HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 06:26:21 -0700
From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Reply-To: henry@ads.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 630, Message 5 of 5

andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) wrote:

> henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) said:

>> I just found this out, too. It almost seems pointless ... why bother
>> when it only works with numbers in your neighborhood?

> A LATA is a lot bigger than your neighborhood.  It is usually much of
> your state.  

But enough of my incoming calls are from out-of-state (and, often
enough, outside the US) that the feature currently has diminished
value.

Still, being an optimist, I signed up for it.
From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Panel Still in Use?
Date: 15 Aug 92 20:14:02 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 633, Message 10 of 10

In article <telecom12.595.2@eecs.nwu.edu> dave@westmark.com (Dave
Levenson) writes:

> I remember reading that the last panel dial office in the US was
> retired from service in Newark, NJ, in the early 1980's.  I don't know
> how many step-by-step switches are still in service, but I think some
> rural areas with very small telephone populations still use them.

I remember seeing a human interest program called "Inside America,"
which talked about a telco called Century Telephone which serves
subscribers in a little-populated rural area.  All service is manual,
with such beasts as 17 party lines not being uncommon.

They had a short interview with one of the townspeople's daughter who
went away to college in California.  She talked about how none of the
LD operators will believe the phone number she gives them, something
like 3314TG (not exactly, but close).

I'm intersted in knowing what is meant when one speaks of "panel."  Is
that another word for switchboard, or is it some anti-Strowger
monstrosity?


[Moderator's Note: Well, you are the second person today to ask for a
more precise definition of panel (as in type of central office.) Maybe
someone will write an article on the differences between panel and
other older types of equipment.   PAT]
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 16:51:57 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <sichermn@csulb.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Unreliable Call Return Feature on Southwestern Bell
Organization: Cal State Long Beach
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 643, Message 1 of 13

In article <telecom12.634.1@eecs.nwu.edu> rex@iqsc.COM (Rex Black)
writes:

> I originally posted this article to the Risks Digest, where it
> generated a lot of comment and questions.  A fellow reader suggested
> that the conversation be moved here so it could generate more light
> than heat.

 [ most of story deleted ]

> On Monday, I called Southwestern Bell and explained my concern.  While
> the person I spoke with understood my concern, he did not help.  He
> repeated the standard disclaimer about "no phone system is perfect,
> the phone company can not guarantee accuracy, blah, blah, CYA,
> CSWBA..."  I did manage to get from him some further information:
> First, this was hardly the first time this happened.  He mentioned
> that incidents like mine occur frequently.  Second, the phone
> company's policy requires that, before turning a case over to the
> police, someone must repeatedly call and harass someone.  One instance
> does not suffice.

> [Moderator's Note: It either identified you as one of those things, or
> it possibly identified the person who returned the call to you as a
> crackpot, which is not unheard of. Nothing is perfect, but I would not
> resist this technology simply because of occassional errors.   PAT]

  As a long-time computer-type, I would never propose or require that
a system be (provably) perfect before deployment, but perhaps the
phone companies should take a bunch of those marketing dollars and
legal fees that are being used to push Caller-ID and other CLASS
features and put them into further quality control ... oops, please
forgive me, but that doesn't generate any revenue.

  And if it doesn't work reliably for call return, what does that
imply about Caller-ID and Call-Trace, the latter of which they charge
a pretty premium and may, in many cases, be used for and carry some
legal purpose and weight. With these kind of unreliable technologies
people may find themselves fingered by and, in effect, convicted by
machine and/or having to prove their innocence because the equipment
wouldn't lie.


Jeff Sicherman
Date: 14 AUG 92 15:04   
From: MPA15C!ARTHUR@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: L O U D  Indoor Ringer Wanted
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 628, Message 3 of 11

Pat, I've been pleasantly inundated with responses to this request,
and as some folks were interested in what I found out, can I take a
few lines to summarize?  First of all, thanks everyone!  There were
far too many of you to easily send individual thanks, as our gateway
to Internet is somewhat awkward.

Many folks referred to the Radio Shack catalogue.  I erroneously
thought that the loud bells had been defenestrated from the RS
catalogue, but it turned out my own catalogue had had that page
mangled and folded under.  My error.  Interestingly, most Radio Shack
stores used to carry that item in stock, but at least around here the
several stores I frequent seem not to keep it out on the shelf.  That
contributed to my belief that it had been dropped.

I received several mentions of Hello Direct, apparently a well-known
firm but unfamiliar to me.  Others talked of contacting support
organizations for the hearing impaired, and others mentioned the
devices that flash lights or strobes in response to detecting ring.
Several folks suggested plugging obnoxiously loud things like blenders
into such a device!  There were other references to firms marketing
ringers for such locations as factory floors and for farms.

I ended up purchasing an old, pre-breakup Bell external ring unit from
a gentleman who had it just gathering dust in the garage.  It arrived
yesterday, and seems quite (but not EXCRUTIATINGLY) loud.  I'll be
visiting the victim early next month, so we'll see if the unit
suffices.  If not, we'll go with one of the "heavy hitters".


Arthur L. Shapiro        ARTHUR%MPA15C@TRENGA.TREDYDEV.UNISYS.COM
Software Engineering
Unisys Corporation       Speaking as a civilian, rather than for
Mission Viejo, CA        Unisys, unless this box is checked: [ ]
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 16:06:31 EDT
From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Bizarre Answering Machine Behavior
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 648, Message 8 of 10

In article 6@eecs.nwu.edu, jrblack@csn.org (Roger Black) writes:

> The problem is this: When the unit hits the appropriate ring, it
> dutifully answers the phone -- and then drops the line.  The caller
> does not hear the outgoing message, does not get a beep, has no
> opportunity to leave a message; all he/she gets is a deep silence
> followed by a disconnect.  The little red "in use" light flashes as it
> is supposed to while the phone is ringing, but goes out as soon as the
> phone is answered and never comes back until the next call.
 ...

> The people at AT&T did suggest that maybe the local line voltage was
> too low, so I put a meter on it.  It shows 50 volts when waiting for a
> call or ringing, but drops to about 8 to 12 volts when the phone is
> answered.  I asked the U.S. West repair service if that was normal,
> and they told me they didn't know anything about voltage levels and
> had no way of finding out.  Ditto with the repairman.  As you can
> imagine, that failed to instill in me a deep sense of security about
> the quality of our local service.

You shouldn't have to, but perhaps you should have asked the local
folks about *loop* voltage.  If they disclaim all knowledge of what
loop voltage might be, ask for their bosses.

Meanwhile, the data you have are quite suggestive.  I assume that the
answering machine is crapping out because the loop voltage drops to an
unacceptably low level.  Here's a couple more experiments for you to
try.  Measure the loop voltage for the following situations:

a) phone in the answering machine off hook;
b) AT&T answering machine off hook;
c) PhoneMate answering machine off hook;
d) some other working phone off hook.

If they are all consistently low, check your inside wiring and/or yell
at U.S. West.  If only one is low, have that device checked out.


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: Wed, 12 Aug 92 12:04:33 PDT
From: lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Pacific Bell Ads For CLASS
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 623, Message 8 of 11

Greetings.  The PacBell CLASS ads are somewhat misleading in a number
of ways.  Their promotion of priority ringing strongly implies that
it's the person calling you who triggers the "special" ring, not that
it will only work if they are calling from the officially entered
number -- not from anywhere else (such as the proverbial payphone).
No mention is made of limits to the length of the number list either.

In most cases, for the purposes that PacBell is promoting this
"service," conventional "distinctive" ringing, where the different
rings are based on the number the callee dialed (and so will work
regardless of where they are calling from) is much more versatile in
practice.  Distinctive ringing has been available from GTE Calif. for
a long time (under the name "Smart Ring").

The PacBell promotion of Repeat Dialing is also misleading in a way
that might be considered minor, but certainly gives a false
impression.  A busy woman gets the triple ring indicating a repeat
dialing "completion" and immediately goes over, picks up the phone,
and says "oh hi ..."  As we know, that's not the way it really works.
After she picked up the phone, the switch would *then* attempt to
complete the call, and assuming it went through, she'd have to wait
for ringing and answer of the other party; she couldn't just start
talking.

And while the ads say "available in the 213, 310, 818 area codes,"
implying that you have to be in those areas to subscribe to the
services, they don't explain that any calls from outside those codes
cannot make use of those CLASS features, nor could calls to/from
non-PacBell numbers (of major significance in areas like L.A. where
GTE has a *very* large base of subscribers intertwined all around and
through PacBell areas.  Neither company seems to be very interested in
inter-company SS7 hookups.

All in all, these CLASS features seem to be another attempt at getting
money for semi-useless frills while the quality of "Plain Old
Telephone Service" (POTS) goes down the tubes while the rates go
through the roof.


 --Lauren--
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:14:35 GMT
From: hpubvwa!tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Area Code Changes in Georgia?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 628, Message 1 of 11

In article <telecom12.612.6@eecs.nwu.edu> scott@asd.com (Scott Barman)
writes:

> The other day I was trying to make a phone call to Athens, Georgia and
> I got a recording that the area code was changed and to redial it with
> the new area code (706, used to be 404).  When was this changed?  I
> know I can still call Atlanta using 404, but what areas are effected
> by this change (e.g., is Thomaston included in the change)?

The split happened on May 3, 1992, although there was a permissive
dialing period until August 3.  Atlanta is still 404.  Here is a list
of prefixes within 404 that changed to 706:

 
208  278  354  468  549  597  657  724  778  828  883
213  282  356  472  553  598  660  731  779  829  884
216  283  357  481  554  602  663  733  782  831  886
217  285  358  485  556  613  665  734  783  838  891
219  290  359  486  557  625  667  735  788  845  893
226  291  367  492  560  628  672  736  789  846  895
232  293  369  495  561  629  673  737  790  849  896
234  295  374  506  563  630  674  738  791  855  931
235  318  375  517  567  632  675  742  793  856  935
236  322  376  537  568  635  677  743  795  857  937
245  323  379  538  569  637  678  745  796  858  947
259  324  384  539  571  638  682  746  797  860  965
265  326  397  540  574  643  685  747  798  861  966
268  327  398  541  575  645  687  754  802  862  989
269  328  437  542  576  646  689  757  812  863
272  334  444  543  579  647  692  759  820  864
273  335  453  544  582  648  693  764  821  865
274  337  456  545  585  649  694  769  823  866
275  338  462  546  592  650  695  771  824  868
276  342  465  547  595  652  721  776  825  878
277  353  467  548  596  654  722  777  826  882
 
Some exchanges will change later on; for that reason, the following
exchanges will be dialable with either the 404 or 706 area code
through March 28, 1993:
 
207  253  304  386  503  536  718  775  832  869
214  254  307  387  519  562  720  781  834  887
227  258  336  412  531  583  725  784  836  889
228  267  345  459  532  599  748  786  844  927
229  287  382  464  534  606  749  787  854  967
251  301  385  479  535  684  773  830  867  983


Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com 
             |  Internet: tad@ssc.wa.com        or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad
Date: 14 Aug 92 00:29:47 EDT
From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How Do I Run This Line?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 626, Message 8 of 15

In TELECOM Digest V12 #618 I wrote:
 
> As far as the Moderator's service during moving was concerned, the
> computer probably handled this as a disconnect view and an add view
> against the same circuit. Although both cable pairs may have been
> direct bridged and in service at the same time, the computer is set up
> to handle a situation such as this. It should be noted that this is
> not an ideal serving arrangement.  We have had situations with extreme
> transmission and signaling impairments occur. In my opinion, this
> should only be used as a transition tool and only after proper
>operation has been confirmed empiracally.
  
The Moderator noted:
 
> [Moderator's Note: Then how do answering services with bridged lines
> to their customers handle this problem?    PAT]
 
Your original note did not make it clear that you had ordered an
off-premise extension. As noted in my original post, this is a way to
have this service accomplished. What I was noting in the paragraph
above was that we have, in exceptional circumstances such as the loss
of business on PBX trunks, performed direct half-taps in the CO on the
old and new cable pairs. This is usually done over as limited time
period as possible, perhaps eight hours as a guideline, and only after
the half-tap has proved usable.
 
Off-premise extensions and/or answering service bridges are usually
done with equipment allowing the bridge legs to be isolated, typically
bridge lifters.

 
Tim Gorman - SWBT
*opinions are mine, any resemblance to official policy is coincidence*
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 00:16:52 GMT
From: Hans Ridder <ridder@zso.dec.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 645, Message 15 of 17

In article <telecom12.643.8@eecs.nwu.edu> spencer@phoenix.
princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes:

> FYI, two people have mailed me to say that the ATDT <beeper number>
> ,,, <number you want to show up> does work.  So there's no need to
> rush out and get a BellSouth beeper or whatever it was :-)

I'd like to point out that in my experience this type of "open loop"
paging is probably not something you want to "bet your business" on,
as it is not very reliable.

With our pager company, the time between the last digit dialed and the
answer was so variable that you could never have the correct number of
commas (waits) in the dial string.  This meant that it was likely that
either the beginning of your message was chopped off (if it didn't
answer soon enough/you didn't wait long enough) or the message was
lost (if it answered to soon/you waited to long.)

I'd suggest using one of the dial-up paging protocols which actually
get an acknowledgement from the paging system, thus "closing the
loop."


Hans-Gabriel Ridder	 Digital DECwest Engineering
ridder@rust.zso.dec.com	 Bellevue, Washington, USA
{pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:31:35 GMT
From: Brinton Cooper <abc@brl.mil>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on CDMA
Organization: The US Army Research Laboratory
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 646, Message 6 of 10

In article <telecom12.623.2@eecs.nwu.edu> syd@dsi.com writes:

> murthy@solomon.technet.sg (K.R.S.Murthy) writes:

>> Can anybody explain to me briefly in layman's words how CDMA
>> technology works?

> Here is a very simple explaination of CDMA (Carrier Detect Multiple
> Access):

> Before sending, listen to the line, if there is no carrier, then send.

> NOTE: ethernet adds another feature to it, CDMA/CA (CA = collision
> avoidance)

The foregoing is incorrect according to common usage.  (Most likely,
the responder confused CDMA with CSMA-carrier sense multiple access,
and it's ethernet instantiation, CSMA/CD, denoting collision
detection.)

CDMA is "Code Division Multiple Access."  CDMA denotes the use of
"spread spectrum" signaling waveforms to achieve addressability on a
common channel.  If you have much faith, I can give you something of a
layperson's explanation.  We will use frequency hopping as the
paradigm; there are others:

One way to use a large channel bandwidth (e.g., 20 MHz) to support
multiple users is to divide it into a large number of narrowband cells
(e.g., 20 KHz).  Each user's "carrier" does not remain stationary
within one of these cells but "hops" according to a pre-assigned
pattern over a large (perhaps all) of these cells in a periodic
fashion with a very long period.

A receiver and transmitter agree on a common code; this code is very
distinct from (orthogonal to) the codes used by all other
transmitter/receiver pairs sharing the same wideband channel.  This
frequency hopping code functions as an address, hence the name "code
division multiple access."

It works because the codes are so distinct (orthogonal) that mutual
interference between any two codes is very, very small.

You can read on CDMA to your heart's content in any text on spread
spectrum and in many networking references.


Brinton Cooper  <abc@brl.mil>, <cooper@udel.edu>, or <ab.cooper@compmail.com>
From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)
Date: 14 Aug 92 06:27:05 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 626, Message 1 of 15

In article <telecom12.617.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, dan@quiensabe.az.
stratus.com (Dan Danz) wrote:
 
> I wonder if Justin has an eel-skin wallet?  Strangely enough, they've
> been known to wipe the mag-stripe info off of credit cards.

URBAN LEGEND WARNING!

This is a pure myth. Eel-skin involves only the erasure of the eel who
once used it. It has no more effect on mag-stripes than any other
leather. Due to its delicacy, eel-skin items often use magnetic
fasteners. These can erase the stripes. But eel-skin has NO effect.


R. Kevin Oberman			Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Internet: koberman@llnl.gov		(510) 422-6955

Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing
and probably don't really know anything useful about anything.
From: PAVALIN@BNR.CA (P.A.)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp
Date: 22 Aug 92 19:35:00 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 652, Message 9 of 13

Well according to proper CCITT-speak, thou shalt call the key to the
right of the zero the 'square' key (Recommendation E.161).

Rumour has it that at recent Geneva meetings 'square' key narrowly won
out over 'tic-tac-toe' key.

Oh, and the key to the left of the zero is called the 'star' key.


Paul Valin                     Tel: + 1 613 763 7394
Bell-Northern Research Ltd.    Email:  pavalin@bnr.ca
P.O. Box 3511, Station C       Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 
                      'only my opinions...'
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 00:26:22 GMT
From: mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us (Nick Sayer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Embassy Telecom Arrangements?
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 639, Message 12 of 14

I was watching "Mission: Impossible" today and one of the scenes
showed a (phony) telephone lineman waltzing into the Russian embassy
in Washington, snooping around, etc, etc.

Even back in the pre-divestiture days, I can hardly believe that this
sort of thing was a possible scenario. Nowadays, of course, since
there are demarcs to limit how far the telco can go, but what did an
embassy of a foriegn nation do for local telecom without letting
Bellco in? Did they have an arrangement with the State Department? Did
they even use Bell? Have the arrangements changed since divestiture?

Thanks in advance for any information.


Nick Sayer <mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us>  N6QQQ @ N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA      
37 19 49 N / 121 57 36 W            +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'
From: jeffj@krf.com (Jeff Jonas)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: 2500 Picturephone in the News
Date: 17 Aug 92 20:46:00 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 638, Message 3 of 12

In the "home" section of the Thursday August 13 {New York Times},
there's an article by N.R. Kleinfield about his two week long test of
the AT&T Videophone 2500.

It's pleasantly written about how he, his friend and family used the
pair of phones, how the pictures were constantly getting scrambled and
how having pictures affected how they use the phones and the nature of
the converations.  Due to the low frame rate, motion is very
quantized.

I wonder how long before 900 numbers offer video services?

On the technical side: I've never seen any real technical specs for
the 2500 posted to TELECOM.  I wonder -- could I use my PC's modem to
get the picture in a window?  Anybody hear of such a product to let
the PC show or even generate Videophone images?

Will videotext/Minitel and Videophone be in direct competition?  I'd
love to see a voice messaging system that gives me a screen of choices
instead of speaking them to me.


Jeffrey Jonas   jeffj@synsys.uucp