HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 09:25:02 EDT
From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 750, Message 7 of 13

In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 746 johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us
(John R. Levine) writes:

> In article <telecom12.744.5@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:

> In New York and New Jersey, you dial 1+ before an area code.  Calls
> within the area code are dialed without a 1.  In the 212, 718, and 917
> areas, all calls within and among 212, 917, and 718 happen to be local
> (or at most message units) so there's no issue of 1+ for toll, and in
> fact you dial 1 + 718 + number to make a local call from Manhattan to
> Queens, or 1 + 917 + number to call a beeper or fax machine within
> Manhattan.

Not quite correct.  Area code 516 which adjoins area code 718 does not
require 1+ dialing for any type of call.  It's N0X/N1X-NNX-XXXX for
out of area code and NNX-XXXX.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Two-Line Switching Device
Date: 5 Oct 92 15:59:47 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 762, Message 3 of 16

In article <telecom12.751.10@eecs.nwu.edu> Bob_Frankston@frankston.com
writes:

> I think that Radio Shack used to and might still sell a device
> designed for sharing an answering machine on two lines.

RS also sells a sharp-looking answering machine that answers two
lines.  I haven't used it myself, but it certainly *looks* better than
the normal "stuff" RS puts out in the consumer end of their operation.


Steven S. Brack         sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu
2021 Roanwood Drive     STU0061@uoft01.utoledo.edu
Toledo, OH  43613-1605  brack@uoftcse.cse.utoledo.edu
+1 419 GR4 1010    MY OWN  OPINIONS   sbrack@maine.cse.utoledo.edu
From: MERRILL@stsci.edu (Clark)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Date: 4 Oct 92 07:35:10 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 760, Message 9 of 12

mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org (Charles Mattair)

> Totally off the subject of telecom but Barbara Bush decided to take a
> walk in Hermann Park (the largest park in Houston proper) during the
> Economic Summit a couple of years ago.  They cleared the park.

> [Moderator's Note: Whatever happened to government of the people, by
> the people and for the people?  Surely she could have walked in the
> park, perhaps with an agent or two and been perfectly safe without
> causing all that annoyance to everyone else who was using the park.  PAT]

What has happened is that the secret service has totally taken over
the presidential security detail.  I don't agree with how they protect
out leaders, but look at it from their prospective.  In the last 30
years they have had one president killed, one president shot, one
president that would of been shot from close range except for the gun
jamming, and one presidential candidate crippled from a gunshot wound.
Another thing that makes me wonder why anyone would want that job!
The Secret Service had gotten paranoid.  It seems that they want the
same amount of security for unannounced stuff as the do for the stuff
on the public calendar.

I saw Reagan come back from a trip once and land at the Pentagon
instead of the White house.  A six lane road leading into DC was
closed off.  And there were officers stationed everywhere.  There was
no way to get anywhere near him.  I was one of five people that
stopped and watched the landing from the Pentagon parking lot.

Another thing I've found slightly amusing is that when presidents go
to sporting events, they never get to see the end of the game.
Another thing that makes me wonder why anyone would want that job!


Clark B. Merrill   Space Telescope Science Institute
Baltimore, Maryland   merrill@stsci.edu
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 20:33:11 GMT
From: bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telephone System For a Cooperative Residential Development
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 747, Message 10 of 14

Suggest you check out Solid State Systems/Cortelco of Kennesaw, GA.
They make a "relatively" inexpensive PBX/ACD system with a Residential
Resale package that is designed for applications like yours.  You can
either contact them directly at (404) 423-2200, or you can go the
cheaper route of trying to find a used one thru {Telecom Gear}, etc.
I've worked on a lot of switches large and small, this one's pretty
good (and flexible).

Good luck.


Brent Capps            | I am not responsible
bcapps@atlastele.com   | for the views
bcapps@agora.rain.com  | of my employer.
Date: 1 Oct 92 01:20:00 GMT
From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Pen Registers
Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau)
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 753, Message 11 of 18

The following is from the PHONES SIG of Invention Factory BBS.

> Those of you who have seen the latest DAMARK catalog may have
> noticed the Galaxis Call Register.

> These are better known by three other names:

> 1. (old )Pen Register
> 2. (just as old) pen recorder
> 3. (the current name) Dialed Number Recorder (DNR)

> I've just received the unit ... Stay tuned for details.

As more information becomes available I will post here.

In the meantime, Damark can be contacted at:

800-729-9000 orders   800-729-4744 Product Information  Fax 612-531-0281
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 21:38:27 GMT
From: bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Reference Books on Telecom Interfaces
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 747, Message 9 of 14

In article <telecom12.731.8@eecs.nwu.edu> telb@cbnewsb.cb.att.com
(thomas.e.lowe) writes:

> I am in need of some good reference books on the physical telephone
> interfaces and signaling used in many of the countries around the
> world (i.e. E1, R1, ISDN, etc.), including Switch to Switch and Switch
> to End-User interfaces.
 
> If you know of any good books, please let me know.

I'm assuming you're aware of CCITT Q.310-Q.490 and the G.700 series.

The only decent one I've found to date is:

   Attachments to Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN);
   General technical requirements for equipment connected to
   an analogue subscriber interface in the PSTN.

   European Telecommunications Standards Institute
   B.P. 152
   F-06561
   Valbonne Cedex
   France
   TP +33 92 94 42 00
   TF +33 93 65 47 16

   Price: 149 ECUs

However, it covers only line-side European analog POTS.  For DID,
ground-start and interoffice signaling, there is no such animal that
I've found after several years of looking.  I've had to amass a
library by contacting each and every PTT individually as I needed
info.  There is no royal road to signaling.


Brent Capps            | I am not responsible
bcapps@atlastele.com   | for the views
bcapps@agora.rain.com  | of my employer.
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 17:23:47 GMT
From: bcapps@atlastele.com (Brent Capps)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Funny Phone Behaviour ... Restatment of Problem.
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 759, Message 8 of 14

In article <telecom12.741.1@eecs.nwu.edu> shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu
writes:

[problems with Panasonic Easa-phone]

I have also experienced problems with the Easa-phone (the older El
Cheapo squarish-ones, not the newer ones with the rounded edges).  It
involved an interaction between the speakerphone and the mute button,
and the symptoms were:

  Easa-phone: offhook on speakerphone, dial VRU.
  VRU: answers, prompts for DTMF digits.
  Easa-phone: enter DTMF digits.  Mute lite comes on without
  being pressed, but mute feature isn't really active.
  VRU: loud female voice says "you have reached the mailbox of
  subscriber OH ONE OH OH OH OH...
  Easa-phone: drops call suddenly

The recorded voice is too loud and the OHs are very staccato, but I
could never figure out for the life of me why the Easa-phone would be
experiencing a talk-off problem when it isn't supposed to be listening
for digits...the newer ones have a fix for this problem but I'm
curious about what caused it in the first place.

Any guesses?


Brent Capps            | I am not responsible
bcapps@atlastele.com   | for the views
bcapps@agora.rain.com  | of my employer.
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 12:23:25 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <acg@hermes.dlogics.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: "I need a Wabash"?
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 743, Message 8 of 8

I was watching a recent episode of "Rescue 9-1-1", featuring a
reenactment of an emergency in Naperville, Illinois where a small
child was calling 9-1-1 after his babysitter collapsed.  The dialogue
was of the original tapes of the call, so all they had to do was
lip-synch to the original soundtrack off the Police Department tapes.

Following several fruitless attempts by the dispatcher to get the
small boy to recite his address properly (apparently they haven't got
enhanced 911 in Naperville), she had him read his phone number to her.
At that point she turns to her supervisor or assistant and says, "I
need a Wabash on this number: xxx-xxxx".  Obviously it was a
reverse-directory search for the address of the phone number. I'm
curious about the "Wabash" reference; does this date to the old days
of The Telephone Company?


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: acg@dlogics.com
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: (312) 266-4473


[Moderator's Note: There is, or was at one time a "Wabash Publishing
Company" which specialized in reverse number (or 'criss-cross') style
directories. Their territory consisted of hundreds of small towns all
over the USA unlike Haines, Donnelly, Polk and City Publishing, all of
whom seem more geographically based. Maybe that is what she meant. The
old version of the Customer Name and Address Bureau here, prior to the
start of 312-796-9600 about twenty years ago was nicknamed "two-oh-
eight-oh". Two-oh-eight-oh got its name from the fact that the cross
references were handled on an exchange by exchange basis, with the
numbers xxx-2080 and xxx-2081 in every exchange terminated on the desk
of the Chief Operator for the exchange. She had a numerical listing of
all the subscribers on that exchange. Callers to the number (the
public was welcome to call) heard the response 'two oh eight oh'. They
would pass the requested number and get the answer. It worked the same
way that 312-796-9600 does now for the 312/708 areas. If the number
was non-pub, then they would not give it out.  We had 2080 for about
fifty years I guess; it went away when the consolidated version began
sometime around 1970.  PAT]
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 12:50:53 PDT
From: DLynn.El_Segundo@xerox.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 757, Message 4 of 13

There was some partial truth and a "non-operative" statement (a lie,
although it used to be the truth) in my previous message explaining 1+
and 0+ dialing in the Los Angeles area, which was first to get N0X/N1X
exchanges.

I mentioned that Pac Bell in the LA area has for many years used
timeout after 0 + seven digits to distinguish, for example 0-312-3456
(a number in West Los Angeles) from 0-312-345-6789 (probably a number
in Chicago).  They changed the dialing instructions in the phone books
for this three years ago, without any publicity that I saw.  The
change is to always dial the area code on 0+ calls, while previously
you dialed the area code only when different from your own.  The
change avoids that need to time out.  I suspect that 0 + seven digits
still times out and works in some or all areas, but I hardly ever make
0+ calls to check that.  The 0+ change occurred in area codes 213,
714, and 818, probably all at the same time.

I have to recant on the claim of no N0X/N1X in 714 (area code
southeast of LA).  Anaheim got the first (and only so far) N0X prefix,
which is 802, according to the May 92 phone book.  This is a long time
after Pac Bell forced us 714 inhabitants to change our 1+ dialing
habits (which I explained in my previous message) to open up the use
of N0X/N1X prefixes.  That 1+ change occurred somewhere in the area of
1980 to 1984; I'm afraid I can't pin it down better than that.


Don Lynn
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:31:50 GMT
From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing
Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 746, Message 6 of 11

My cellphone is in 313-600, and I can dial seven, ten, or eleven
digits.  This works because cellular switches always know how many
digits you dialed.  The phone doesn't send the number to the switch
until you press the "spend" key.
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Centel of Florida Merging With "Sprint Corporation"
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:34:39 GMT
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 754, Message 3 of 13

> [a plan to] transfer the majority operational
> control of Central Telephone Company of Florida to Sprint Corporation.

> Ok, I'll admit I have no idea whether the "Sprint Corporation"
> mentioned is the same as US Sprint, ...

Last spring, US Telecom finally bought out GTE's share of Sprint long
distance (which according to its bills is the "Sprint Communications
Company Limited Partnership".)  At that time, US Tel changed its name
to Sprint Corp.  This makes Sprint the only company in the U.S. to
have a significant presence in all three of the local, long distance,
and cellular markets.  Their press releases use the word 'synergy' a
lot.  I don't know whether they'd be allowed to switch customers to
Sprint long distance -- as far as I know, only the RBOCs and GTE are
required to provide equal access.


Regards,

John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl

Cheap shot:  There were several messages about this in the Digest, but I
guess all that Wagner blasting away has addled poor Pat's memory. :-)


[Moderator's Note: Ahem ... (just waking up) ... did I hear my name
taken in vain?   PAT]
From: jdgretz@northridge.witchcraft.com (John D. Gretzinger)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Addtional Thoughts About Voice Mail Systems
Date: 28 Sep 92 23:53:00 GMT
Reply-To: jdgretz@northridge.witchcraft.com (John D. Gretzinger)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 748, Message 3 of 12

I thought I would add some details to the Voice Mail discussions
currently underway.

Most (I used to say all, but after talking to John Higdon have to
revise that) PC based voice servers require the system to be brought
out of service when any service is required.  This includes backup of
data, retrieval of billing information, replacement of components,
etc.

Many also require the system to be managed only through the locally
attached keyboard.

For a service bureau with equipment at client sites, this causes a lot
of problems.  Remote diagnostics and administration is limited.  Also,
if management reports are required it is necessary to down the system
to retrieve the reports, and then put it back into service.

Stand alone machines are better in these areas, but costs are almost
always higher.  Their advantages include remote diagnostics,
(depending on the vendor) centralized management reporting, hot change
of components, management reports produced in background to voice
processing, etc.

GTE uses a mixture of machines in it's COs, but the primary machine is
from Digital Sound Corportation.  DSC is not interested in small
sites, and thus does not have a machine for the small business.  Also,
their IVR capability is severely limited at this time.  They have
announced capabilities for next year that other players have available
now.

If I had my choice, I would buy anything else.  My first choice would
be Centigram, then Octel.  I really like Centigram's approach to
business, machine management, and IVR development tools.  This is not
to say Octel is not real close.  Simply my impression and choice.

If you currently want to do IVR with DSC, you need to be very good
with low level C code, 'cause that's what you got now.


John D. Gretzinger       Internet: jdgretz@northridge.witchcraft.com
(818) 996-9216           CI$:      73020,267
(805) 379-8907
Standard disclaimers apply - My employer had no opinions on anything.
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 1992  22:35:13 EDT
From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: About a Bad Cellular Connection
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 761, Message 7 of 8

A funny thing happened today.  One of the executives called into this
office from Europe and had a connection that made me think they were
calling locally.  Really clean call.

Later on, one of the mid-level people calls in on a cellular phone
that made me think he was calling from Mars or Jupiter, or at least
during a sunspot attack.  Really bad.

So I mentioned to him that his connection was {worse} than one that
came in from Europe.  So I asked him, "By the way, which phone system
are you using, Crapula One or Barf Atlantic?"  :) He thought it was
funny too ...


Paul Robinson     These opinions are MINE, MINE, MINE.
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 11:02:33 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: 1 vs. 1xx in Call to Motel?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 748, Message 6 of 12

Recently, I wrote of a motel in Mechanicsburg, PA; the room phone had
a list of charge cards which supposedly were accepted on the phone.

I had called that motel earlier for a reservation.  Instead of getting
a person, I got a menu where I would hit 1 for a reservation (this got
the front desk) or the room number to call a room.  At that motel, I
saw some rooms (apparently not meeting rooms?) which were numbered
1xx, which seems to indicate a timeout resolution if I am indeed
calling the front desk.  The motel is the Comfort Inn at 717-790-0924.
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 04:14:57 -0500
From: Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Commercial Service Addresses
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 739, Message 13 of 17

BG09110@SWTEXAS.BITNET writes:

> Does anyone know if Telnet addresses exist for the following services?

> Portal - I understand that this service will offer free, unrestricted
> access to all who logon through Internet.

> Delphi?

> [Moderator's Note: I do not believe you can truely telnet to either of
> those sites. It's a lot like 'telnet mcimail.com': it says you got
> there, but you *really* wind up at the site serving as the gateway and
> where the name 'mcimail.com' is aliased.  I think Portal and Delphi
> are the same way.  PAT]

   Portal is certainly accessible through Internet: telnet to
nova.unix.portal.com and choose 'online' as your service.  As for the
"free, unrestricted access" -- well, the telnet connection won't cost
you anything, but getting any access to Portal costs $15/month (you
can sign up at the prompt).

   As for Delphi, it's a little unclear.  There is a delphi.com, but
that is actually BioTechNet, a molecular biology information service.
Delphi Information Systems has an internet address (192.77.14.0), but
I can't telnet in there.
From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Living in the Past
Date: 5 Oct 92 23:53:00 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 763, Message 6 of 6

It is NET (Nynex).  The problem seems to have been in the cable
between the pole and my house which probably died due to work on the
pole and old age rather than a stolen pair.

My real point about competitive environment is not so much the
question of willingness to cooperate as the limits on innovation.  In
this particular case, does ANY telco offer to provide your own message
during a temporary outage? (A private OOS message)

I realize that I'm begin unfair in that even in competitive
environment there are many "obvious" services that are simply not
available.  While the majority is probably due to failures of
imagination as much as lack of competition some of the problems still
occur in competitive environments where are particular service though
valuable doesn't offer an immediate competitive advantage so gets
little or no priority.

Still, my feeling is that the presence of competition increases the
probability of useful features being made available.
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 1:27:14 EDT
From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Non-Air Air-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 762, Message 10 of 16

In Volume 12, Issue 753, Christopher Wolf (cmwolf@mtu.edu) wrote:

> When I took the ferry across Lake Michigan from MI to WI this summer,
> there was a phone or two on board that looked like the phones on
> air-planes.

> How does this work being only 100ft off the ground, in the middle 
> of a lake?
 
On the ferries owned by the British Columbia government that operate
between Victoria and Vancouver, there are pay phones of two kinds:
conventional radio-telephones operated by the British Columbia
Telephone Company (B.C. Tel, half-owned by GTE Corporation), and
cellular pay phones, operated by B.C. Cellular, which I believe is a
subsidiary of B.C. Tel.

I think that the charge for calls from the cellular phone was about $1
(Canadian) a minute a year ago. I didn't try it out.


Nigel Allen      nigel.allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu