HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 12:27:18 GMT
From: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us (Bob Izenberg)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Phone Number in "Sneakers"
Organization: The Fortress of Ultimate Dorkiness
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 703, Message 1 of 12

	A few friends and I saw the movie "Sneakers" recently ...
Toward the end, River Phoenix's character asks for the phone number
of a female NSA agent.  One of our group remembered her number, and
saw fit to hit us all up for the two and a half dollars or so that the
call cost.

	Alas, there was no seductive gun-toting NSA agent to be yanked
away from the dinner table.  The film industry's normal flawless
attention to telecom detail :-) failed it here: (415) 273-4196 is now
in area code (510).  I don't know what would have been said (at least
on the side of the call in our town!) had someone answered, but the
matter is academic.  The number has not been assigned in that area
code.  At least, as far as we know. Would we have been rattled if
the phone rang right back when we hung up?  Maybe just a little.

	I can't say what would make a herd of movie-goers zoom in on
this one particular item, unless it's the insatiable lust for film
trivia.  In any case, it is not for me to question, because, when all
our change was returned, I was thirty-five cents ahead.  :-)


Bob      WORK: bobi@vswr.sps.mot.com  HOME: bei@dogface.austin.tx.us
Date: 6 Sep 92 18:21:00 GMT
From: gt8963a@prism.gatech.edu (MCCARTNEY,JEFFREY ELWOOD)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Need Info on Compass Voice-Response Software and Others
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 688, Message 13 of 13

I'm looking into various voice-response systems.  Would anyone care to
tell me about their experiences with the various manufacturers of such
and the associated software and hardware, especially Compass Software
out of Sarasota FL.

I'm interested in all types:

Touch-tone (DTMF recognition)

Text-to-speech

Synthesized voice


Thank you.

If I get a decent sampling, I'll post a summary.  


uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt8963a
Internet: gt8963a@prism.gatech.edu
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 23:08 PDT
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code?
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 695, Message 3 of 14

Will Martin <wmartin@STL-06SIMA.ARMY.MIL> writes:

> I suppose that it would be *possible* to use "911" as an area code,
> since it should always be preceeded by a 1 or a 0 in making a call,

Except in those places where it is not required. Such as here. Those
places would have to be set up for a "dial 1" requirement and then
followed by an appropriate grace period, followed yet by another
buffer period to get "non-dial 1" users whipped into shape. I am
always getting stung when I use a San Francisco telephone where a '1'
is required after being used to my own phone where a '1' is not
required (and never has been -- ever).

I am afraid that in the San Jose area, there would be an awful lot of
unintentional '911' calls if 911 was to become an area code.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115
    john@zygot.ati.com      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !
From: William.Degnan@mdf.FidoNet.Org (William Degnan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone
Date: 5 Sep 92 13:03:15 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 684, Message 10 of 11

On <Aug 30 00:44> UUCP (Tony Harminc <TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA>) writes to
All:

> The worst case is, as was mentioned recently, if a Princess phone with
> lighted dial was installed at one time, and the dial light transformer
> is still connected to the second pair.  Then you may have a fire.  You
> could easily disconnect and tape the red/black leads inside the phone
> to be safe.

If plugged into a two-line jack (ala RJ-14) it could short line two when
the set is off hook.

But red/black? Wouldn't yellow/black achieve the same purpose but
allow the set to be used?


William Degnan,  Communications Network Solutions
-Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology-
P.O. Drawer 9530       | wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org | mfwic@mdf.fidonet.org
Austin, TX 78766-9530  | !wdegnan@attmail.com  | Voice +1 512 323 9383
* Origin: Private Line - Stealth Opus in Austin (1:382/39.0)

"Well-informed people know it is impossible to transmit the voice over
wires.  Even if it were, it would be of no practical value."
                                    -- Boston Post 1865
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:15:22 GMT
From: lamb@xtcn.com (Richard Lamb)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: "Bonding" Protocol State Machines
Organization: XtcN Ltd
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 713, Message 4 of 16

Where can I find this specification? Preferably something off the net?
I know it is a spec for inverse-multiplexing (taking many low speed
lines to make a single high speed one).  We are doing something like
this but it would be nice to stick to some standard instead.


Thanks,

Rick Lamb
XtcN Ltd, lamb@xtcn.com, Tel:508-655-2960, FAX:508-655-4559, Telex:6504829720
11 Roxbury Ave.,Natick MA 01760,4425 Butterworth Pl.N.W.,Washington D.C. 20016
From: richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:32:13 GMT
Organization: Hatch Usenet and E-mail.  Playa del Rey, CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 714, Message 4 of 12

In article <telecom12.704.7@eecs.nwu.edu> our Esteemed Moderator
notes:

> personally prefer the current arrangement even if I do have to dial
> 1-708 for many of my local calls.  PAT]

For the benefit of Pat and others who, like me, make frequent local
calls to different area codes, I would like to pass on a household
hint for the finger-weary ... :-)

I had some free memory buttons on my desk phone, so I set four of them
to: "1213", "1818", "1714", and "1800".  The memory buttons are "One
Touch", so I just have to hit one button and then dial the seven-digit
number.

                
Rich Greenberg - N6LRT - 310-649-0238 - richg@hatch.socal.com
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 09:42:08 GMT
From: A.G.Minter@bnr.co.uk (Andrew G. Minter)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#"
Organization: BNR Europe Limited, Harlow, GB
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 705, Message 11 of 11

Just to confuse things even more:

The UK English voice on our wonderful NT Meridian VoiceMail system
refers to `#' as "square sign".


Andrew G. Minter            | Email: A.G.Minter@bnr.co.uk
Principal Research Engineer | Phone: +44 279 403165
BNR Europe Limited          | Fax:   +44 279 451866
London Road, Harlow         | ESN:   742-3165      
Essex  CM17 9NA             | Telex: 81151 BNR HW G
From: fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us (Scott Fybush)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Kauai Phones Back
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:55:00 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 714, Message 8 of 12

The phones are back on Kauai.  I tried calling at about 3 AM eastern
time (9PM Sunday night Sep. 13 there) and got a message saying
facilities were down.  About three hours later, calls were getting
through OK.

The situation there is bad ... phones are back up, but power won't be
for another month.  There's no running water, thousands are homeless,
and information isn't getting out to would-be aid recipients because
the local radio stations are off the air.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 19:05:48 GMT
From: sullivan@warschawski.geom.umn.edu (John M. Sullivan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#"
Organization: Geometry Center, Univ. of Minnesota
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 698, Message 9 of 12

In article <telecom12.684.8@eecs.nwu.edu> rjhawkin@mothra.syr.edu (The
Virtual Kid) writes:

>> The # sign?  The POUND sign!  <grin>

> Oh, I always thought the "#" sign was an abbrivation of the word
> -number- after all, some address books say "phone #:". 

Well, I certainly pronounce it that way, as in "number-include
stuh-die-oh dot h", but around here "hash" (for "hash mark") seems
quite popular.  It is called the "pound sign" because it has been used
for centuries as a symbol for pounds avoirdupois (as opposed to pounds
sterling).  You can probably find it marking the weight of many large
shipping boxes.


John Sullivan
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 15:25:12 GMT
From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States
Organization: AT&T
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 691, Message 11 of 13

In article <telecom12.683.8@eecs.nwu.edu> lairdb@crash.cts.com writes:

>> [Moderator's Note: Actually, I believe one thing Greene did NOT say
>> was how many holding companies there had to be or how many telcos
>> would be assigned to each. I think AT&T was allowed to decide.  PAT]

> Judge Greene:  "Okay, how many little companies?"
> AT&T attorney: "Ummm, how about, ahhhhh... ... one?"

> Hee hee.

Not so hee hee.  EOBS says, quoting directly from the MFJ, "nothing in
this Modification of Final Judgment shall require or prohibit the
consolidation of ownership of the BOCs into any particular number of
entities."

I read this to mean that it would have been perfectly valid for AT&T
to spin off the 22 BOCs into a single holding company, say, American
Local Telephone and Telegraph, *provided* there was *no* corporate
relationship between that holding company and AT&T.
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 09:55:18 PDT
From: lauren@cv.vortex.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Illinois Bell Now Allows Remote Call Forwarding Changes
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 685, Message 8 of 10

Greetings.  Remote call forwarding, as described, could be a very
handy service.  But a few questions pop immediately to mind:

1) How long is the PIN?  (Four digits is not sufficient!)

2) Can the subscriber change the PIN through some relatively "secure"
   mechanism? 

3) Is there any mechanism to notify the subscriber or take other
   actions if there are a large number of incorrect PINs entered
   for a number?  (E.g., by someone with a PC running through the codes
   night after night trying to find someone's PIN?)

4) Can you disable or "opt-out" of the remote feature entirely if you don't
   want it to be available for your number, short of eliminating call
   forwarding from your service entirely?

Let's see how well IBT thought this one out.

 --Lauren--


[Moderator's Note: The remote feature is only turned on if someone
wants to use it; It is only a four digit PIN, however that is a
compromise between convenience and security which seems to work okay
for the majority of subscribers. The number (different for each CO)
that you dial into to use the remote feature *is* equipped to trap
information about who is calling it; I'd be reluctant to change your
call forwarding without permission, have you complain to IBT about it
and have them respond 'oh, it was changed from over at Patrick's house
about three in the morning ...'. All in all, the security is average
and the convenience it affords is above average. A nice trade off.  PAT]
Date: 7 Sep 92 19:54:15 GMT
From: forthd!johnl (John Lebert)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone
Reply-To: johnl%espace@relay.tek.com
Organization: Fourth Dimension, Portland OR
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 694, Message 12 of 13

In article <telecom12.676.6@eecs.nwu.edu>, jhenderson@pomona.
claremont.edu writes:

> I live in the LA area, and use Pac Tel for my cellular service.

> Calls to 911 are free, and you're connected to a CHP dispatcher (I
> assume that most calls for help in this area are from stranded
> motorists). This dispatcher will connect you to other agencies as
> needed.

> Incidentally, the rep that programmed my phone said that even if the
> service is disconnected, 911 calls still go through. I never had my
> service disconnected so I don't know if he was right or not.

I got a cellular phone in with a bunch of computer equipment I got at
an auction here in Portland, Oregon.  I found that 911 *does* work
without being connected to service. This is great, because that is all
I would ever need it for.


John Lebert    johnl@espace
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 11:04:56 EDT
From: ghadsal@american.edu	
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Motorola "Advisor" Pager Question
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 693, Message 5 of 9

Steve,

To answer your question concerning the Motorola Alphanumeric pager
I'll make a couple assumptions; the pager is a PMR2000, and your
service is a for-profit company. BTW - I am not an Motorola empployee.

The PMR2000 has three small holes on the bottom of the unit that look
like contacts for something ... well the PMR2000 has a couple optional
devices; a printer, and charger, and a printer charger. As to which
does what I cannot help you, but I am confident that someone at the
paging company can; if its a local "Ma and Pa" company you are likely
not to get any help, but if its a larger service (ie: Bell Operating
Co like PacTel, Bell Atlantic, NYNEX, etc) or one of the larger
private services like MetroComm, PageNet or even the national company
called SkyTel (MTel) you can expect that *someone* knows how the thing
works.

If you still are not satisfied I would snag the local yellow pages (or
OneBook) and find the nearest MOTOROLA SALES office (not a dealer).
If your not close to one email me ... I'll see what I can do; no
promises or timelines.

A long time ago I helped some people at a non-profit agency in Glen
Burnie, MD called Volunteers for Medical Engineering (VME) with
similar, but unique challenges ... haven't spoken with anyone since
moving away.  Again, no promises.

Also, your friends that have PC's and modems can alphanumerically page
you as well using commercial software; I have a *demo* copy for ONE
alpha USER and ONE paging service I'd be happy to pass on.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 00:01:24 GMT
From: John Wheeler <johnw@group1.COM>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls
Organization: Group One Ltd.; San Francisco, CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 705, Message 4 of 11

capek@watson.ibm.com writes:

> I tried to use the AT&T Alliance Conferencing service, whose number is
> 700-456-1000.  I dialed and got a "cannot be completed as dialed"
> message.  I tried 700-555-4141 to confirm that AT&T was still my
> default carrier, and it was.  It turned out that for the Alliance
> number, one must dial 0 + 700 ... even though the 0 is not necessary
> for 700-555-4141 call.  What's going on here?

Well, I haven't heard AT&T's new EasyReach 700 service mentioned here,
though I haven't been watching real closely ... I'm now a subscriber
to ER700, with a fantastic number (my name!) ...

0 + 700 is ALWAYS needed for ER700. I assumed that was because each LD
carrier can apparently can market/divide 700 services as they see
fit ... does this mean that different carriers can re-use the 700's?

BTW: is 555-4141 still working? I thought it had been discontinued.


John Wheeler  |Informix-4GL / SQL * Unix * Broadcast Audio Production
Group One Ltd.|WTBS Emmy award winner * Global Broadcast Events  
San Francisco


[Moderator's Note: You are correct that each carrier can use the 700
number space as it sees fit. There can be (and are) duplication of
numbers there.  PAT]
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 23:20 PDT
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: New Phone Number Intercept
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 696, Message 5 of 12

On Sep 7 at 22:24, TELECOM Moderator writes:

> Speaking of live operator intercepts, are there still any of those
> situations where the operator responds but cannot hear the caller
> because the LD carrier does not open the mouthpiece until the call has
> supervised, which it will never do with an operator?

> Are all the OCC's opening the talk path now?   PAT]

It was AT&T that (exclusively?) participated in this practice, and it
began some years ago. It was put in place to prevent the practice of
"black boxing" and also to protect itself from itself. It seems that
many of the AT&T PBXes sold and installed by none other than AT&T had
misprogrammed DID circuits that never supervised. Any call made to
such lines was a "free" call.

And we are not talking about just a few systems. This mishandling was
rampant. AT&T was losing big bucks on long distance because of the
incompetence of its own installers and that of its contractors. Also,
there were a few unscrupulous customers who intentionally programmed
DID circuits to never supervise. The fix was to not enable caller to
callee audio until the circuit was supervised. This way the caller
could hear call progress tones, but no two-way communication could
take place.

A complaint from a customer describing this condition would result in
the dispatch of service personnel to reprogram the System 75, 85, or
whatever.

To my knowledge, the OCCs never bothered with this practice. And I
believe AT&T is still doing it.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115
    john@zygot.ati.com      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !
Date: 14 Sep 92 00:10:56 EDT
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: USWest - Helloooo, is Anyone in There?
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 709, Message 2 of 12

> The /lowest/ fees on the system were $.05/minute, and that was
> charged for services like the Joslyn Art Museum's calendar, which I
> could read at the building for free or call a telephone touchtone
> system and get for free.  More standard were rates like $.10 or
> $.15/min.

This sounds very much like the gateway service that New England Tel
tried a year or two ago.  The price was very high and nearly
everything was available elsewhere cheaper, often for free.  People
who tried it tell me that no matter how fast your modem was, data
arrived at 1200 bps.  When they discontinued it NET whined that it was
because they weren't allowed to provide content.

Now they have a Minitel-based directory service but they haven't
publicized it much.  People who've tried it say it's laughably bad,
and probably mostly exists so NET can try to get services
grandfathered in case the regulators sensibly continue to regulate
them out of the content business.


Regards,

John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 10:23:01 CDT
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: USA to Ten Digits
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 709, Message 4 of 12

In article <telecom12.704.7@eecs.nwu.edu> andrew@frip.wv.tek.com
writes:

>> Fred Gaechter at Bellcore has said he sees a similar future
>> for the NANP: dialing ten digits for ALL calls irrespective of
>> whether they're local, toll, or outwith your NPA. Do other
>> Digest readers think this would be acceptable?"

> Absolutely not.  But I didn't think switching from five to seven
> digits for intra-exchange calls was acceptable either ...

   When my home-town exchange went non-SXS last year, they lost the
ability to use four-digit local dialing -- even though the switch
could have supported the town as a Centrex group with four digits.
But things change ...

> [Moderator's Note: The options would seem to be seven digits for local
> (probably the majority of the) calls one makes and eleven digits for
> all others or ten digits for everything since if an area code is
> always required then the leading digit '1' could be dropped. I
> personally prefer the current arrangement even if I do have to dial
> 1-708 for many of my local calls.  PAT]

   Fred's comment (in a published "planning guide") was not individual
opinion, but that of the "North American Numbering Plan
Administration", headed up by Fred.  You have to view the comment in
context with the REASON for the comment.

   The guide assumes a time 20-30 years hence, when the use of overlay
NPA's will cause a lot of "local" calls to require dialing of another
NPA.  In such cases, the callers from those numbers will have to
(usually) dial "1+" on a majority of their calls.  All callers will
have to remember to check the NPA of any neighbor's or business phone
they use, to determine if 1+NPA is needed.  Also, in 30 years, many
calls will be made from phones that have the intelligence to do
dialing from other stimulus (voice, etc.).  Thus, requiring ten-digit
dialing will not be "onerous" and will permit calling any party
without the need to first know from where one is calling.  And it will
"free up" the leading "1" for other uses, perhaps in aiding the
conversion to 4-digit NPAs in the far-distant future -- if the first
such NPAs are 1XXX, they could be easily differentiated from the "old"
NXX-XXX-XXXX numbers.


Al Varney  - just MY opinion.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 14:21:14 GMT
From: jvz@pt.com (John Zambito)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on E&M Signaling Technology
Organization: Performance Technologies, Incorporated
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 697, Message 13 of 13

apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) writes:

> Why do telecommunication professionals always say -48Vdc not +48Vdc?

According to Bellcore:

"Because of corrosion problems, the use of supply potentials that are
positive relative to ground reference is not recommended."


John Zambito, Performance Technologies Incorporated	jvz@pt.com
315 Science Parkway, Rochester, New York 14620    uupsi!ptsys1!jvz