HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 06:50:00 +0000 
From: Greg (G.T.) Stovall <gstovall@bnr.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? 
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 846, Message 1 of 13

In article <telecom12.837.8@eecs.nwu.edu> steve@wrq.com writes:

> I seem to remember a story that appeared in the TELECOM Digest several
> years ago about the SWB-GTE situation in Texas.  There was a large
> company, Atlantic Richfield I think, that moved a large complex from
> an area served by SWB to one served by GTE.  The GTE service was so
> inadequate that they had all of their local lines terminate in SWB
> territory, then piped them into their office in GTE territory via
> private microwave.  GTE got upset about this and sued.  The
> small space they rented in SWB territory) was their business.

Hmm.  Maybe that explains the microwave array on the roof.  When AR
vacated their old facility in Richardson (consolidated into the new
Plano facility) there were still active microwave links on the roof.
I don't know if these were remaining local links for just that
building or if AR still rented the roof space for SWB transmissions.


Gregory T. Stovall        <gstovall@bnr.ca>      
Bell-Northern Research    Richardson, Texas, USA   (214) 684-7009
My opinions are not necessarily endorsed by BNR.
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 10:50:30 -0600 (CST)
From: wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Newbie Question
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 847, Message 9 of 17

In a recent TELECOM Digest, betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz)
writes:

> I just picked up my first cordless phone and am I confused! A few
> questions:

> 1) What's the range on these things? This is a Sony SPP-75, if it
> matters.

Range is advertised as 1000 feet, but in 'real world' urban
conditions, expect anywhere from 100 - 300 foot 'usable' range.  This
figure is dependent upon a myriad of conditions from location of base
unit, type of building construction, portable battery level and
interference from other phones and devices that share the frequencies
that the phones use.

> 2) What's the "auto security code system" for? Does that keep my phone
> from ringing when someone else's does? From hearing someone else's
> call?

Security codes are used by the phone to make it more unlikely that
others can gain access to your line, by using a handset on the same
frequency as your unit.  Security codes also can be used to keep your
portable from ringing when a neighbor's phone is called. They have
nothing to do with overhearing or being overheard.

> 3) What's the relationship between the security codes and ten
> channels?

None.  Channels are the actual radio frequuencies over which the call
is transmitted, security codes are information sent over those
channels as described above.

> 4) Is this thing supposed to be left in the base or can I bring it
> outside and wait for it to ring? Does it have to stand up in the base?

No need to keep it in the base, except for charging.  However, it is
best NOT to keep charging and recharging. Better to use the batteries
until the battery-low light comes on.  Continued short charges can
cause the battery to aquire a short-memory, and begin to lose it's
ability to stay charged for a full term.

> 5) The manual mentions computers and interference. Will the phone
> interfere with the computer, or vice versa? If I get a second line,
> the phone could have the opportunity to interfere with the modem.

The interference is caused BY the computer's cpu clock, and causes the
phone to whistle and whine.  The phone will not bother the computer.

> 6) Finally is this a particularly good or bad phone? 

I have heard good things about the Sony.  Never owned one.


William Pfeiffer
Moderator - rec.radio.broadasting - Internet Radio Journal
To subscribe, send e-mail to 'journal@airwaves.chi.il.us'
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 20:01:29 CST
From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 855, Message 6 of 8

>> Equipment to do this DOES exist.  I work for a railroad, in the
>> telecommunications department (although not the switched network
>> group), and we have equipment (I can't remember the name - I'll refer
>> to it as a DACS, although that is not really an accurate name) that
>> does this.  

> If railroad signaling (I'm a RR wannabe as a hobbyist) is what is
> carried, it is natural to have protection switching (What the telecom
> industry calls its schemes to maintain reliable transmission
> facilities) in place for safety reasons. In the public switched
> telephone network (PSTN), the consequences of dropping a connection
> are not as severe.

Agreed.  I remember a quote from some telco engineer after a fairly
major outage (not sure which one) who said words to the effect of "We
can make the telephone network as reliable as you want, but you'll
have to pay for it."
 
Actually, I believe it is being used for data circuits (important to
the business, but not for safety - there are other protection methods
for safety related stuff such as dispather radios, but that is
irrelevant here), and I think the plan is to put voice trunks (PBX
tie-lines) on it at some point (maybe) ... the point is it could be
done.

>> I an fairly certain that supervision on the trunk will not be lost
>> during the interval that the trunk is being rerouted.  If it was,

> The previous post (this issue) from Al Varney about signaling on DS1
> indicates a very short (less than 125 us) interval needed to maintain
> supervision.  Protection switching operates with switching times of at
> least two orders of magnitude higher. As such, it is highly unlikely
> that individual circuit supervision will survive such a switch.

I don't know what the requirements to maintain supervision are, but
this equipment is better described as a packet switch, rather than a
DACS.  The voice signals are packetized and sent.  (No packets when
the line is quiet, supervision sent only when it changes, etc), and so
the receiving end would (I believe) tolerate a second or two of no
packets without dropping supervision.  (Again, this is general info
only - I am not the engineer in charge of this project). In this case,
there would no NO loss of supervision (for any period of time).

> Now that we've beaten this to death, I reiterate that I know of NO

True.  This is the last I'll say on this topic.  Its certainly
possible that NO telcos use this method.

> telephone companies (this doesn't mean that none exist!) that use this
> approach.

(Well, at some point, you will probably be able to add the railroad's
switched network "mini telco" (but bigger than some real telcos) to
the list that do this).
 

Brett
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 13:31:07 EST
From: Coby M. Ries <coby%deadlock@uunet.UU.NET>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: FYI 215 NXX Additions
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 863, Message 10 of 10

The following is taken from a letter that I received from our local
bypass carrier(Eastern Telelogic):


"Several new NXXs have been introduced into the 215 area.  You may
need to have these NXXs programmed into you PBX.

	NXX		LOCATION		EFFECTIVE DATE
	---		--------		--------------

	239		Norristown		12/15/92
	305		W. Conshohocken		12/15/92
	306		W. Conshohocken		12/15/92
	413		Philadelphia		12/20/92
	619		Ambler			12/10/92
	815		Norristown		01/01/93
	819		Philadelphia		12/01/92
	916		Leesport		12/28/92

These are not the first NXX exchanges to go into affect in the 215
NPA.  About a month ago my boss came into my office telling me he
couldn't reach his wife's car phone at a 215-816-XXXX number.  I am
assuming other NXXs may have been added at that time (approximatly two
months ago).  I am also going to call Eastern Telelogic and request a
copy of the "Updated NXX List".  I post anything that looks relatively
new/interesting.

I also heard from my Bell of PA rep that 215 will be splitting some
time in the near future.  This was according to a Bell of PA internal
letter.  I think he said 810 was the new NPA.  Any truth to this?


Coby Ries, coby%deadlock@uunet.uu.net, Voice +1 215 963 7350
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 00:15:49 GMT
From: phaedrus@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (James Hartman, Sysop)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem
Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 848, Message 5 of 10

normt@ihlpm.att.com (Norman R Tiedemann) writes:

> Next time this happens, tune in the local "wild and crazy" radio
> station and check if you hear yourselves. (Or start shouting
> obsenities.)

According to recent FCC blurbs, it is illegal for a radio station to
broadcast your voice unless you've either been asked and said OK, or
if you call as part of an obvious phone-in portion of a program.

Follow-ups to rec.radio.broadcasting.


phaedrus@unkaphaed.gbdata.com (James Hartman, Sysop)
Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, Houston, TX, (713) 943-2728
1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis
From: ssbc+@andrew.cmu.edu (Sam Swett)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Two Cellular Phones on the Same Number
Date: 16 Nov 92 01:44:31 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 849, Message 2 of 13

> Wait a minute; this is a *clear* example of [I forget, there's a Latin
> term for it], where somebody says something that *appears* to follow
> from something else, but there's actually no relation between the two.

    I believe the phrase you're looking for is "non sequitor", meaning
"does not follow"...


sam (equipped with airbag)
From: lederman@dts66.uscghq.uscg.mil (B. Z. Lederman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telecom Quotations
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:28:55 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 861, Message 5 of 9


    I missed your original request for telephone quotations.

    One of my favorites comes from the "Two Ronnies", an English
television show where they used to do a pseudo news reading.

    "So many people have written to complain about the telephone
service that the Post Office is actually going to show a profit this
year."


Bart Z. Lederman    System Resources Corp.
From: tjh+@cmu.edu (Tom Holodnik)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Testing Long Distance Connections
Date: 16 Nov 92 15:57:32 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 853, Message 4 of 13

Is there a way I can test a particular modem over a long distance
line, without travelling long distance?

The things I'd like to test are:
	- whether a particular modem is sensitive to noise unique to long
distance connections.
	- whether a particular modem works better over one long distance
carrier than another. 

The gist of this is that I'd like to know, per long distance carrier,
how to set up a long distance loopback.  Is this possible?  Would I
need to enlist the aid of another party somewhere?


Thanks (much),

Tom Holodnik    Network Development    Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 11:08:41 PST
From: bier@acuson.com (Jeff Bier)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Telephone Headsets and Cordless Headsets
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 842, Message 9 of 14

I'm seeking recommendations on telephone headsets.  I have in mind the
kind that replaces the handset on a typical telephone.  I'm also
curious to know if anyone makes a cordless telephone headset.


Thanks,

Jeff Bier   bier@acuson.com   (415) 694-5827
Date: 15 NOV 92 04:03   
From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Dial Tone on CATV
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 852, Message 5 of 14

With all the talk about cable companies wanting to compete with LECs
for local dial tone, I started wondering: how can a cable company
offer dial tone, when their cable runs out from their office, with
houses strung off it (instead of LEC wires, which form individual
local loops with houses)?  How can they keep everyone's calls
separate?  I guess they could put everyone on a different frequency,
but that would probably use up all of the cable, and then some.  Don't
they want to leave room for TV?


Randy Gellens                randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com|
A Series System Software                 if mail bounces,  forward to|
Unisys Mission Viejo, CA                         rgellens@mcimail.com|
Opinions are personal;   facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself|
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 92 08:39 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Weird Sales Call
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 842, Message 5 of 14

A few days ago during the dinner hour I had the most unusual sales
call of all time. Phone rings and when I answer it the person on the
other end says, "Jim?"  When I indicated that the person must have a
wrong number, I waited the usual 500 ms for a reply and then receiving
none, hung up the phone.

He then immediately calls back and says, "John?" "Speaking" "I got the
name wrong; you will have to be a little more patient. This is Jeff
Somebodyorother with Somethingorothertronics and I'm calling about
some equipment you might be interested in."

At that point I interrupted with, "Wait a minute. You call me during
the dinner hour, disturb my meal, call me by the wrong name and then
tell me to be more patient? I don't know if I am really interested."

The person at the other end let out a small, Sardonic chuckle, and
then hung up the phone in my ear. Now this is what I call slick
salesmanship.

Here is my theory: The person was from an antenna components
manufacturer. He got wind that I am about to move an AM transmitting
facility and called to hawk his wares. It so happens that this
particular company does indeed make quality parts and it is highly
likely that they may be used in the new project. But this particular
salestype has a lot to learn about his presentations and his
preliminaries!

As it happens, there is another, well-known-in-the-broadcast-biz
salescritter whom I will never buy from again. We were buying
equipment for a major project for a station in San Francisco and this
gentleman called late in the afternoon. I had stepped out and got his
message upon my return. Since it was late in the day, I opted to
return his call the next morning. When I did so, Mr. Salescritter
launched into a lecture on telephone courtesy, lambasting me for not
returning his call the day before (at 4:55 PM when I got the message).
I told him that I did not think it was really his place to instruct me
on "how to be a good customer and polite telephone user." His
"retaliation" for my remarks was to call the station owner and tell
him what a bad person I was and how I was impossible to work with.

The station owner, who has known me for years and years, agreed. His
solution to the problem? He cancelled all of the orders with this guy
and told him that he would not have to deal with me anymore. And
another distributor got the station's business.

And who says life is not fair?


John Higdon  |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115     |       FAX:
john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | +1 408 264 4407
From: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin N9ITP)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Date: 16 Nov 92 07:24:53 GMT
Reply-To: hpa@nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 854, Message 5 of 12

In article <telecom12.847.2@eecs.nwu.edu> of comp.dcom.telecom,
Alistair Grant <100032.525@CompuServe.COM> writes:

> The response about DTMF tones was great. Every one says I need
> both tones, not the average -- ok -- but my physics book says that
> when two pure frequencies are emitted then the resultant frequency and
> frequency only is the average.

> Anyway with just one speaker how do I emulate two tones so as to
> fool the phone? I have seen watches that dial telephone number; how do
> they do it?

They do it by feeding the sum of two sinusoids to their single
speaker.  It is just that the phony square wave generator of the PC
only can generate 0's and 1's, which is not good enough.

Your physics book is correct, with a reservation.  It all is due to
the equation:

   cos(f1) + cos(f2) = 2 * cos((f1+f2)/2) * cos((f1-f2)/2)
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                           Average freq.    Difference freq.

If the difference between the two frequencies is significantly smaller
than the average, the waveform looks like the average frequency
*modulated by the difference frequency*.  These two frequencies are
called _carrier_frequency_ and _beat_frequency_, respectively.

I'd suggest putting this equation in a spreadsheet model and plot out
the graph.  It will be very clear, but do it over enough periods so
the pattern is clear.  Then go out and get a synthesizer board,
preferrably one which handles digitized sound.  Then all you need to
do is compute the equation above and feed it to the DAC.


hpa
INTERNET:  hpa@nwu.edu   TALK:      hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
BITNET:    HPA@NUACC     IBMNET:    16331@IBMX400
HAM RADIO: N9ITP         NeXTMAIL:  hpa@lenny.acns.nwu.edu
Date: 15 Nov 92 01:27:45 PST (Sun)
From: john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Private Lines, Bandwidth
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 846, Message 4 of 13

Alan Boritz <72446.461@CompuServe.COM> writes:

> AT&T, NY Tel, and just about every other telco in the US use *0 dBm*
> as their nominal level transmission standard, NOT +8.

> That's a hell of an example to set for a public radio station at an
> educational institution: know your standards ... and ignore them.

Decades ago, I was involved with a small classical station that had
its studio in Los Gatos (GTE).  We had just moved the programming
operation from the transmitter site up on the hill and had 15KHz phone
lines installed. From day one, the lines were nothing but trouble.
They were muddy. They were unreliable. They had about 50 db loss. If
you think GTE is incompetent now, you should have seen it back in the
late sixties!

Since the studio and the transmitter were "served" out of the same
office, it would have seemed a simple matter for GTE to have provided
decent circuits. But no. We managed to equalize the muddiness out
ourselves. But the worst problem was the incessant "dialing clicks"
that could be heard over the loudest fortissimo passages and that
would raise one right out of his chair during the pianissimo segments.

Our solution was unconventional. We impedance-matched a pair of Dynaco
amplifiers to the phone lines at the studio end. Then we drove them at
about the ten-watt level. This had the effect of pushing the dial
clicks down about thirty decibels, but had the additional effect of
leaking symphonic music into a number of telephones in the area. GTE
was furious. So were we. It ended up being a standoff (GTE did not
disconnect us; we did not go to the PUC) until the station was sold
and the new owners bought a 950 MHz link to the studio and also began
playing rock music.


John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com> (hiding out in the desert)
From: jadams@vixen.cc.bellcore.com (adams,john)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Looking For Three-Slot Coin Phone
Date: 21 Nov 92 12:47:38 GMT
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 866, Message 8 of 12

In article <telecom12.853.5@eecs.nwu.edu> jsimpson@darmok.uoregon.edu
(John Simpson) writes:

> I've always enjoyed the sound of the coin bells inside the old
> three-slot payphones.  I would like to own one for myself to use
> inside my residence.

> Of course I would want a coinbox key!  I have two big questions,
> first, is it kosher to have a coin phone on a private residential
> line? Second, where can I buy one of these beasts?

Yes. Of course it will only function as a normal instrument ... it
won't collect or reject coins without a coin service line from the
phone company.  My friend, Ken LaFreniere (AT&T Coin Telephone Product
Manager), told me about three small companies who specialize in
refurbishing (mechnically and electrically) old coin phones from
Western Electric, Automatic Electric, Northern, etc.  I have called
for their catalogues and will be purchasing one of the old WE 233
multislot units as a present for a retiree!  The names and telephones:

	PHONECO			608-582-4124
	RUSSELL PATE		407-777-1759
	A.W. MERRELL & CO	407-655-5417


Jack (John) Adams		Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
(908) 758-5372 {Voice}		(908) 758-4389 {Facsimile}
jadams@vixen.bellcore.com	kahuna@attmail.com
From: 0003991080@mcimail.com (Proctor & Associates)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Nicad "Memory Effect" (was Cordless Phone Newbie Question)
Date: 16 Nov 92 22:00:00 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 853, Message 7 of 13

In a recent TELECOM Digest, betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz)
writes:
 
> 4) Is this thing supposed to be left in the base or can I bring it
> outside and wait for it to ring? Does it have to stand up in the base?
 
wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer) responds:
 
> No need to keep it in the base, except for charging.  However, it is
> best NOT to keep charging and recharging. Better to use the batteries
> until the battery-low light comes on.  Continued short charges can
> cause the battery to aquire a short-memory, and begin to lose it's
> ability to stay charged for a full term.
 
Actually, the "memory effect" myth about nicad batteries has been
pretty well debunked.
 
Turns out that a memory effect can only be demonstrated under very
carefully controlled lab conditions, where the cell is slightly
discharged hundreds of times to exactly the same discharge point.
Otherwise it does not exist.
 
The most damage done to nicad cells by the memory effect is when users
attempt to fully discharge the cells to avoid the mythical effect, and
then drive it into reverse polarity, damaging the cells.
 
Sorry I don't have references with me on this.  There was an article
in the past year in QST (a ham radio magazine, published by the
American Radio Relay League) about this, and a few years back there
was an item in QST Technical Correspondence from a battery engineer at
Gould explaining that memory effect in nicads does not exist.
 
The myth is quite popular though.  I have seen ads for fancy
microprocessor controlled nicad charges that carefully do a deep
discharge before each charge.
 
 
Paul Cook                        206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates        MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.           fax: 206-885-3282
Redmond, WA  98052-5317   3991080@mcimail.com