HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 08:32 EST
From: kessler@inuxy.att.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Caller ID is Now Working in Indianapolis, Indiana
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 680, Message 7 of 9

After waiting about three years, Caller ID is finally working in
Indianapolis.  It started working at about 8:15am on my ISDN set.  Per
call blocking *67 has been working for about a month.


Bill Kessler   kessler@inuxy.att.com
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 01:49:34 GMT
From: allen@well.sf.ca.us (Allen Barrett Ethridge)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Request for Line/Trunk Emulation Boxes
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 662, Message 12 of 14

I'm looking for hardware that would connect into a PC or workstation
and allow several analog lines and/or analog or digital trunks to
terminate into and be controlled from the workstation.  A VME based
solution (as I believe someone else has already requested) would be
excellent. An HP-UX compatible solution would also be excellent, but
I'm open to any suggestions.

I can be reached at work as 'ethridge@bnr.ca' or at play as
'allen@well.sf.ca.us'.  I prefer the work address (it's free and I
have a real editor there).

 
Thanks,

Allen Ethridge
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:06:08 GMT
From: barrey@Novell.com (Barrey Jewall)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota 
Organization: Novell, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 681, Message 14 of 14

In <telecom12.668.6@eecs.nwu.edu> drilex!carols writes:

>> Apparently, people [in Minneapolis are getting calls] from a new kind 
>> of telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc.  It
>> sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer
>> that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attorney General's
>> office says that this doesn't violate any laws.

Fortunately, in California there is a law that says that recorded
announcements have to be preceded by a live human, which tends to
avoid Sears calling me at 3:30 AM to tell me that my dishwasher (which
I had not ordered) had arrived. This doesn't stop the calls from out
of state, however, as the state of California doesn't do anything
about 'em.

> [Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like
> that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday
> morning like they do mine?  PAT]

This was avoided by me rather simply. Upon arrival at our door, the
JW's were greeted by two unshaven, slightly drunk men (me and a
friend) one of whom was holding a Mossberg police shotgun. Jeff (my
friend) cocked the weapon, and asked "you won't be coming back, will
you?"...

They never did. 

(BTW ... it was 7 AM, not nine, and we'd gotten home about four hours
earlier.)

Bah.


Barrey Jewall - Network  Admin. ++ and yea, though I walk through the shadow 
barrey@novell.com	        ++ of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am
Novell, Inc.- San Jose, Calif.  ++ the meanest sonofabitch in the valley...


[Moderator's Note: For all the philisophical differences I have with
JW's, I would rather have them as neighbors any day over the nasty
people I deal with now. JW's are clean and very quiet. Their children
are very well-behaved. Most of my neighbors now are like animals and
Chicago is like a zoo where the violent animals are in control.  PAT]
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:51:44 GMT
From: heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 673, Message 5 of 13

> [Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call
> 787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency.

I'm surprised that our Moderator didn't mention it, but in the
Chicagoland area, they have put signs up all over the place that one
should dial "*999" to report any sort of emergency from a cellular
phone.  I've used it several times to inform the authorities of
stranded motorists, non-working traffic signals, possibly-drunk
motorists, downed trees or power lines, and speeding peace officers.

In Buffalo Grove, where 911 service was installed a year or two ago,
they have found that the system "isn't getting enough use"!  They tell
us that people are only using it for truly life-threatening
emergencies.  We have been told, through the town newsletter, that we
should use 911 *any* time we want fire/police/ambulance dispatch.  So,
the way I read it, if I have a fender-bender and need a police officer
to come by to see what happened, from a non-cellular Buffalo Grove
phone, I'm to dial "911", rather than the police non-emergency number.
I think it's wierd, but who am I to argue?  


Ron Heiby,  heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com	Moderator: comp.newprod


[Moderator's Note: Who are you to argue? You are a citizen with an
above average knowledge of the telecommunications network. Don't fall
into that all too common trap of criticizing some bureaucrat only to
be attacked in return, 'how would you know anything about this?'. That
is BS! Continue arguing that 911 is *only* for dire emergencies when
immediate police intervention is required.  PAT]
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 00:52:35 GMT
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Proper use of 66-block punchdown tool
Organization: Columbia University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 4 of 6

How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the
end gets trimmed?

My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and
then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never
seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to.

I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal.  Is that one
to get it it down and one to cut?

Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool?  Mine is
black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has
one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other.  Does any one
color indicate which side has the blade?  (Neither side on mine seems
to trim the cable.)


Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.  gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles    72355,1226 on CI$
Date: 26 Aug 92 15:56:35 GMT
From: davecal@microsoft.com (David Caldwell)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Slamming Prevention
Organization: Microsoft Corp.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 664, Message 11 of 12

Well, I have just set up phone service for myself and requested my
long distance carrier.  So far, so good.  When I called Southern Bell
to make some changes to my service (they default you with their
$2.50/month Maintenance Plan ... thanks, but no thanks!) I inquired
about the status of my long distance carrier.  They informed me that
it could be changed by any LD carrier with my verbal consent to said
carrier.  

Well after hearing all of the horror stories on this group about
slamming I inquired about "locking" (their word, not mine) my account
so that changes could only be made when authorized by me.  They told
me that I could pay 10.75 to have my account locked!  I told them they
could take their charge and shove it.  I know that Southern Bell has
switched people I know here to other LD companies based on "verbal
confirmation" through the LD carrier.  I am thinking that switching LD
companies is a great source of revenue for my friends at Southern
Bell.  Any advice or ideas on how to deal with the phone company from
hell?


Thanks,

David Caldwell    davecal@microsoft.com
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:00:59 -0500
From: Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 671, Message 7 of 9

lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes:

> Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not
> royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of
> intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some
> unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to
> say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just
> idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up
> the cell-phone frequencies.  The last news report I saw indicated that
> the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him.
 
   From what I gather from the British papers, there is no prohibition
on eavesdropping on cellular or cordless calls.  There is some sort of
restriction on "using" material heard over the air, but it is not
being enforced in this case.

   I remember thinking when recently reading _Diana: Her True Story_
that the royals seem to use cordless phones in strong preference to
corded, even for the most intimate of conversations.  Charles would
reportedly take the phone into his bath to have a private chat with
his mistress, Camilla Parker-Bowes.  (Diana would discover this by
pressing the redial button after he came out, and getting the P-B
residence.)

   Also, the royals seem to use something they call a "scrambler,"
which is supposed to make their calls uninterceptable.  I suspect it
is nothing more than an audio-inverter, since there is no key used to
control it (just tell the other party to "go to scrambler").

   British laws concerning wiretapping in general seem to be rather
loose.  Recently, members of the press recorded conversations between
the Minister of National Heritage (David Mellior) and his mistress, by
tapping into an extension socket at the flat the mistress was using.
They apparently had the *landlord's* permission, but not that of
either party to the conversation.  According to the {Sunday Times},
this activity broke no laws.
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1992 05:33:33 GMT
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 681, Message 10 of 14

julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) writes:

> The big question is "Why are people still doing installations
> with quad wire?"

Maybe because when they go to Radio Shack or Pay'n Pak (a big chain
ha1rdware/electrical retailer here) and ask for "telephone wire" they
get sold quad!

I'm going to have to find a use for the quad I got stuck with (no
receipt) and track down some two-pair to make a *long* extension cable
for my apartment. (Phone jacks in the bedrooms, and the kitchen.
*none* in the living room ... <sigh>)


Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/51	 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: NYTel LATAs
Date: 23 Aug 92 19:26:13 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 657, Message 7 of 10

> New York Regional Calling Area:
> New York City (212/718/917 area codes); Long Island (516) except
> Fisher's Island; ...

Aha.  I'd long been wondering where Fisher's Island gets its phone
service.  It's physically close to New London CT, has a New London zip
code (the only place in the country out of state zip sequence) and the
only way to get there is by ferry from New London.  So I guess SNET
provides their phone service, too.

> Albany Regional Calling Area:
> Capital District and Adirondack Region - all of Area Code 518 and Hancock,
> Massachussetts in Area Code 413);

That's odd, the New England Tel phone books claim that all of 413 is
in the Western Mass. LATA.  The exchange is 413-738.


Regards,

John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:52:28 GMT
From: kentrox!bud@uunet.UU.NET (Bud Couch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill?
Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 673, Message 9 of 13

In article <telecom12.662.4@eecs.nwu.edu> smp@cathedral.cerc.wvu.
wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis) writes:

> Is there a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a telephone cable 
> to make a longer one?  Essentially what I would emagine would be similar
> to the two male connectors fused together.

Well, there is always the old WECO 710 splicing connector, but it
requires a rather elaborate tool to use, since it uses an
insulation-displacement mechanism. I think that the tool runs about
$300, and I don't think that AT&T will sell the connectors in
quantites of less than 25.

Personally, I'd use a pair of needle-nose pliers (and some wire
strippers if you don't have the touch to strip wire with them), a
soldering iron, a little solder, and a roll of electrical tape, but
then again, I *have* been called a dinosaur (along with some other
names!). :-)


Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox   If my employer only knew...  standard BS applies
Date: 27 Aug 92 15:29:41 GMT
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept
Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 668, Message 4 of 12

In <telecom12.658.5@eecs.nwu.edu> MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.
unisys.com writes:

> I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this
> number before).  When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're
> sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are
> using.  Please read the instruction card and dial again."  (There are
> the standard SIT tones at the beginning.)  This is odd since I'm
> calling from my office phone, not a pay phone.

Sounds like a PBX intercept to me.

Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.


[Moderator's Note: IBT has a few numbers where they 'store' various
funky intercept recordings for whatever reason: 312-856-1520 ==> 1525
always return messages like " ... can't be completed as dialed, please
ask your attendant for assistance", "<tones> all circuits are busy
now", and a particularly odd one used to be in that range of numbers
which simply said "the voting has been concluded"(?), plus one that
makes sense if you think about it, "the number you have dialed cannot
be reached from outside the customer's premises".   PAT]
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 01:21:35 GMT
From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 672, Message 7 of 12

Slightly diverging from the topic here, but I was wondering about the
air-phone service that is now fairly common on US carriers. While on a
trip to the US each time I flew (usually United) the air hostesses
would always invite us to use the service, especially convenient since
the phones were located in the seat in front of us (at least on some
of the smaller planes like 737's). This led me to think about the
movie Die Hard II where air phones figure prominently in the plot. In
some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he checks
the pager and calls her back on the plane.  Is this possible or some
Hollywood license? I never noticed any numbers on the air phone which
indicated you could call one.  Just wondering ...


Laurence Chiu   lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:51:00 EDT
From: clements@BBN.COM
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 673, Message 6 of 13

In V12,I641,M2, Mark Lottor gave us a review of the Sony IT-A4000:

> The Sony IT-A4000 has been out for a while now.  It is a speakerphone
> and digital answering machine. [...lotsa good stuff deleted...]  In summary,
> it's a nice phone.  It has some minor annoyances, mostly because you
> know they could have just added a few lines of code to make it do
> something differently.  However, it easily beats having a machine with
> tapes or paying someone for voice-mail service.  It sells for around
> $199.

I would add just a few comments:

    1) I'm glad to see that the price has come down, if that's
       accurate.  I had to pay over $300 for mine.

    2) I would have preferred this unit without the built-in
       phone, which must add a fair amount to the price.  I've
       got plenty of better phones.

    3) It isn't very good at ignoring no-message calls if the
       line it's on doesn't have CPC pulses.  I run mine behind
       my Panasonic PBX, which doesn't give a CPC pulse on
       hangup, and I get a lot of silent messages and
       dialtone/busy messages.  I've used other machines that
       were much better in that situation.

    4) This one surprised me, and is the main reason for my
       posting:  There's no way to stash your outgoing message in
       memory while you use a different one for a while.  I'd
       never really thought about it, but with a cassette-based
       OGM you can set one cassette on a shelf for a day if
       that's appropriate, and then put it back in the machine
       later.  On Rolm PhoneMail you can do the same thing - have
       a "regular" OGM and an "alternate" OGM that you change
       more frequently.  But with this Sony machine, you have to
       re-record your "regular" OGM from scratch.  There's no
       concept of saving an OGM.  I say it "surprised" me but
       that's only because the thought that you might not be able
       to do this never crossed my mind.

Just my additional two cents.


Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 17:15:12 PDT
From: Alan TC Penn <tc@cdc.hp.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Distinctive-Ringing Decoder
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 679, Message 7 of 15

I am going for a distinctive-ringing decoder or demultiplexer. The
function of this device is to route the incoming phone message
directly to either an answering machine or a modem.

                                 
              		           |--------- answering machine 
                                   |  ring A
  Wall jack ------- device --------
                                   |
			           |--------- modem
                                      ring B


With this device, I can utilize my one phone line to have two
different phone numbers for different applications.
From: RM_KIEFF@rom.tcpl.ucalgary.ca (ROM M. KIEFFER)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Modem Access From Europe to North America
Date: 2 Sep 92 14:40:59 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 679, Message 13 of 15

Greetings,

One of our employees will travel to the Netherlands in the near future
 from where he will need to access various computing devices back at
the office in Canada, with his Macintosh powerbook and built-in modem.

This gives rise to several questions:

- since European jack wiring is different from North American
standards, what kind of cable will I need to build/acquire to make
ends meet?

- is it legal in to connect private modems to the public carrier?

- and, are the European digital dial tones the same as the North
American ones?

(I have thought about packet carriers instead of long distance calls,
but the services at the NA end of the link cannot be reached/used that
way.)

I would appreciate hearing from the European readers about these
questions, either direct to me, to summarize to the net, or via the
standard distribution.


Thanks,

Rom
From: mcgregoa@cognos.com (Alayne McGregor)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Bell Canada Does it Cheaper
Date: 1 Sep 92 21:56:34 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 677, Message 6 of 11

In <telecom12.664.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, John Higdon writes:

> "Pacific Bell plans to upgrade a small number of Pacific Bell Public
> payphones in its franchise territory to trial Public Coin voice
> Messaging Service (CVM). Our intent is to trial this service from a
> limited base beginning the first quarter of 1993 pending regulatory
> approval. CVM will allow a caller, encountering a busy or no answer
> condition, to send up to a one minute message to their called party for
> an additional fee above the cost of the call. 

Bell Canada has had this feature for quite some time now -- except it
only charges you the quarter that you would have paid anyway to reach
the person.


Alayne McGregor    mcgregoa@cognos.com   alayne@ve3pak.ocunix.on.ca
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 05:18:45 GMT
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Status of Non-Dialable Points
Organization: Columbia University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 678, Message 3 of 11

Can anyone with access to the Bellcore database give a current report
on the status of U.S. non-dialable points?

Several years ago there was an article in the Digest about this, and
the nondialable points included Shoup, Idaho (Farmer's magneto line),
Newhalem, Washington (Independent four-digit exchange) and a few
others, and then the usual array of Nevada toll stations, plus some
unusual ones, such as Texas ranchers who were reachable by _name_ in
the Bellcore database.

That article was from four years ago.  I'd be curious to know the
current situation.  Last I heard, both Shoup and Newhalem had become
dialable.


Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.   gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles     72355,1226 on CI$