HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas)
Subject: Re: Annex 3 and lpd
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:38:28 GMT

In article <JESMITH.92Oct8090509@tss7.gdfwc3>, jesmith@gdfwc3 (Jesse Smith) writes:
> For those folks familiar with the Xylogics Annex-3 terminal server:
> Do you know of any technical reasons why a person has to use their
> software (aprint or rtelnet) to send print jobs from Un*x hosts to
> printers attached to the terminal server?  Could they not make it
> completely compatible with, say, BSD 4.3 lpd?  What am I missing
> here?

  Short answer: because LPR is brain-dead. Long answer: LPR expects
the system where remote jobs are being sent to spool them to disk.
LPR basically has to distinct modes while sending the job:

  1) Data Mode
  2) Control Mode

Data mode is where the actual file is transfered and control mode is
where the job parameters are sent (such as print a banner page, expand
tabs, etc, etc) The main problem is that the default LPR sends the data
*first* and the control information second. Since a terminal server 
doesn't have an infinite amount of memory (ie no disk) it does not
really have any hope of doing the Right Thing wrt the control info;
it must just send the data to the port on a best guess basis. For
simple jobs of binary data, this is probably not a hinderence, but
when you try to do anything more complicated (like asking for TROFF
output filters to be applied for example) you are, well, screwed.
  Technically, there is no problem to actually implementing LPRD in
a terminal server (it's not really that complicated), but it is not
the solve all of all problems printing. I have heard that you can
get a verison of LPR which transposes the control file and data file
making the situation vastly better but this isn't standardly shipped
by your vendor (or at least not widely so). Of course it wouldn't
be that difficult to hack on the Berkeley sources, but that sort of
defeats the reason for wanting direct LPR in the first place...

  [ this is coming from somebody who has grudgingly written LPRD
    for another vendors terminal server... ]
-- 

		Michael Thomas	(mike@gordian.com)
	"I don't think Bambi Eyes will get you that flame thrower..."  
		-- Hobbes to Calvin
		USnail: 20361 Irvine Ave Santa Ana Heights, Ca,	92707-5637
		PaBell: (714) 850-0205 (714) 850-0533 (fax)
From: leonard@telcom.arizona.edu (Aaron Leonard)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Re: Annex 3 and lpd
Date: 13 Oct 92 16:30:48 GMT
Reply-To: Leonard@Arizona.EDU
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona Telecommunications

In article <JESMITH.92Oct8090509@tss7.gdfwc3>, jesmith@gdfwc3 (Jesse Smith) writes:
| 
| For those folks familiar with the Xylogics Annex-3 terminal server:
| Do you know of any technical reasons why a person has to use their
| software (aprint or rtelnet) to send print jobs from Un*x hosts to
| printers attached to the terminal server?  Could they not make it
| completely compatible with, say, BSD 4.3 lpd?  What am I missing
| here?

The inherent problem with having communications servers 
providing direct lpd service is this:

The lpd protocol has the control information for the print job
sent AFTER the file itself is sent.  Therefore, an lpd server
must buffer a (potentially large) print job before it begins
to print it.

Consequently, an lpd server must have a disk attached for 
spooling.

One idea that has occurred to me is this: have the comm server
use a remote disk, accessed via NFS or TFTP, to store its spooled 
print jobs.  The downside would be that the printed file would
have to take three trips across the network before it finally 
arrives on the printer.  However, since printer traffic is really
pretty low volume compared to ordinary disk traffic, I wouldn't
worry about this too much.  I *would* recommend to an implementor
of such a system on a comm server, that they support multiple
disk servers, in order to eliminate a single point of failure.

Aaron

Aaron Leonard (AL104), <Leonard@Arizona.EDU>
University of Arizona Network Operations, Tucson AZ 85721
|>   If it ain't broke, break it.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
From: tim@boxhill.com (Timothy Jones)
Subject: Re: Annex 3 and lpd
Organization: Box Hill Systems Corporation, New York, NY
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:50:12 GMT

On Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:05:09 GMT, jesmith@gdfwc3 (Jesse Smith) said:

jesmith> For those folks familiar with the Xylogics Annex-3 terminal server:
jesmith> Do you know of any technical reasons why a person has to use their
jesmith> software (aprint or rtelnet) to send print jobs from Un*x hosts to
jesmith> printers attached to the terminal server?  Could they not make it
jesmith> completely compatible with, say, BSD 4.3 lpd?  What am I missing
jesmith> here?

The software is completely compatible with lpd.  The device file specified in
the printcap entry is what's managed by rtelnet.  Basically, rtelnet creates a
fifo (e.g. /dev/printer), to which the spooler software (e.g. lpd) writes.
Rtelnet reads from the fifo and writes the data to a port on the Annex.  It's
all transparent to the spooler.

Tim
--
Timothy Jones, Engineer                                 e-mail: tim@boxhill.com
Box Hill Systems Corporation                                voice: 212-989-4455
161 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10013               fax: 212-989-6817
From: richardw@spider.co.uk (Richard W)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Re: Output to remote printer truncated
Date: 7 Oct 92 07:03:50 GMT
Organization: Spider Networks, Wokingham, UK

jakob@ptt-iat (Jakob Schripsema) writes:

|s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Craig Macbride) writes:
|>I have recently seen a problem whereby a SCO Unix box, sending to a
|>printer through a Synoptics terminal server, ends up with truncated
|>printouts........
[....]
| I had the same problem with a Spider terminal server. Paul Gomans from Spider
| Systems gave me the following solution:

[...description of shutdown() solution...]

|: Another possible solution is to use the "linger" option on sockets which will
|: linger on the close until FINs are exchanged. You could use this
|: _instead_ of the shutdown option. The syntax of the linger option is used in
|: the function "setsockopt" and is something like:

|This works. To save you some work here's the code I use :.....

Where possible, it is better to use the linger option. The shutdown()
technique relies on a text string being returned by the server when the
connection is closed (in the case of SpiderPort this would be "<Closed>").

This unfortunately doesn't _guarantee_ to prevent truncation, particularly
when you are printing over a slow speed link (e.g. 64K).
-- 
---------------------------------------------+--------------------------------
Richard Whitehead, UK Tech Support Manager   |  0734-771055   Fax: 0734-771214
Spider Networks, Wokingham, Berks UK         |    <...uknet!spider!uk-support>
<richardw@spider.co.uk>                    /\o/\     <uk-support@spider.co.uk>
From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Date: 12 Oct 92 15:31:45 GMT
Organization: Motorola, Inc. LMPS
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 774, Message 6 of 14

In addition to cellular, 800/900 Mhz trunking is available for call
boxes.  This would be a less expensive solution for a customer who
already has a trunked radio system, such as a large corporate campus
or university.


John Gilbert   johng@ecs.comm.mot.com
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 04:37:10 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: 10252 as a Code For Sprint
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 769, Message 8 of 9

I made a long distance call from a Red Roof Inn room recently and
found that 10252 access code got Sprint.  The archive file
occ.10xxx.access.codes says "Long Distance/USA".
From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Date: 12 Oct 92 03:33:48 GMT
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 774, Message 3 of 14

In article <telecom12.760.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, MERRILL@stsci.edu (Clark)
writes:

> I saw Reagan come back from a trip once and land at the Pentagon
> instead of the White house.  A six lane road leading into DC was
> closed off.  And there were officers stationed everywhere.  There was
> no way to get anywhere near him.  I was one of five people that
> stopped and watched the landing from the Pentagon parking lot.

I happened to be in New York City a few weeks ago when President Bush
also happened to be in town.

I was heading home to New Jersey, in the midst of the evening
rush-hour, and had waited almost 45 minutes in line to enter the
Holland Tunnel (it goes under the Hudson River, from lower Manhattan
to NJ).  When I was three cars from the tunnel entrance, three NYC
police cars arrived from several directions, a dozen officers hopped
out and stopped all traffic entering the tunnel.

Nothing further happened for about five minutes (probably to allow the
traffic already in the tunnel to reach the far end).  Then a motorcade
consisting of several NYPD cars, several un-marked cars with U.S.
Government plates, a limousine, and several more U.S. Government cars
entered the tunnel.

Nobody else was allowed into the tunnel for another five minutes.
Then a police car entered the tunnel, and drove slowly, straddling two
lanes, in case anybody should try to pass, and the rest of us piled in
behind him.

When I reached the NJ end of the tunnel, I noticed that the motorcade
was visible ahead, entering the NJ Turnpike.  It continued, in
splendid isolation, all the way to exit 14 (Newark International
Airport).  All six lanes of the turnpike, from about a half-mile ahead
to a half-mile behind, were kept empty.

If they wanted to hide what they were doing, they did a lousy job of
that!  But I suppose it is necessary.  I found myself wondering if
this was the real thing, or if it was a diversion, deliberately
designed to attract attention, while the real president was whisked
away with less fanfare, by another route.


Dave Levenson		Internet: dave@westmark.com
Westmark, Inc.		UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
Warren, NJ, USA		Voice: 908 647 0900  Fax: 908 647 6857
Date: 8 Oct 92 19:39:53 GMT
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Highway Call Boxes
Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 767, Message 6 of 17

I can't confirm at the moment, but I read that those are solar-powered
cellular phones.


Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)


[Moderator's Note: The consensus is that you are correct.   PAT]
From: eli@cisco.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:55:22 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 784, Message 8 of 10

If you are talking about a Fax S&F system where you could dial it,
enter a phone number, and have it send you a particular fax, boxes
which do this are available through Brooktrout Technology, 617 449
4100.  It is called their "flashfax" system.  Demos are available by
calling 617 449 9010.

A simpler solution for you might be to get a fax board or external
modem for your PC, or use a service similar to the IBT service Patrick
described.

Also note that the "faxback" type of fax S&F is patented by Brooktrout.  
Other industry players have refused to pay royalties and instead
persist in trying to derail this patent.  Apprently yet more patent
court action is forthcoming.

Brooktrout defeated ATT in the first patent interference suit about
the "faxback patent".


eli
Date: 14 Oct 1992 10:25:54 -0700
From: leavens@mizar.usc.edu (Justin Leavens)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Different Rings For Different Things?
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 780, Message 5 of 6

CLASS features such as the "Repeat Dialing" and "Priority Ringing"
that are being offered now. I am curious to know if there are any
specifications or standard in place so that these special rings could
be picked up by a modem (one in the future specifically designed to
look for these rings) or a terminal communications program.


Justin Leavens    Microcomputer Specialist    University of Southern California
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 6:28:50 MDT
From: ndallen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Nigel Allen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Fax Store-and-Forward Service Wanted
Organization: Echo Beach
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 777, Message 3 of 7

> (I'm tired of running into busy trunks, busy recipient fax-machine, 
> or recipient fax machine's ring-no-answer signals outside office 
> hours in connection with a fax I'm trying to send to Zimbabwe 
> University.)

I wonder whether someone at Zimbabwe University turns the fax machine
off after 5 p.m. to save electricity, assuming that nobody else in the
country would be likely to be sending a fax message outside business
hours, and forgetting that people in other time zones (such as Fred
Linton) might want to send a fax message.
 
It's also possible that the fax number is no longer used by a fax
machine.  It might be wise to double-check the fax number, possibly
against a university calendar.
 
I think the most reliable solution, assuming the fax machine at
Zimbabwe University is working properly and you have the correct
number for it, is to use the outbound fax service of MCI Mail.
(Perhaps AT&T Mail offers a similar service.)  If all you want to send
is text, the MCI Mail or AT&T Mail services should be adequate.
 
And if nothing else works, you could send a cablegram, but cablegrams
are quite expensive.

 
Nigel Allen   nigel.allen@bbs.oit.unc.edu
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 00:10:17 GMT
From: kirill@newsbytes.msk.su (Kirill Tchashchin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Email to Serbia (Yugosla
Reply-To: kirill@newsbytes.msk.su
Organization: Newsbytes News Network / Moscow Bureau
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 773, Message 12 of 15

Hi:

As far as I know, EUnet has discussed the implementation of the
Serbian embargo (disconnecting the mail link, literally speaking). I
know that Russians tried to keep the link alive, as it's rather better
to have them beating each other in the flame war, not in actual war.
But this did not work and EUnet has decided to disconnect. I don't
know for how long it will stay in this state. Will appreciate any
further information.


Kirill Tchashchin     Newsbytes News Network
Date: 12 Oct 1992 19:56:35 GMT
From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Question About Caller ID Information Display
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 776, Message 6 of 14

In article <telecom12.767.12@eecs.nwu.edu> TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM writes:

> In a message From: billabs@nic.cerf.net (Bill Romanowski) on 6 Oct 92
> 21:15:07 GMT:

>> So now I want to know how it works. I suspect DTMF after first ring?
>> No doubt an FAQ but any info would be appreciated.

> Approximately just before the second or third ring (depending on the
> system), the information is sent as a data stream about 300 baud
> between rings.  In short, this is why modems can be built to take the
> caller ID information.

>[Moderator's Note: I think it is 1200 baud.    PAT]

Note, however, that it's Bell 202 specs, NOT Bell 212, which is why,
if you couple it to a typical 1200 baud modem, it doesn't work.


[Moderator's Note: As I found out after some experimentation several
months ago. See the article "Me and My Crazy Ideas" in an issue of the
Digest earlier this year.   PAT]
From: Holmanj@uwwvax.uww.edu (John Holman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What it Costs to Have the President Over
Date: 12 Oct 92 07:00:00 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 774, Message 1 of 14

I just heard on the radio that the city of Milwaukee spent $25,000
for security alone for a Bush visit on Labor Day and $8,000 for a
Clinton visit.  The president was also just in another city (Fond du
Lac) in Wisconsin and a friend of mine went to the rally with this
report, "Anyone wearing a campaign button that was not the President's
had to remove them!"  Some were anti-Bush buttons were confiscated and
people were told they could get them backafter the rally.
From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: GTE Addresses On Outgoing Email
Date: 12 Oct 92 13:06:00 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 775, Message 6 of 12

I also appreciate all (well, most?) submissions and want to encourage
them.  As an email advocate I feel some obligation to education.

The key is that once one starts submitting to telecom, one is no
longer a passive reader of a shared bulletin board but rather an
individual with an identity.  To continue on the analogy with phones,
a single TELECOM Digest access at each site is like a single phone at
each site.  Incoming callers must speak to an receptionist to reach a
given person.  This might be tolerable for voice but not when one
attempts automated access to a Fax machine.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 21:10:06 GMT
From: jwi@world.std.com (Jazzman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Does Phone Company Log Calls to a 'Busy' Line?
Organization: Nexus
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 770, Message 6 of 11

I know that most phone companies log the telephone calls made from one
point to another.  My question is: if I tried to make a local call and
got a busy signal, would my call attempt show up on the phone company
(or anyone elses) log?

In case it matters, the system I'm using is NYNEX in the greater
Boston area.  Also, theres nothing special about my phone: not
monitored, tapped, or anything like that!

Thanks in advance,


John   (jwi@world.std.com)


[Moderator's Note: I do not think they usually bother unless the
subscriber has some interest in the information. I do know that many
large inbound call centers (reservations, customer service, credit
authorizatioins, etc) ask for that information in an effort to have an
adequate number of lines available. Many years ago at the Amoco/Diners
sales authorization center (when it was in Chicago) they had numerous
little meters they would read hourly to measure the traffic. Whenever
all trunks in a given group were busy, a counter would increment by
one; and whenever IBT gave a busy signal to a caller then they (IBT)
would send a pulse down a special line which caused another counter in
the Amoco office to increment by one. Still another special circuit
from IBT would send a pulse whenever IBT disconnected a call which had
not yet 'supervised', that is, a 'lost call' in Amoco terminology: one
where the call had been abandoned by the caller without waiting for an
answer, mostly because of a delay in getting a response. When I
operated my recorded message service twenty years ago, I also had IBT
do a 'busy' study for me. They kept track of that data for a couple
months to help me decide if I had enough lines on my system.   PAT]
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 14:52:03 GMT
From: trussell@cwis.unomaha.edu (Tim Russell)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telecom in the MidWest
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 777, Message 1 of 7

dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes:

>> I was told that the reason telemarketers chose the MidWest was that they
>> had the most "neutral" accents. Nebraska was said to have been pitching
>> that. I'm told by a Nebraskan that she thinks the accent is neutral
>> except for Washington, which they pronounced "Waa-shington."

    This is very true, Nebraskans do indeed have VERY neutral accents.
I would say that the "Wa" sound tends more toward the "War"
pronunciation, though not so badly that "wash" sounds like "warsh",
just different.  Being an Air Force brat, I find it refreshing since
my accent (almost complete lack thereof, actually) doesn't stand out
at all.

> Another reason for good telephone service in Nebraska is that Omaha
> was the home of the former Strategic Air Command of the US Air Force
> and top-notch telecom service was needed.

    Definitely.  I'm not familiar with the specifics, but I do know
that Omaha has TONS of trunks coming in from all over everywhere.  Now
that SAC is Stratcom and Langley AFB in Virginia has taken over quite
a bit, I would think phone capacity will be even higher.

    One thing I always chuckle at is Omaha's constant trumpeting that
the unemployment rate is WAY below the national average, hovering
somewhere around 2%.  They neglect to note that this would most
certainly not be the case were it not for telemarketing, though.


Tim Russell    Omaha, NE   trussell@unomaha.edu