sharebase.com (Ted Marshall)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on CDMA
Organization: NCR/ShareBase Corporation
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 646, Message 5 of 10

X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 623, Message 2 of 11

> NOTE: ethernet adds another feature to it, CDMA/CA (CA = collision
> avoidance)

Ethernet is actually CSMA/CD (Carrier SENSE Multiple Access /
Collision DETECT).

> There is always the ability for two transmitters to decide at the same
> time, its free, jump on the line.  This causes a collision.  In pure
> CDMA, the collision just wipes out the data, and a timeout retry will
> pick it back up.

Other than the "D", the above is correct. The timeout is done by a
layer higher than data link (typically by transport).

> Ethernet, uses CA, where each station first transmits a pre-amble
> before the data.  They also listen to see if the pre-amble got stepped
> on.  If it does, they back off and avoid the collision.  Then the data
> makes it out, or everyone backs off, and a 'retry timer' is used.

This is quite wrong. Although Ethernet does use a preamble, its only
purpose is to allow the receiver to synchronize on the packet. A
collision on the preamble is treated like any other collision: both
transmitting stations "jam" the Ethernet to make sure that all
receivers notice the collision and then the transmitters do
exponential backoff (modified by a random-number generator) before
trying to retransmit the packet. This is all done by the data link
layer and does not require intervention by higher layers (unless 16
consecutive transmits fail with a collision). A collision in the
preamble is not "safe" because without a clean preamble, the receiver
cannot synchronize to receive the packet.

This is why it is called "collision detection" instead of "collision
avoidance".


Ted Marshall                             ted@sharebase.com   (408)369-5574
NCR Corp. (ShareBase Div.)             2055A Logic Dr., San Jose, CA 95124
The opinions expressed above are those of the poster and not his employer.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 18:52:03 EST
From: Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: LEC Bypass w/o Least-Cost-Routing
Reply-To: jeff@digtype.airage.com
Organization: Univ of Fnord; Roslyn's Cafe Div.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 639, Message 5 of 14

How is LEC bypass usually done? Is it a function of the LCR capability
of a switch?

If so, is there any hardware that could be added to a switch that
doesn't do LCR to route instate calls via another carrier?


Thanks,

Jeff
Jeff's Oasis at Home.  Jeff can also be reached at work at:
                       jwasilko@airage.com
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 15:35:00 EDT
From: Todd.Langel@f230.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Todd Langel)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Wires of Mystery
Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/230 - CSFSO Telecomm, Clearwater FL
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 624, Message 12 of 12

> As many of you know, the old standby for figuring out who owns a 
> facility (wire, microwave, etc) used to be "cut the wire, see who 
> shows up to fix it".  Now, I do NOT advocate this; it might be 
> something that is important, and distruction of the property of others 
> is something that should be carefully considered before it is done, 
> but it is one way to do it ... in extreme cases, it is the only way. 

Did you know --> If there is a facility or cable that caries
government lines thru it. and you or someone has a malicious intent to
damage or destroy that facility or cable, that it is a federal offense
and carries something like a five year mandatory sentence in a federal
prison!
 

 ... OFFLINE 1.38 * <T. Langel> <AT&T Network Systems - Tampa, Fl> 
Internet: Todd.Langel@f230.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG
UUCP: ...!myrddin!tct!psycho!230!Todd.Langel
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:20:05 GMT
From: ebupaf@ebu.ericsson.se (Pat Fargo 6266)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS
Reply-To: ebupaf@ebu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Business Communications, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 646, Message 4 of 10

Back in the days when I worked at the Labs, I was lucky enough to go
on Operating Company Assignment Program (OCAP). I was hosted by
Southern Bell in Charlotte, NC. The most amazing part of Ma Bell were
the volumes of standards for all aspects of the phone company. AT&T
regulated maintenance, answer times, response time, and a million
other control parameters to insure good service.

I agree with John that we would not have as many new features, or the
complexity we do now without competition, but have always felt it had
to deteriorate because there was no more Ma Bell to look over the
Opco's shoulders. Each Opco must now make money, and the first thing
to go is the excess maintenance, and those characterisitics that made
the service high quality. Its too late now to talk about it. Its gone.
Bellcore was supposedly set up to be somewhat of a controlling body,
but from my last experiences with it, nobody listened to it.


Patrick A. Fargo   Ericsson Business Communications, Inc.
Anaheim, California