HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 19:11:56 GMT
From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
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 672, Message 12 of 12

Some suggestions:

Before you call 'TPC' you might want to disconnect both lines at the
DMARC (telco box where the lines enter the house) and run a temporary
wire from the modem to one line, and a phone to the other. Then test
to see if the noise problem still exists. If so, then the problem is
in the drop wiring or Telco Outside Plant Cables. Call repair and
report that you have "cross-talk" between your two lines. If they
suggest that you have inside wiring problems, explain the previous
test.

If not, then you may have a cross connection between the two lines
inside your house. With standard 'twisted pair' inside wiring, this
should not happen and no modem noise should be heard.

If you have a number of phones, first try to disconnect all but one
and see if the problem persists (the cross may be in one of the
phones). If not, then the best way to trouble-shoot the problem is
probably to physically trace out all of the connections. Find each
terminal block where the lines are connected and look to make sure all
of the colors match up.

You may have to literally disconnect all of the lines and re-connect
them one at a time, testing for the problem each time you re-connect
another leg. The problem from a trouble-shooting standpoint, is that
if the house is an older home, phone extensions are often
'daisy-chained' from one jack to another, as they were installed (at
different times). There may be no logic as to how the connections were
made. (This is often a good time to re-wire, bringing each
extension/jack to a common hub. This makes future trouble-shooting or
expansion more convenient).

Hope this helps.


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, 28 Aug 92 00:47:14 EDT
From: capek@watson.ibm.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: NYC Plans Attack on Pay-Phone Abuses
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 3 of 6

An article in the {New York Times} on August 23 says that New York
City is moving ahead with a plan which would require the operators of
COCOTs on public property to obtain a franchise from the city's
Department of Telecommunications and Energy, and which would be
granted only to those who comply with the (Federal, state and city)
laws which regulate them.  A survey conducted by the department shows
that "as many as two thirds" of the pay phones violate the law in a
number of ways -- by overcharging, blocking long distance carrier
access, offering misleading or no information about rates, failing to
indicate the owner of the phone, and so on.

Apparently, none of the private pay phone presently on public
sidewalks have permission from the city, although such permission is
required.  (NY Telephone routinely obtains such permission.)  The
present effort is apparently an escalation by the city in the level of
enforcment: Now the companies must obtain the franchise, whereas in
the past individual phones had to be granted permission.

The article gives a number of examples of abuses which I won't repeat
here; we're all familiar with the kinds of things which go on.

The proposal is expected to be approved by the City Council in the
fall and go into effect next year.


[Moderator's Note: Chicago is doing the same thing. All pay phones
including those of Illinois Bell will have to be registered starting
next year if they are on public property.   PAT]
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:53 PDT
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
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 12, Issue 669, Message 3 of 9

On Aug 28 at  2:00, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> [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]

As a matter of fact, a Saturday morning phone call OR a Saturday
morning visit from the Jehovah's Witnesses would be handled about the
same way. My front door is equipped with the doorphone option on my
Panasonic hybrid. Someone comes to the door, I reach over and "answer
the phone", and tell whoever it is to "shove it under the door" and go
away. Then I hang up and go back to sleep.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115
    john@zygot.ati.com      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 13:31 EDT
From: catfood@wariat.org (Mark W. Schumann)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Publi Access UNI* Site
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 669, Message 2 of 9

I would think that anyone calling you could be cited for harrassment
if you asked him/her to stop calling and were ignored.  IMHO, if the
caller chooses not to listen to you (by automating the call), that is
the caller's problem.  The first time you get one of those calls, ask
the computer to refrain from calling ever again.  The second time, you
can prosecute.  :-)


Mark W. Schumann/3111 Mapledale Avenue/Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2447 USA
Preferred: mark@whizbang.wariat.org | Alternative: catfood@wariat.org
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 11:26:37 EDT
From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Travelers Offers Toll Fraud Insurance
Organization: Salomon Inc
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 679, Message 15 of 15

Today's {Communications Week} reports that the Travelers Corp. has
begun offering a program to insure users against toll-fraud losses of
up to $1 million per year.  The policies will cover fraud from hacked
DID access and fraud from hacked voice mail access.  While loss of
income or business interruption will not be covered, calls appearing
on the insured customer's phone bill will be covered.

Coverage will be sold in $1,000 increments from $50,000 to $1,000,000.
A $50K policy will cost $2500/year and have a $5000 deductable.  A
$500K policy has a $24,500 premium and $50,000 deductable.  A
$1,000,000 policy will cost $49,400 with $100K deductable.  (If you do
the math, you see that the premium is about 5% of coverage amount and
the deductable is 10%.)

According to Travelers, this is the first offering of insurance for
toll fraud, although several carriers and manufacturers offer programs
to protect users against losses incurred with their equipment or on
their networks.


Andy Sherman
Salomon Inc  -  Unix Systems Support  -  Rutherford, NJ
(201) 896-7018  -  andys@flatline.sbi.com or asherman@mhnj.sbi.com
"These opinions are mine, all *MINE*.  My employer can't have them."
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 03:00:12 GMT
From: mitchell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Dennis Mitchell)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 681, Message 11 of 14

shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes:

> The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of
> hissing and noise heard on the voice line.

> What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can
> use inside the house?

I had a similar problem in my apartment in Hawaii.  I ran a BBS on the
second line and when it was on-line I got a lot of crosstalk.  After
three visits the Hawaiian Telephone tech isolated it to a defective
modular receptacle.

He explained that in the humid air of Hawaii, there was often a small
amount of corrosion that conducted the signal between the two lines.
I wasn't willing to believe it ... until he fixed it by changing the
receptacle, and it stayed fixed until I moved out.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 12:27:53 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names
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 3 of 12

You could go to a library and look up newspapers on microfilm.  Some
libraries might even have old telephone directories on microfilm, as
was the case in Wilmington, Delaware (where I located a 1960 directory
on microfilm and figured from it that the 1965 area code split in
Florida was 305/904).


[Moderator's Note: The Chicago Public Library has directories from
Illinois Bell and Chicago Telephone Company (IBT's 1920's predecessor)
going back to 1879. They are all on microfilm, as is a complete set of
the {Chicago Tribune} back to October, 1871. They have a few pre-fire
copies of the {Tribune) between 1842 and 1871 also. I use the old
issues of the papers a lot for reference.  PAT]
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 00:38:53 CDT
From: cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: My Trimline Phone is Broken!
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 679, Message 3 of 15

One of my best-ever garage-sale aquisitions is an old (and ugly
yellow-green) ITT Trimline-type phone.  Got it for $1, with no cord.
It's been a faithful bedside phone for years, now, and gives me
something to do with that little transformer I unplugged from the
basement six houses ago :-).

After this move, it's given up.  The microphone isn't working.  I
checked the mic with my ohmmeter, and it shows a good connection.
Changes resistance with audio, so I don't think the mic has gone.  But
I find no voltage across the mic when the phone is off-hook.

Perhaps one of you might have an idea, or even a schematic they could
pass along?  The phone says "ITT 180447" on the flex-circuit in the
handset.  I don't really want to tear into it with no roadmap.

E-mail preferred, and thanks in advance.


Roy M. Silvernail   (in the throes of a mail crisis, so try.... 
                     roy@tfsquad.mn.org)
From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker?
Date: 30 Aug 92 17:33:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: eecs.telecom12.673.11
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 673, Message 11 of 13

Is it possible to make a calling card call and not have to wait for
the <bong> to enter your card number?  I'd love to be able to just
dial it all straight and not have to wait those extra few seconds.


Michael Rosen   Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University	
mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu  Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 13:51:49 PDT
From: pwl@tc.fluke.COM (Paul Lutt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Archive Access
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 661, Message 13 of 19

I seem to have misplaced my notes on how to access the Telecom
Archive.  I am interested in getting a copy of the stuff dealing with
the IXO/TAP protocol.  I do not have direct Internet access, so an
email interface would be required.  Could you please send me a copy of
the directions on how to use the archive?  Thanks.


Paul Lutt    Domain: pwl@tc.fluke.COM  Voice: +1 206 356 5059  
UUCP:	uunet!fluke!pwl   
Snail:	John Fluke Mfg. Co. / P.O. Box 9090 / Everett, WA 98206-9090


[Moderator's Note: This question comes up frequently. The Telecom
Archives can be accessed using anonymous ftp from lcs.mit.edu. When on
line, then cd telecom-archives.  Various email > ftp services are
available and instructions can be obtained from the operators.   PAT]
From: olwejo!root@uunet.UU.NET (Bob Kupiec)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies
Date: 23 Aug 92 05:53:30 GMT
Organization: Olwejo - Private UNIX System
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 657, Message 3 of 10

In <telecom12.649.6@eecs.nwu.edu>, the Telecom Digest Moderator writes:

> [Moderator's Note: You are correct. I live in a different world than
> many of the readers here. I live in a dirty, very impoverished, crime-
> ridden and rapidly dying inner city.

I've seen you write how much you dislike the city many times, and if
you don't mind me asking, what is keeping you there?  I don't think
that I would have lived in those surroundings for very long, I would
have packed my bags and gone somewhere else.


Bob Kupiec - Olwejo System Admin. - N3MML   !: uunet!cs.widener.edu!olwejo!bob
UUCP: olwejo!bob@cs.widener.edu             Internet: kupiec@hp800.lasalle.edu
School: LaSalle University, 20th St. & Olney Ave., Philadelphia, PA


[Moderator's Note: Very simple. I do not have the cash reserves I feel
I would need to live somewhere else for a month (or two or three?)
while looking for employment without being a burden on my new
community in the process. The current economic recession is a real
killer. I can barely keep my bills current. The idea of going
somewhere else without pre-arranged employment and housing is very
scary to me.   PAT]
Date: 02 Sep 92 15:39:57 GMT
From: hatamian@gandalf.rutgers.edu (ShAhin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Hardware/Software Position Wanted
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 679, Message 2 of 15

Hello everyone,

A friend has asked me to post this for him. Please respond directly to
him by phone or to me via email.

Thanks,

S

                        -----------

Hi,

I am looking for a position in the area of computer software/hardware
and netwroking. I have a MSEE with emphasis on Computer Architecture.
Also, I have two years experience in designing both hardware and
software for microprocessor based medical instruments.

I also have about six months of experience in design and
implementation of Ethernet LANs using NOVELL3.11.

Please for further info and/or a resume call me at: (201) 848-0446.


Thanks.

Amir S. Hatefi
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 06:30:03 -0700
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Polite Thief
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 665, Message 7 of 15

Jerry Leichter <leichter@lrw.com> writes:

[stuff about the phone rejecting the 10288 prefix deleted]

> I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense
> like this reported, but I can't remember it.  Anyone?

The number you're looking for is 816-654-8000.  They accept collect
long-distance calls for the purpose of making long-distance calls over
AT&T's network.  Presumably, they then go after offending operator for
blocking 10288 calls.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    (310) 568-3555
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      (310) 568-3574
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:46:13 GMT
From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Hearing Radio on the Phone
Organization: Rice University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 662, Message 7 of 14

Recently I was talking on the phone to a friend of mine in Long Beach,
California, and she told me a a repetitve problem she had been having
on her phone -- whenever she used the phone, she heard a *radio*
*station* on her phone line.  I listened carefully, found that, on the
other end of the line, I heard the same thing (only when I was talking
to her), only not as loud.  We identified the radio station as KFI
(640 AM, Los Angeles).

A few weeks later, I found another friend had the same problem, also
in Los Angeles, but with a different radio station.  The latter person
had just installed a new phone, so perhaps it has something to do with
a circuit in the phone instrument responding to the radio signal.

I've heard of RF intereference before, but this is ridiculous.  It
reminds me of a fictional story I once read about someone who got a
tooth filling that picked up radio stations.

Does anyone know why this happens, or what can be done to fix the
problem (or reproduce it)?


Robert Book    rbook@rice.edu


[Moderator's Note: There are line filters available which will cure
this problem. The telco has no special responsibility to handle the
problem as long as the lines are 'clean' when they had them over at
your premises. Typically newer electronic phones seem to have this
problem more than older style instruments. If someone is located
within a mile or so of a radio station transmitter/antenna the problem
can be more difficult to clear. You might want to check out an article
which appeared in TELECOM Digest a few years ago: "Praise the Lord and
Pass the RF Filters" told the story of the fight residents of the
north side of Hammond, IN had for a long time (maybe still?) with FM
radio station WYCA whose transmitter facilities are located about
four blocks away in Burnham, IL.  Maybe I will reprint that article if
there is sufficient interest.   PAT]
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 02:33:39 GMT
From: mitchell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Dennis Mitchell)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 682, Message 10 of 10


Regarding 911 calls from cellular phones: I was traveling cross
country through the Quad Cities area (Davenport, Iowa and Moline,
Illinois) and needed to call 911 to report a car stranded on the
highway.  My call went to the wrong 911 office, but they were used to
it and forwarded it to the right office (across the river).  A few
weeks later I got my bill, and I got hit with a $3 roaming charge, and
the billed phone number wasn't 911, but some other 'local' seven-digit
number.  Wierd.


[Moderator's Note: If you report the circumstances of your call to the
cellular provider (don't just rely on them to see it on your bill and
do it automatically) many will write off the charges as goodwill. I
know Ameritech here in Chicago has done that on occassion when
motorists have called in emergencies then stayed there to assist until
emergency personnel arrived on the scene.  PAT]
From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Trinary FAX Number?
Date: 1 Sep 92 05:50:27 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 7 of 11

The fax number for {Advertising Age} magazine in New York City, (212)
210-0111, looks as if it could be in base three.
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 18:58:23 GMT
From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 669, Message 1 of 9

	Here in California, recorded message calls must be preceeded
by a live person who:

	1.  Identifies him or herself.
	2.  States the nature and duration of the message.
	3.  Asks wheter you are willing to listen to the message.
	4.  Disconnects if you refuse.

	These rules do not apply to calls from outside the state of
California or to calls placed by businesses to preexisting customers.

	If you receive a recorded message call which fails to do all
of the above and wish to make a complaint, your local Business Office
will need to know the name of the individual or business making the
call.

	I've received several calls that do not comply with these
requirements, and have, where the caller is identified, turned them
over to the local business office.  Have never gotten a call that
complies with the requirements.


Harold
Date: 26 Aug 92 18:53:00 GMT
From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Recommendations Wanted For Pager/Beeper
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 664, Message 5 of 12

I am thinking of getting a pager (beeper).  I would like to be paged
when my answering machine gets a message.

What are the recommendations to accomplish this?

I now use two Panasonic KX-T1470 Answering Machines and would prefer
not to get another machine as I am very pleased with the ones I have.
They have all the features that I want, except that they will not dial
a beeper number.

As I already have telephones that handle multiple lines, I especially
would like to avoid having to get another answering machine that would
include its own phone that would only be usable on one line.

Incidentally, the reason that I use two answering machines instead of
a dual line answering machine is because a dual line answering machine
can not answer both lines simultaneously. 

Ray Normandeau
INTERNET:ray.normandeau@factory.com 
P O Box 854, Times Square Station,
New York, NY 10108-0854
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:21:27 GMT
From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Weird Intercept
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 672, Message 1 of 12

In article <telecom12.668.5@eecs.nwu.edu> cmoore@BRL.MIL (VLD/VMB)
writes:

> All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would
> still be in 213, not in 310.

I don't know what question prompted the above reply.

The 663- (once-upon-a-time NOrmandie prefix) is mid-Wilshire-up-to-
Hollywood, right around Normandie Avenue -- very definitely nowhere
near the 213/310 boundary.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 15:54:38 EDT
From: ddssuprs!tom@uunet.UU.NET (Tom Gillman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: Dickens Data Systems, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 664, Message 8 of 12

I, too, would like to know why cellular phones are prohibited by law on
aircraft. Please post or email any relevant info.


Thanks,

Tom Gillman                                  | Internet:  tom@dickens.com
Systems Integration - Dickens Data Systems   | uucp:   ...uunet!ddssuprs!tom


[Moderator's Note: Perhaps whoever sent the old thread on this topic
to the other inquirer recently will send it to Tom also. Thanks.   PAT]