HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: carlson@steam.Xylogics.COM (James Carlson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Re: Info-annex location, and Annex log digester?
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:08:29 GMT
Reply-To: carlson@xylogics.com
Distribution: na
Organization: Xylogics Incorporated

The acp_logfile digester is available for anonymous ftp from
xylogics.com in pub:

  56 -rw-r--r--  1 mildram     57341 Nov  2 19:20 acpscripts.shar
  24 -rw-r--r--  1 mildram     24429 Nov  2 19:20 acpscripts.tar.Z
1808 -rw-r--r--  1 mildram   1842688 Sep 19 21:50
sendmail-5.65c+IDA-1.4.4.1.tar.Z
  15 -rw-r--r--  1 mildram     14775 Dec  1 15:02 ukcf.README
 112 -rw-r--r--  1 mildram    103497 Dec  1 15:02 ukcf.tar.Z
  71 -rw-r--r--  1 mildram     71869 Jan 24 17:36 vttest.shar

You want to get either acpscripts.shar or acpscripts.tar.Z (they're the
same).

--
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,comp.sys.sun.admin,comp.sys.sun.hardware,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.sys.sun.wanted,comp.periphs.scsi
From: chienhua@simplex.ecn.purdue.edu (Chien-Hua Hsiao)
Subject: Which machine can use these simms
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 00:07:15 GMT


Please help me to identify which machine can use following simms.

+---------------------------------+
| +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ +-+ |
||||||||||||||||| |||||||||||||||||
+----------------^----------------+
       |                  |
    32 pins            32 pins

These simms have 8 chips on it. The code on the chip is  AAA1M300J-08
                                                         NMBS    9130
Are the simms 1Mx8-80NS.

Thanks in advance. Please e-mail me.


Chien-Hua Hsiao
chienhua@ecn.purdue.edu
From: daniel@nstn.ns.ca (Daniel MacKay)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Annex, PortMaster, Iolan reviews, 12/92 SunExpert
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:49:31 GMT
Organization: NSTN Network Operations Centre, Nova Scotia, Canada

Barry Shein did the reviews- good summaries of features to check no matter
what server you're shopping for.
--
	Daniel MacKay				daniel@nstn.ns.ca
	NOC Manager, NSTN Operations Centre	902-494-NSTN
	Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers,comp.sys.sun.admin,comp.sys.sun.hardware,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.sys.sun.wanted,comp.periphs.scsi
From: ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu (Edward J. Hartnett)
Subject: Re: I need more serial ports!! (Sun ELC)
Organization: CIRES, University of Colorado
Date: 27 Jan 93 10:36:28

In article <1993Jan27.160755.26869@cbnews.cb.att.com> adh@cbnews.cb.att.com (andrew.d.hay) writes:


   lra@caribou.Eng.Sun.COM (Larry Ader) writes:
   "
   "I have a Sun ELC at home and am in desperate need of more serial ports.
   []
   "To me, this solution is not elegant (or convenient).  What I'm wondering,
   "is what others of you have done when you ran out of serial ports.  I have
   "heard of terminal servers and am wondering how well these work.  Do you
   "have any recommendations?  I obviously need something that attaches over
   "ethernet or the SCSI bus.

   not necessarily.  it's hardly any cheaper, but you can run x.25 over
   the serial ports [sun has a driver] into a pad [packet
   assembler/disassembler] with asynch. serial ports -- i've seen pads
   with 8 and 16 lines...

   in general, i think you'll find meeting your price goal quite
   challenging.	;^<

   -- 
		   +--------------------------------------------------------------+
   Andrew Hay	|	one step beyond the outer limits of the twilight       |
   a_d_hay@att.com	|	zone in the darkened room at the night gallery	       |
		   +--------------------------------------------------------------+


I don't know anything about the ELC, but if it has a scsi port you can
buy a terminal server from Central Data (800 482-0315) that will give
you two extra serial and one parallel port for about $600. I have one
and I'm quite happy with it. I don't work for Central Data.

--
	Don't blame me, I voted against Amendment 2!

Edward Hartnett				ejh@khonshu.colorado.edu
From: gmccomb@netcom.com (Glenn McComb)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: PacBell Intra-LATA Rate Ripoffs
Date: 23 Jan 93 08:10:15 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 38, Message 2 of 11

Hello!  I'm trying to find out how to dial from my (408) to (415) and
(510) via my preferred carrier (MCI).  When I dial 10222 (MCI access)
and then a 415 number, a recording tells me "it is not necessary to
use your carrier" or something like that.  What they mean is that they
are trapping the call and requiring me to pay 0.25/minute for a
ten-mile call!!!  I know that most states have made this predatory
bulls--t illegal, but what is the status on the other states?  I'm
being strung up by PacBell in California.

BTW, MCI would charge me 0.13 + 0.11 for the same call!

Any ideas?

Thanks.


[Moderator's Note: I believe under the tariffs, your local telco, (in
this case Pac Bell) has the right to keep that traffic for itself, and
there is some question in my mind if MCI is lawfully allowed to handle
intra-lata calls between 415/408/510. In reference to the rates you
quoted for MCI, I think you mean they would charge those rates for a
call of that distance -- provided it was an *inter*-lata call. AT&T
also charges 12-13 cents per minute on interstate calls during off-peak  
hours, but they are not technically allowed to handle intra-lata calls
either.   PAT]
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 23:51:24 GMT
From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: AT&T Public Phone 2000 Credit Card Bug
Organization: Open Software Foundation
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 40, Message 8 of 13

In article <telecom13.35.9@eecs.nwu.edu> robichau@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov
writes:

> While traveling last week, I had a chance to try my first Public Phone
> 2000 (PP2k). Unfortunately, the phones at present have two serious
> problems which render them unusable, at least for me.

> Bug #1 is intentional. The phones only accept SWBT and Bell Atlantic
> calling cards for data calls.

Are you sure? I don't know where you are, but I used a PP2K at
Cleveland airport, and used my New England Telephone calling card,
which leads *me* to bug #3: The line was only 1200 bps, and the noise
was so high as to be unusable.


Kenny Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142	+1 617 621 7306
kenny@osf.osf.org	OSF has nothing to do with this post.
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:17:41 GMT
From: timothy@eddie.rmnug.org
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Any Good Books About ISDN and Telecommuting?
Organization: Rocky Mountain NeXT Users' Group
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 38, Message 8 of 11

Are there any good resources available that discuss ISDN and it's
relationship to telecommuting? I'm interested in developing a list of
applications that would support a telecommuter.

Are there any good journals dedicated to this or related topics.


Tim Miller, Boulder, CO   timothy@eddie.rmNUG.org [NeXTmail accepted]
From: toml@Cayman.COM (Tom Lahey)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telecom Management Degrees
Date: 23 Jan 93 15:21:46 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 41, Message 9 of 12

> Does anyone know what colleges/universities offer a Telecommunications
> Management Degree program starting at the associates level?  All I've
> seen has been a Masters Level program at places like Univ of Maryland.

The New Hampshire Vocational Technical College in Nashua New Hampshire
offers an Associates Degree in Telecommunications. They have both day
and evening programs. Phone number is: 603-882-6923


Tom Lahey   batfish!toml@attmail.com
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 8:31:56 EST
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: 301-303, Not in 410
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 44, Message 15 of 15

I accidentally completed a call yesterday to the 301-303 prefix.  (A
call to 800-477-4704, still in use as C&P help line for 301/410 split,
also has 303 in the shrunken 301 area.) I am now concerned about the
archives, since they list 303 as a Columbia prefix in 410.  Phone
books I checked in Maryland last night list 303 as Berwyn (i.e., a
Washington-metro-area prefix), which could be pseudo-foreign exchange
service from Columbia.
From: jon_sree@world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Answering Machine Exclusion: Schematic
Date: 27 Jan 93 07:06:51 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 47, Message 10 of 11

Hi Pat:  

This is either for publication, or FAQ or what-have-you. I typed it up
in response to someone's question, so maybe others will find it
useful.

----

This is the schematic I traced for an answering machine stopper
gadget: it cuts off the answering machine in case any line is picked
up. Some answering machines have this feature built-in; the older or
inexpensive ones don't. The gadget is called Message Stopper (R), by
Design Tech International Inc., Springfield, VA. Several other mfrs
make this kind of gadget, so this is just one I happened to buy.
Cost, roughly $10.

The gadget is in the same form factor as a wall-plug-in Y-splitter.
That is, it plugs into the wall RJ11 outlet, and has two RJ11 outlets
on it, one marked TEL, the other marked ANS. There are two LED's, the
green one on top of the ANS outlet, the red one on top of the TEL
outlet.

The two outer wires of the three RJ11's are wired in parallel. The
schematic for the center two wires is :


         .--------------  phone
      .-----------------
      |  |
C1   ----|
C2   -|  |
      |  |
      |  |
      |  '-----------------  answering machine
      |  
      +--|<--+--|<--->|----
      |      |    two zeners                      
      +-->|--+
         two leds

     Top led is green, bottom is red. 

It turns out the leds are basically idiot lights. The outside design
makes it look like the green should light up when the ANS is offhook,
and the red when TEL is offhook, but actually, depending on the line
polarity, only one will glow, and only when the ANS outlet is offhook.
If a load is connected on the ANS outlet, both leds will glow when
ring voltage comes through.

I could not read the zener voltage off the diodes, but I measured 11V
across one of them when operating.

The theory of operation is straightforward. All telephone extensions
in the house are in parallel with each other, and with any device
connected on the TEL outlet. If any of these devices is offhook, the
phone line voltage is expected to drop below 12V or so, at which point
the zeners isolate the ANS outlet from the line.

It's a fairly simplistic design, and will not work in all situations,
but it mostly works.


Regards,

Jon Sreekanth

Assabet Valley Microsystems, Inc.     |  Fax and PC products
5 Walden St #3, Cambridge, MA 02140   |  (617) 876-8019
jon_sree@world.std.com   


[Moderator's Note: I shall put this as a file in the archives, which
are accessible using anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu.  Thanks for sending it
along to the Digest.  PAT]
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Looking For DID Information
Date: 23 Jan 93 20:04:00 GMT
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 13, Issue 42, Message 5 of 14

bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps) writes:

> Nothing magic to it, but you should be aware that the scheme John is
> talking about may be considered infringement on a patent held by
> Brooktrout Technologies of Natick, MA.  They make fax/voice response
> PC cards with an on-board DID interface for just the purpose you
> described.

Somehow, I do not think that any patent can tell you how to use a
standard telephone technology such as DID. But there are other serious
negative considerations to DID (kept in place by the telcos because
DID is a direct competitor to Centrex).

The first is a rather steep installation charge. In Pac*Bell land, it
is about $700 just for establishing the DID group. The second is the
"termination charge" which essentially puts you on the hook for a
multi-year period, even if you disconnect the service.

Back when DID involved literally wiring up a switch for DID trunks,
these charges had some validity. Now, of course, a few key strokes and
the telco has taken thousands of dollars from you. And as a side
benefit, those steep charges make you think twice and possibly
consider Centrex as an alternative. Telco makes much more money from
that in the long run.


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
From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Apartment Security Stupidity
Date: 21 Jan 93 15:47:19 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 37, Message 10 of 15

> 'in-use' light on the phone would be honored by most courteous people
> who saw it illuminated for a few seconds when they arrived.  PAT]

That is, if they can see the light.  The growing use of purely visual
indicators on publicly accessible telephone equipment is a real
scourge.  I cringe every time I hear somebody singing the praises of
some new payphone or other communications device containing a
graphical screen or other visual indicator.  That is just something
else that will have to be fixed, at some time, or that will give grief
or maybe even cause a dangerous situation for either a blind person or
somebody else whose call gets stepped on because some blind person
didn't get enough information about the system to use it properly.

 There have been light detectors for use with LED's and other types of
signal lamps , for over 30 years.  These things are easy to build and
quite cheap.  They have made most office phone systems accessible.
The problem is that most blind people don't carry a light probe around
with them.  If they did, and came upon this signalling system for the
first time, they would probably have been given instructions from the
person they were visiting telling them how to use the phone but
omitting the part about the in-use lamp since most people just don't
think about things like that.

 A better solution for the hypothetical situation would be to have
exclusionary switching on each phone so that if the line voltage is
low, that phone can't be picked up.  I believe that is how the devices
work that prevent extension phones from being picked up when one is
already in use.

 As for the big non-hypothetical problem, there is no easy answer, but
we, as technical people, need to give it the college try.  There will
be more and more people with different handicaps in the work force.
Solutions which fix one or two telephones, here or there, just won't
solve the problem.  The best solution will be to make sure that
telecommunication facilities are as accessible to as many people as
possible.  A good title for a thread on this subject would be, "Why do
you Have to See to Hear?"


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group
From: PMW1@psuvm.psu.edu (Peter M. Weiss)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Subscribable Mailing Lists on Internet?
Date: 27 Jan 93 14:55:31 GMT
Organization: Penn State University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 48, Message 5 of 13

In article <telecom13.38.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, Paul Robinson <tdarcos@
access.digex.com> says:

> Someone else may have the list of Internet based subscribable lists, I
> know there is one I just don't know who makes it.  I will CC this
> message to TELECOM Digest and allow the readers there to give some
> insight.

An excellent document is available about searching the Lists-of-Lists
electronically, and is itself accessible via electronic mail by
sending a note to: listserv@NDSUVM1 (bitnet) or @vm1.nodak.edu with a
simple body-of-text message of:

GET LISTSOF LISTS

This document (153 lines) is authored by Marty Hoag and contains
valuable advice (and LISTSERV Database Search scripts) on how to do
automated searching.


Pete Weiss - Penn State U, co-owner LDBASE-L
From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Phoneline Simulator to Test Modems - How?
Date: 23 Jan 93 18:52:22 GMT
Organization: Maverick International Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 42, Message 3 of 14

In article <telecom13.18.13@eecs.nwu.edu> george@tusk.med.harvard.edu
writes:

> To test modem/terminal-server settings I would like to connect connect
> the modems directly via a phoneline simulator.

(I'll also e-mail the author as he requested.)

I have sucessfully connected two 2400-baud modems with just a cable -
it took a little trickery and manual manipulation via the AT commands
on both ends, but I was in a pinch and it worked.  Obviously, dialing
and auto-answer cannot be done this way.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:25:58 +0000
From: J.Harrison@bra0401.wins.icl.co.uk
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Discovering Your Own Phone Number in the UK
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 44, Message 14 of 15

Within the United Kingdom there have traditionally been a variety of
numbers (usually 17x) you can call to find out the number of the line
from which you are calling. Like in the U.S., these numbers varied
depending on locality.
         
A BT engineer showed me how to dial 175 to get my own number and I
believe BT has now standardized on this. In my own area code it only
works with lines supporting "Star Services" (the BT name for the
package providing call waiting, three-way calling, etc.), but I have
heard that in other areas it works on any line connected to a digital
exchange (yes there are STILL a small handful of Strowgers here!)
         
If you call 175 you get (sometimes) a minute or so's silence designed
to deter the casual or wrong-number caller. Then a voice tells you
your area code + number, then "start test".
         
Flash the switchhook (actually you have to hold it down for nearly a
second otherwise nothing happens) - you then get some information
about the earthing (grounding) on your line, plus a request to selct
next test. You can then dial 1 for a DTMF dialpad test (it expects you
to key 123456789*0# and then tells you if it heard the tones OK), or 3
and it will give you what it calls a "coin pulse test" designed for
payphones.
         
Anything else says you dialed wrongly, EXCEPT if you dial 4 which says
"not from this line you can't!". If anybody knows what this does (or
the other several undocumented Star Services codes) I'd like to know.
         

Joe Harrison
Yes, the disclaimer; I'm on behalf of me not my employer.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 17:27:38 CST
From: roy@cybrspc.UUCP (Roy M. Silvernail)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: "Secret" Phone Codes
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 45, Message 5 of 7

tompkins@tti.com (Tompkins) writes:

> In one of those discussions, about a year ago, a number was posted
> that purported to work nationally: 10732-1-404-988-9664.

It works in Minneapolis (612), complete with a trailing 8.  There were
also about ten digits recited after a second tone.  All but the last
were 0, and the last was 2.

I wonder how this will show up on my phone bill?


Roy M. Silvernail |+|  roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu


[Moderator's Note: It will show up as a $59.95 charge from AT&T's
'Find Out Your Number' bureau, converted to a 900 call for the
purposes of billing.  :)   PAT]
From: sanford@ascend.com (Curtis Sanford)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: N.E. Telephone Admits Ripoff - Refuses Restitution
Date: 22 Jan 93 00:47:27 GMT
Organization: Ascend Communications, Alameda CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 37, Message 2 of 15

In article <telecom13.29.1@eecs.nwu.edu> sth@slipknot.mit.edu (Scott
Hannahs) writes:

> These are reposts of some articles involving an ongoing dispute with
> New England Telephone that I posted to ne.general a week ago.

>> Remember the other MIT graduate who found that NET had overcharged
>> the State House something like a few millions of dollars?

> No. I might not have been here then.  Do you have a date, or
> reference, names etc.  I would like to get ahold of that info.

I believe you are refering to Len Evanchik, who was then (and may
still be) Director of Telecommunications for the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts (and yes, an MIT grad).  One of first acts upon taking
office was to take a calculator to his past Centrex bills.  I believe
he uncovered three to five years of double billing on all Centrex
measured service calls.  The refund was in the millions.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 14:38:16 EST
From: mike@camphq.FIDONET.ORG (Mike Bray)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cellular One/NY Re-bills Roaming Charges
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 13, Issue 46, Message 12 of 12

While roaming in the San Francisco area last June, I had the
opportunity to try Cellular One's NACN (North-Anerican-Cellular-
Nonsense).  At that time it didn't hardly work, and the folks at
Cellular One/SF all gave me conflicting reports about "you have to
make at least one call" or "just turn your phone on" etc, etc.  At
that time, the term Nonsense was justified.

But during my last trip to that area in October, they seem to have
corrected all their problems and the NACN now works quite nicely.
(Except if you have voicemail, right Douglas?)

And of course when I get to a new area, I call them and ask them what
their roaming rates and policies, are, etc.  And I also took my
_Official_Cellular_Roaming_Handbook_ too.

But when we got our phone bills from Cellular One/NY, we find that the
roaming charges are NOT what the carriers themselves say they are!  It
seems that for certain NACN systems, but not all of them, Cellular
One/NY re-bills the other systems' $2.00/day + .50/minute as
nothing/day + .99/minute!

When I called Cellular One/NY to complain about this, they just say
"this is the way we do it" and that's all I can get them to say.  I
can't find anything about this practice in any of Cellular One/NY's
paperwork and they can't seem to explain it either.

Has anyone else had this done to them?


Mike Bray     mike@camphq.FIDONET.ORG   (or)   ...!apple!camphq!mike