HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kaufman@xenon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: AT&T 'Buying Back' Customers
Date: 13 Sep 92 20:06:47 GMT
Reply-To: kaufman@cs.stanford.edu
Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 708, Message 6 of 11

levitt@zorro9.fidonet.org (Ken Levitt) writes:

> I have a business line which has what New England Tel calls "Remote
> Call Forwarding".  This means that my business number is permenantly
> and forever forwarded to another number.  That phone number only
> appears in the CO.  Since there can never be a phone connected to it,
> it would be impossible to ever make an outgoing call on it.

> A few months back I received one of the AT&T chechs in the mail that I
> could cash if I was willing to switch this line to them.  I cashed the
> check and allowed them to switch this line to AT&T.  A few weeks
> later, I received a letter from AT&T thanking me for switching.

> I guess if I ever made a LD call and charged it to that number, it
> would be billed through AT&T, but I am not likely to do that.

I have such a line, and a calling card attached to the number.
Whenever I use the calling card, AT&T calls me a few nights later and
asks me if I want to switch.  I always say yes, and get my $20 in
vouchers, or whatever.

What makes this so much fun, is that the originating CO (in my case)
does not keep a record of a 1+ carrier for the forwarding entry, so
every time AT&T checks they discover that the 1+ carrier is NOT AT&T.
So they call me again and offer to give me $20 to switch.  I think I
currently have a net credit on long distance charges.

Attempts to explain the situation to the marketing droids are not
successful.  So I figure I have done my due dilligence and cash the
voucher.


Marc Kaufman (kaufman@CS.Stanford.EDU)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 03:33:40 GMT
From: GeraldR@sunfish.ratsys.com (Gerald Ruderman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware?
Organization: Rational Systems, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 698, Message 2 of 12

In article <telecom12.685.1@eecs.nwu.edu> toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch)
writes:

> The reseller salesperson/owner tried to make dialing the 14 or so
> extra digits and lack of one-plus dialing (he doesn't have
> arrangements with the local telco to offer one-plus dialing) a
> "feature" because you can keep your existing long distance company for
> "emergencies". 

When I lived in an area served by GTE with only two connections
between the CO and the long distance network I found the "emergency"
feature of a reseller very handy. Their conection to the outside world
was always working when my 1+ connection was blocked by failure or
overloading.


Gerald Ruderman                                   geraldr@ratsys.com
From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV (Paul Robinson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: I-Net Awarded Air Force Contract
Date: 10 Sep 92 22:33:32 GMT
Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 699, Message 2 of 11

Montgomery County [Maryland] {Gazette},  Sept 9, 1992 page A-40

By Bill Borda, Staff Writer

   Bethesda-based I-NET, Inc. has won a contract worth nearly $40
million from the Air Force for telecommunications and computer
services.

   The contract call for I-NET "to enhance (the Air Force's)
telecommunications systems through computer applcations," said Jeff
Rosolio, the company's vice president of administration.

   Rosolio said the contract covers a broad range of services,
including systems engineering, technical, logistic and management
services.

   The contract calls for I-NET to do work on the telecommunication
systems at Scott Air Force Base, Ill., Gunter Air Force Base, Ala.,
and Tinker Air Force Base, Okla., he said.
From: gavron@spades.aces.com (Ehud Gavron 602-570-2000 x. 2546)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Radios in Die Hard
Date: 12 Sep 92 16:16:00 GMT
Reply-To: gavron@ACES.COM
Organization: ACES Consulting Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 701, Message 9 of 10

In article <telecom12.691.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, johng@comm.mot.com (John
Gilbert) writes:

> My favorites from the Die Hard movies were:

> In the first movie where the portable two-way radios talk to the bad
> guys inside the building, but when taken to the roof talk to the
> police on the same frequency. (These are those fancy full-duplex
> two-way radios). Not a very good choice of frequencies by the bad
> guys, or very wise placement of voting receivers by the police.

The radios in mention are Kenwood TH45AT 70cm (400MHz band) transceiv-
ers, which most amateur radio operators (hamsters) are familiar with.
Police bands exist in the 70cm band and also in the 2m band (150MHz)
as well as others.

I searched through my frequency directory and cannot locate which
bands the FCC allocates for Bad Guys (tm).  Therefore using Bad Guys
Logic (tm) I assume they can use any band as it becomes convenient.

Never forget though -- the police accused our hero of being on CB
Channel 9.  No respectable ham radio does CB*, and it is no crime to
blabber on channel 9 yelling for help.


Ehud Gavron  (EG76)   gavron@vesta.sunquest.com
From: uflorida!novavax!burtond@gatech.edu (Donald B. Burton)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How do You Pronounce "#"
Date: 13 Sep 92 18:25:46 GMT
Organization: Nova University, Fort Lauderdale, FL
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 709, Message 12 of 12

# is commonly called the pound sign or the number sign ... and less
commonly the crosshatch, the tic-tac-toe ... and even octothorpe.

MCI started using it to indicate you want to continue a second call on
the same billing.  Now AT&T and Sprint also use them.
From: TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA (Tony Harminc)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Vermont Payphones
Date: 11 Sep 92 00:30:10 GMT
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 699, Message 3 of 11

I spent a few very pleasant days of vacation in Vermont, and noticed a
couple of curious things making calls from payphones:
 
1) I didn't see a single COCOT.  Are they illegal in the state?
 
2) A very high proportion of NETel payphones had rotary dials.  Tone
service was clearly available to residence and business customers,
but I didn't see a single payphone with keypad in Stowe or surrounds.
 
3) The NETel payphones seem to have several different default LD
carriers.  I would have thought the LEC would sign up with a single
carrier for all its phones.  Sometimes the default was AT&T for both
1+ and 0+ calls; in other cases it was AT&T for 1+ and (say) USSprint
for 0+.
 
4) While making a calling card call from one of the rotary dial phones
with USSprint as default, I had some problems: I dialed 0 416
745-xxxx, waited *forever* (i.e. 20-25 seconds :-) ), got a Sprint
message asking me to key in my calling card number or hit 0 for an
operator, waited *forever* for the timeout, got the Sprint operator
who seemed slightly surprised that all I wanted to do was make a
calling card call, gave the card number to him, waited a short
*forever* (about 10 seconds), he said "there -- just validating your
card, it's going through now", and I was dumped into a ringing tone
followed by "the card number you have entered was not valid -- please
try again".
 
Grump!  Of course by this time the operator was long gone, and I had
no way of rekeying the number.  I started the whole thing again, this
time told the operator what had happened and asked him if my Bell
Canada calling card (old format number) should work and to please stay
on the line until validation.  He said it should, and he would.  He
didn't, and it didn't.
 
I dialed 10288, told AT&T all about it, and was connected in a few
seconds.
 
So who was right?  Should my Bell card number work with Sprint?
Do US LEC cards work with Sprint ?
 

Tony H.
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:38:10 GMT
From: srogers@tad.eds.com (Steve Rogers)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: ISDN Messaging and Answering Demonstration
Organization: EDS Technology Architecture, Dallas
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 699, Message 4 of 11

[Received in the mail, and passed along to the Digest.]

Dear Telecommunications and Messaging Industry Professionals:

We are pleased to invite you to attend the October 28, 1992 meeting of
the North American ISDN Users' Forum (NIUF) Messaging and Answering
Group.  This meeting is part of the October 26-30, 1992 NIUF being
held at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in
Gaithersburg, Maryland.  The NIUF has created a strong user voice in
the implementation of geographically consistent ISDN and ISDN
applications and has helped to ensure that the emerging ISDN
environment meets users' application needs.  More specifically, the
NIUF Messaging and Answering Group focuses on how messaging and
answering applications can be realized in an ISDN environment.
Applications include defining ISDN interfaces for Voice Mail,
Electronic Mail and Fax Mail, Transparent Networking of Voice Mail
Systems (VMS), Centralized VMS, Unified Message Retrieval, and Unified
Message Notification.

At this meeting you will have an opportunity to preview a prototype
ISDN application which provides an integrated desktop, including a
single user interface for notification and retrieval of voice, email
and fax messages.  This service demonstrates functionalities addressed
in the following NIUF applications:

Unified Message Retrieval (Application #160009.0) and Unified
Message Notification (Application #810035.0).  Included as one of the
TRanscontinental ISDN Project 1992 (TRIP '92) applications, this
service is being developed specifically for use with standardized ISDN
utilizing X.25 packet messaging over the ISDN D-channel.  TRIP '92
will bring together members of the telecommunications industry to
showcase real life uses of ISDN and the national scope of the ISDN
network.

We encourage participation from messaging vendors, enhanced service
providers, RBOCs, and businesses with their own messaging needs.  With
your involvement, we can make these and other ISDN applications a
reality.

For more information about the North American ISDN Users' Forum and
registration material, please contact Dawn Hoffman, National Institute
of Standards and Technology, Building 223, Room B364, Gaithersburg, MD
20899, at 301-975-2937.


Sincerely,

Glenn Ehley, Siemens Stromberg-Carlson
Chair, NIUF ISDN Implementors' Workshop

                       ---------------
                            
Steve Rogers	srogers@tad.eds.com DS  Dallas, Texas
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 03:56:57 EDT
From: David Leibold <DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Finding Your Own Number - a few Canadian updates
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 689, Message 17 of 19

During a recent vacation through the west (I won't mention in too much
detail the disastrous attempt to meet the Moderator in person :-() I
encountered a few more ANI numbers which may not be in current lists:

204 (Manitoba) area: dial 644 or 644.xxxx (where the xxxx digits don't
matter) and get your number read back ... one habit of the device is
that the seven digits will be spoken, then the first digit is spoken
again before the thing cuts off. 644 didn't seem to work in Churchill,
though.  (As a side note, Churchill recorded messages like to end with
the code "CHHL", presumably part of the CLLI designation (common
language) that represents the CHurcHiLl, Manitoba exchange).

In 403, at least in Edmonton (run by Ed Tel, as opposed to AGT in the
rest of Alberta), 311 should read the number back. Three years ago, in
some cases, 999 would also do this function.

I forgot what the code was in British Columbia, but it was one of the
N11 type codes ... 311 or 511.

More vacation details may follow, considering the holiday isn't quite
over yet.


dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:12:21 GMT
From: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com (Andrew Klossner)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: "911" as an Area Code?
Reply-To: andrew@frip.wv.tek.com
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville, Oregon
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 695, Message 1 of 14

> "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 ..."

Maybe not.  My mother-in-law once started a call to Kansas at 913-780,
but she aborted the call after punching 1-9-1.  A 911 operator called
her and asked if she'd tried to dial 911.  She is convincing when she
says that she's sure she dialed 1-9-1 and not some other sequence.

It would be interesting to know just what key combinations her CO (in
Albuquerque, 505-898) routes to 911.


Andrew Klossner  (andrew@frip.wv.tek.com)
  (uunet!tektronix!frip.WV.TEK!andrew)
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 11:40:32 EDT
From: capek@watson.ibm.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Having to Dial 0 + 700 on Calls
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 688, Message 11 of 13

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?

Is the leading 0 some sort of acknowledgement by me that this is a
chargeable call?  If I dial the 0, is it presented by my LEC to AT&T
in a different way than if I don't dial it?  Also, where was the
message generated? By the LEC or by AT&T?  If the latter, is there a
technical reason why they couldn't easily have figured out what I
wanted and what I was doing wrong, and told me, rather than forcing me
to call around to find out.  (The service worked wondefully, by the
way, once I got through to it ...)


Peter Capek


[Moderator's Note: Zero-plussing generally indicates that you are
requesting the assistance of the operator for some task other than a
straight direct-dialed call. The 'operator' might only be a computer
you deal with (ie. the automated collect calling and third number
billing some telcos use now-a-days), but that is beside the point.
Setting up conference calls is a function of the 'operator', and all
'operator assisted' calls carry a surcharge.   PAT]
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:17:07 GMT
From: anthony@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Anthony J Stieber)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 696, Message 2 of 12

In article <telecom12.681.7@eecs.nwu.edu> cgordon@vpnet.chi.il.us
(gordon hlavenka) writes:

> Exactly.  No uplink calling on Airfone.  Never had it.  Possibly never
> will, for political rather than technical reasons.  Imagine an
> insurance salesman or 12-year-old prankster (or terrorist!) calling up
> to random airplanes. Now try and find a _cost-effective_ way to
> prevent these calls.

The only reason to be able to do uplink calls would be to call someone
back after leaving a message or something similar.  Simply have the
phone number of the Airfone change, and have that number be current
only for that flight.  Phones from which calls are not made are
totally inaccesable.  Several digit extensions would probably be
needed to prevent someone from randomly dialing Airfone extensions and
stumbling across an active line.


Anthony Stieber	 anthony@csd4.csd.uwm.edu   uwm!uwmcsd4!anthony
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 09:49:58 EDT
From: Jerry Leichter <leichter@lrw.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Voice Message Service
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 6 of 11

As a general rule, I agree with John Higdon's complaints about LEC use
a regulated, protected base to get into unregulated markets.  However,
his recent tirades about a new Pac*Bell proposal to allow you to have
the system deliver a message if you call from a pay phone and there is
no answer is a bit off the mark.

In response to someone else's comment:

> Around here only the COCOTs offer that leave a message on busy
> service ...

Mr. Higdon remarks:

> Notice how as with the information providing business, the field has
> been tried and tested by true entrepreneurs who had to put up real
> risk capital to try out their ideas. Once a market seems to be viable,
> then the telco muscles its way into the market with its network
> control and ratepayer subsidization.

The first time I saw an example of this service, it was at an
SNET-owned and operated pay phone outside of Hartford, Connecticut
about two years ago.  Since I haven't seen it elsewhere even to this
date, I've always assumed that was a trial implementation.  The
service cost either 25 or 50 cents (I think the former) above the base
cost of the call (in-state calls only).  It was very nicely
implemented.

Unless someone can find an older COCOT implementation, I'm afraid the
points for "innovation" go to the operating companies here.

> Then it offers a better product at a cheaper price, putting the
> competition out of business.

Tell me, as a consumer, am I supposed to be upset about this?  The
traditional anti-monopoly line says "once the competition is out of
the business they'll raise prices and you won't have any alternative
but to pay".  If that's the claim, fine; but if the only complaint is
that:

> Of course it does this with free money and its superior network
> access.

then why should I, as a consumer, care?  Neither "choice" nor the
financial health of entrepreneurs in the telecom business is of
importance to me; product quality and price are what I care about.


Jerry
From: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca (Ben Armstrong)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Develswitch RS232 Connectivity Product
Date: 10 Sep 92 18:40:40 GMT
Organization: Dymaxion Research Limited, NS, Canada
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 700, Message 3 of 11

Is anyone out there still using a Develswitch (manufactured by
Develcom Electronics)?  For those not 'in the know' the Develswitch is
an RS232 connectivity product.

We have a five-shelf unit, which when fully populated with boards
could handle up to around 256 RS232 connections.  We want to know if
there are any remaining in production as we are considering replacing
ours.

Please respond via E-Mail to RR@dymaxion.ns.ca or call the number
below and ask for Rod Regier (pronounced re-GEER).


Ben Armstrong, Software Development        bus: (902)422-1973
Dymaxion Research Ltd.,                    fax: (902)421-1267
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3J 1R2  Internet: bg@dymaxion.ns.ca
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 20:34:56 GMT
From: nackee@tdd.sj.nec.com (N. Nackeeran)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: NT EBS Information Request
Organization: NEC-AM TDD, San Jose, California
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 713, Message 5 of 16

Can anyqone send me the datails of EBS (Electronic Business Service)
provided by Northen Telecom. It is supposed to be using P-Phone. I
would like to know the feature and the typical usage.  Please e-mail
to 'nackee@tdd.sj.nec.com'.


Thanks,

N.Nackeeran
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:29:18
From: Adam Ashby <adama@bnr.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Mitel Telecom Questions 
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 712, Message 7 of 14

Hi PAT,

A couple of questions for your Canadian audience here ...

1) What products are Mitel producing these days?
2) Where (geographically) are their markets?
3) Are they making any money?
4) Who bought BT's share?
5) Why - on the London market anyway - are Mitel's shares so high?  They
   are currently around 100p having languished around 40p for years.
6) What goes on in the (newish) Mitel building in Slough?
7) Is the Caldicot factory still up and running?

And lastly, but by no means leastly, does anyone (Mitel/Newbridge)
know the whereabouts of Dr. Don Mills, one of Terry's erstwhile
partners in many ventures, including the hotel in Wales, who could
talk the hind legs off a donkey -- whatever that means!

My coffee mug has prompted this curiosity -- it celebrates Mitel's
first $100,000,000 year in 1981.  I'll bet they could do with a few of
those again!!


Adam
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 01:04:41 CDT
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Strange MCI Problem
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 705, Message 8 of 11

In article <telecom12.696.7@eecs.nwu.edu> vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET
(26070-adams) writes:

> In article <telecom12.688.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill
> Huttig) writes:

>> I had a strange thing happen to me tonight. I called my aunt and
>> after dialing heard nothing; no ringing or noise at all, so I tried
>> several more times. At first I thought it might be that the speed
>> dial lost the end of the number so I dialed it (well actually pushed)
>> the number manually ... still no luck

>> Is this what can happen with a SS7 problem? The ringing through but no
>> voice path getting opened?

> Not according to what I've read.  Call set up protocol with SS7 (By
> the way, I strongly doubt you were SS7 connected) currently utilizes
> "distant end" ring back which is a strong indication that all went
> well with YOUR LEC and MCI, but the ball was dropped by the distant
> LEC, when your aunt answered.  The good news is that since "cut
> through" did not occur, a billing record was never completed either ...
> whew!

   Jack, there's another SS7-related failure mode that can yield these
symptoms.  Since no MF tones or winks occur on an SS7 circuit, it's
possible to signal the called party, have them answer and trip
billing, without a working voice circuit.  The protocol provides for
what's called a Voice Path Assurance (VPA) test on some percentage of
the calls (0-100%).  Usually a facility failure ("backhoe fade", etc.)
triggers a Carrier Alarm, blocking the circuits from future calls
until cleared.  But if that mechanism was broken, and the VPA test
wasn't run on your particular call, or any of your re-attempts, ...
well, just check your bill.

   I can't comment on SS7 to ICs.


Al Varney - just MY opinion.