HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rees@dabo.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.isdn
Subject: Re: The ISDN network
Date: 17 Dec 1992 15:53:30 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan CITI
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: dabo.citi.umich.edu

In article <1992Dec17.063247.177@indyvax.iupui.edu>, imhw400@indyvax.iupui.edu writes:

  o	Did anybody ever find a sensible price for a float-charger plus
  	gel-cell battery pack capable of putting out the miniscule 7W required
  	by typical ISDN sets for an hour or two?

Phone companies size their battery backups for 8 hours in places where they
don't have diesel generators.  Even that isn't really enough.  My own
battery backup for my home phone system is good forever (or at least until
we get three cloudy days in a row).  Of course if you're willing to power
down the nt1 when the phone is on-hook, then one or two hours of talk time
is plenty.

  	Remember, when we get to this point they'll
  	be selling millions of these supplies -- they will be dirt cheap. 
  	Certainly a lot cheaper than running an extra pair to every subscriber
  	in the world.

An extra pair isn't required.  The phone company could supply phantom power
over the "talk" pair.  The problem is that with a 48 volt supply and
standard pairs (22-26g) you can't supply more than a watt or two.
From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.isdn
Subject: Re: Is long distance ISDN possible now?
Date: 16 Dec 92 17:52:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Dec16.175255.23978
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA

In article <28229@oasys.dt.navy.mil> curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch) writes:
>Now that TRIP'92 is over, is it possible for someone in North
>America to make an ISDN data call outside of their local
>area?
>
>If it can be done, who would I need to talk to get signed up
>for the service?  i.e., is there only one long distance company
>providing it like MCI, or AT&T?
>
>Or will it just work if I have the correct long distance carrier?
>Will there be an extra charge (I assume so) or will it be billed
>at standard phone call rates?

I don't know about San Francisco to D.C., but for inter-LATA calls within
California (between Pacific Bell service areas), both AT&T and Sprint handle
data calls.  No pre-subscription is necessary as far as I know - you just 
place the call.  If the call is tagged as a data call, AT&T or Sprint ensure
a fully digital end-to-end connection.  Sprint charges the regular voice rate
for the call, while AT&T charges a higher rate since its a 'data' call.  This
may be a good starting point to get your D.C. question answered.

Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com
From: jeff@wisdom.bubble.org (Jeff Ross)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Re: datability flow ctrl
Date: 17 Dec 92 04:14:59 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Wisdom's Pony Express

In article <1992Dec15.220810.14729@cuug.ab.ca> cappisk@cuug.ab.ca (Kevin Cappis 283-6333) writes:
>
>
>
>Hello out there,
>
>     First of all I hope this is the right group, from what I've read
>I believe this is the right one. I have a term server that was built by 
>DATABILITY but is using a different brand name (oem product). 
>     
>     Here is my problem. Everything seems to work just great, however I
>have been experiencing problems with CTS flow control. When a large file
>goes out the server port into the modem eventually the modem will drop CTS.
>The server then stops sending data, but when the modem raise CTS the port
>becomes locked up. The port status (sh po xx status) shows the port as
>"xoffed". This seems obvious however a datascope shows that no xoff chars
>are sent from modem.

a few items to check, first off you can type "monitor port XX status"
and you will get a constantly updating screen of what's going on in terms
of signals high and low.

in terms of "xoffed" it is a generic term just meaning that the terminal
server is to stop sending data.

>
>     The server is set for CTS flow conrtol enabled and the cabling appears
>to be correct, as well as the modem parameters. (zyxcel 3242bis modems)

what are the parameters for the port?? i.e. "sho port xx"

>
>     Has anybody got the same setup working okay, or the same problem?
>If so reply to cappisk@sun.cuug.ab.ca

I used to run several high speed modems off a vcp-1000 (probably the same
unit you have, on the 8 port line cards, no problems.

>
>                                          Adios, Kevin Cappis
>

			Jeff

-- 

.Sig??? you want a stinkin' .Sig???
Jeff Ross
201-299-1819 (home)				jeff@wisdom.bubble.org
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.servers:181 comp.protocols.ppp:991
From: donl@isgood.chi.il.us ( Administrator)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers,comp.protocols.ppp
Subject: Re: Request: Terminal servers that support PPP *now*
Summary: We use the NetBlazer....
Keywords: telebit netblazer ppp slip async
Date: 12 Dec 92 02:09:32 GMT
Followup-To: comp.dcom.servers
Organization: WorldBridge BBS - Joliet, IL

In article <tim.723359403@appenzell> tim@appenzell.cs.wisc.edu (Tim Theisen) writes:
>emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti) writes:
>>We decided not to go with the Netblazer because of problems getting the
>>darn thing to support all three of SLIP, PPP, and ordinary async dialup
>
>We are currently supporting SLIP, PPP, UUCP and ordinary async dialup on
>the same inbound line (any line) on our NetBlazer.  It wasn't all that
>difficult to setup.  We have found it to be quite flexible.

Here, here.  We use our NetBlazer for the same thing.  Haven't had any
problems yet with using all 3 services on the same dialup lines.  We have 4
lines, one with a USR 9600 and 3 with T2500's.  No problems on any of the
lines. 

Just letting you know....

Don 
-- 
"If you have tried to do something		Donald P. Leaman
 and failed, you are vastly better		Engineering & Design
 off than if you had tried to do		Integrated Systems Group, Inc.
 nothing and succeeded."			donl@worldbridge.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
From: cappisk@cuug.ab.ca (Kevin Cappis 283-6333)
Subject: datability flow ctrl
Organization: Calgary UNIX User's Group
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:08:10 GMT




Hello out there,

     First of all I hope this is the right group, from what I've read
I believe this is the right one. I have a term server that was built by 
DATABILITY but is using a different brand name (oem product). 
     
     Here is my problem. Everything seems to work just great, however I
have been experiencing problems with CTS flow control. When a large file
goes out the server port into the modem eventually the modem will drop CTS.
The server then stops sending data, but when the modem raise CTS the port
becomes locked up. The port status (sh po xx status) shows the port as
"xoffed". This seems obvious however a datascope shows that no xoff chars
are sent from modem.

     The server is set for CTS flow conrtol enabled and the cabling appears
to be correct, as well as the modem parameters. (zyxcel 3242bis modems)

     Has anybody got the same setup working okay, or the same problem?
If so reply to cappisk@sun.cuug.ab.ca

                                          Adios, Kevin Cappis






-- 
     k   k    eeeee     ccccc
     k  k     e        c     c       Kevin Eric Cappis
     k k      eeeee   c              125 Abinger Cres. SE 
     k  k     e       c              Calgary Alta. Canada
From: leonard@telcom.arizona.edu (Aaron Leonard)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Re: Annex-3 vs. V.32bis
Date: 17 Dec 92 23:03:07 GMT
Reply-To: Leonard@Arizona.EDU
Distribution: na,local
Organization: University of Arizona Telecommunications

To connect up a V.32bis modem to dial into an Annex 3
serial port:

- turn off all XON/XOFF flow control stuff on your modem
- turn ON hardware (CTS/RTS) flow control on the modem
- enable V.42bis compression on the modem
- lock the serial port to 38.4Kbps (both on the modem side
  and on the Annex)
- on the Annex, set control_lines to `both' (modem control
  and hardware flow)
- set input_flow and output_flow to `eia'.

This should about do it.

Aaron
From: bpytlik@wang.com (Bogdan Pytlik)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: netware/LanManager server hadware
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:07:51 GMT
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA


	  Hi, I am looking into other people's opinion about the
	server hardware configuration running Netware or LAN Manager
	server software. 
	
	  I would like to find out what would be a good configuration
	for up to 20 people load doing moderate file access like
	(compile, linking).
	  I would like my hardware be balanced in the sense that non of
	the hardware components would be a serious bottleneck to the
	other.
	  What is your experience with server hardware you have ?

	The questions I face are:
	1. Motherboard should I use ? Bus architecture (ISA,EISA,
	Microchannel, other). CPU 386 20/33/50 MHz, 486 20/33/50 MHz ?
	2. Network card (for 10Mbits/ethernet)
	3. Hard drive. Seek time transfer speed, cache ?
	4. Other ?

	Any comments and hints will be appreciated.
	Thanks
	Bogdan
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
From: mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas)
Subject: Re: datability flow ctrl
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:10:31 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.220810.14729@cuug.ab.ca>, cappisk@cuug.ab.ca (Kevin Cappis 283-6333) writes:
>      Here is my problem. Everything seems to work just great, however I
> have been experiencing problems with CTS flow control. When a large file
> goes out the server port into the modem eventually the modem will drop CTS.
> The server then stops sending data, but when the modem raise CTS the port
> becomes locked up. The port status (sh po xx status) shows the port as
> "xoffed". This seems obvious however a datascope shows that no xoff chars
> are sent from modem.

   This is probably an artifact. Xoff'ed probably means generically 
stopped from doing output. Sounds more like there is a bug in the
RTS/CTS flow control code...
-- 

		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: bjs@beach.cis.ufl.edu (Brian J. Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.servers
Subject: Annex-3 vs. V.32bis
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:42:06 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.

Well I just recieved my long awaited Annex-3 with R7.0 version of the software
with PPP support.  Well I set up one line for testing to make sure I can get
normal modem operations to work fine.

Now I am dialing up to the with a Zoom V.32bis modem connecting to a Zoom 
V.32bis.  Which is connected to port=1 of the Annex-3.  Now for starters
I choose not to play with the Error Correction and Data Compression so
it is disabled on both modems.  So I am really connecting 14.4K to 14.4K.

I startup a zmodem transfer from the Unix side (after having "rlogined" in
to the Unix host)  And all I get it a few bytes then massive errors. 
Performance drops down to about 220 cps and then the zmodem transfer aborts.

I have tried the port with  

EIA/hardward flow control
==========================
control_lines flow_control
input_flow_control eia
output_flow_control eia
speed autobaud

EIA/hardware flow control + modem control (This is what I thought I needed)
=========================================

control_lines both
input_flow_control eia
output_flow_control eia
speed autobaud

Now what am I doing wrong here, I wanted to use the annex with PPP and
V,32bis modems so that they connect and use the Data Compression for even
higher transfer rates of simple text, but if I can't get to identical 14.4K
modems to send the file at normal 14.4K speed I don't know what to do.  I
must note that if I do a stty on the "annex" the baud rate is 9600, which 
I would have to guess is the problem.  I have also tried locking the port 
speed at 38400, 19200 and just get junk.

Any Ideas Xylogics Users ?

Bjs

-- 

Brian J. Smith           Systems Manager CMT Group   Email: bjs@phys.ufl.edu
Department of Physics	    283 Williamson Hall      Fax:     (904) 392-0524 
University of Florida 	   Gainesville, FL 32611     Voice:   (904) 392-5339
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 17:01 PST
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Other Bitnet Servers
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 903, Message 15 of 15

rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes:

> If both these options are too much trouble, then I have to question
> whether they really want to communicate with us.

> [Moderator's Note: In the above example, 'user@system.bitnet' works
> just fine from here at Northwestern.  PAT]

I have certainly had no trouble for years addressing mail to
user@system.bitnet. Perhaps you might want to check your local
system's mailer and transport agent and find out why only you seem to
have this difficulty.

I regularly correspond with individuals at BITNET sites and am myself
on some mailing lists. We never have any trouble getting mail to each
other, and I certainly use no special addressing conventions when
writing back.


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
Date: 14 Dec 92 12:38:04 GMT
From: cmylod@nl.oracle.com (Colum Mylod)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Proposed Australian Number Changes 1994-1998
Organization: Oracle Europe
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 906, Message 13 of 16

In article <telecom12.904.10@eecs.nwu.edu>, lmadison@ie.oracle.com
(Linc Madison) writes:

> I'm sorry, folks, but this is the most incredibly BRAIN-DEAD scheme
> I've ever heard of.

> in the tiniest, most remote town in the nation.  There are only a
> handful of cities in the world that have eight-digit numbers: Paris,
> Rome, Tokyo, Mataranka ...

Not only Paris but all of France: every city, town, village, hamlet,
farm, barn.  Ditto for all of Denamrk. And you know what? They like it
that way! The minor inconvenience of dialing Claud next door on eight
digits is ameliorated by the convenience of having Michele 200 miles
away also eight digits. More importantly modem/laptop dialers have it
soooo easy with a standard format for all calls.  A standard format
goes down well with the public, much simpler than having to remember
where-am-I before making that call. No, Aussies should go to
no-area-codes nine (or so) digit numbers. Much preferable to Holland's
and Austria's area-code-for-every-village scheme with its "do I dial 0
first?". I await the day we all use fixed schemes worldwide.  


Colum Mylod    cmylod@oracle.nl IMHO of course.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 04:26:17 GMT
From: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Santa Claus Conquers the Fax Machine
Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 909, Message 11 of 12

In article <telecom12.907.11@eecs.nwu.edu> David Leibold <DLEIBOLD@
VM1.YorkU.CA> writes:

> A Reuters report notes that a new fax line to Santa Claus was swamped
> with thousands of calls for gift wishes. The line was set up in North
> Pole, Alaska (formerly Moose Crossing), the self-declared home of
> Santa Claus for many years.
 
> The fax number is +1 907 488.4646 (that is, 488.HOHO).

> Perhaps Floyd Davidson is still on the Digest; wonder how Alascom is
> taking all of this?

Hi David, and nice of you to ask about it!

Everyone who calls should be sure to get the number right, because the
poor folks who *had* 488-4040 got a free number change ... and the
company with a fax machine at 904-488-4646 is out of paper.  (The
right number is 907-488-4646.)

A group of volunteers in North Pole (which was never called Moose
anything, but is just up the road from Moose Creek) put in a couple
fax lines and sent out a press release to everyone from Jay Leno and
Rush Limbaugh to Paul Harvey.  They are offering to send a return fax
and mail a card postmarked from Santa at North Pole.

They did indeed get swamped.  5000 the first day.

Some of the faxes being received from little kids are facinating.  I
read one today "from" an almost born baby who wanted a really good
daddy ... and the reply said Santa would provide the best set of
parents from the inventory on hand!

And Jay Leno wouldn't mention it because they would not dedicate one
number only for his show.  A reply to him indicated maybe Santa would
provide him with a new attitude ... since he needs one.

They also got some interesting press in the local paper.  The local
telco, PTI Com (which is owned by Pacific Telecom, Inc.) set up the
fax machines and offered to pay for postage on the cards.  Alascom,
the long distance carrier (which is also owned by Pacific Telecom),
declined to provide any assistance.  A small long distance company,
GCI, then offered both money and technical assistance.  Of course long
distance service was switched to GCI immediately.  And all of that was
published in a front page article by the {Fairbanks Daily News-Miner}.

We took up a collection at work and an envelope was delivered today
with $5 from almost every Alascom employee at the Fairbanks Toll
Center.  It was specifically marked as being from the employees ...

I understand they will be taking calls up until the 21st, so if you
have kids ... give it a try, the reply messages are priceless.


Floyd

floyd@ims.alaska.edu  A guest on the Institute of Marine Science computer
Salcha, Alaska        system at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 08:33:02 GMT
From: jeff@bradley.bradley.edu (Jeff Hibbard)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cellular Tinkering?
Organization: Bradley University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 903, Message 1 of 15

CRAIG@harvarda.harvard.edu (Craig Evans) writes:

> I am interested in a headset for the phone especially for long trips

Here in Illinois, if a police officer sees you driving with a headset,
you'll get a fairly serious ticket.  Perhaps you should check the laws
in your state before proceeding.


Jeff Hibbard, Peoria IL
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 8:42:35 EST
From: Dennis G. Rears <drears@pica.army.mil>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: MCI Mail Continues to Dump Incoming Mail
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 908, Message 14 of 18

Rich Greenberg asked:

> Are there so many MCI Mail addressees that sending each of them an
> individual copy would be impractical?  If not, and your software can
> be adjusted to do this, the initial headache of setting it up would
> eliminate future headaches. Just dump the bounces.

> [Moderator's Note: Your proposal would cause a lot of extra work for
> everyone in the middle ... it *would* work, but one of the reasons for
> the standards as they are written now is to avoid such extra handling
> of mail and the requisite bandwidth. I have several dozen subscribers
> on the mailing list at mcimail.com.  I won't do it as you suggest.  PAT]

   I have to agree with Pat.  I have 18 addresses with mcimail.  I
don't have the time to set up something special for mcimail and
compuserve.  Unlike Pat, I don't even bother trying to send the
messages separately.  People who do not run a list have no idea how
much time we spend on it.  Even when everything is going right I spend
at least five hours a week (my time not the company) time on my
Digest.  Pat spends at least two hours a night.  We shouldn't have to
waste time on it, when the company that is being *PAID* to run a mail
system doesn't do it right.

  Incidently most of the Moderators on the Moderator's mail list agree
with Pat and I on this issue.


dennis


[Moderator's Note: Dennis Rears is the Moderator of the privacy forum
which had its origins here in telecom a couple years ago and split off
when the eternal discussion on Caller-ID got out of control.  I've had
others suggest sending MCI readers individual copies rather than a
single copy with a mutiple-address (blind cc) envelope; my answer is
still the same. Many of the Moderators will agree: we have bent over
backwards to accomodate the commercial sites and their idiosyncracies;
I do not intend to impose on eecs.nwu.edu in this way; nor will I
impose on Reston (the gateway).  PAT]
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 17:16:16 EST
From: clements@BBN.COM
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: "The Net <tm>"?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 908, Message 7 of 18

In article <telecom12.905.4@eecs.nwu.edu> Brad Hicks writes:

> I haven't been this steamed since the last time a megacorp highjacked
> a common term, when IBM (in my mind, illegally) trademarked the
> acronym for "personal computer."

This isn't really very telecom-related, but:

I'm not one to defend IBM, particularly, but they did NOT trademark
the term "PC".

In, for example, "IBM PC/AT", the "IBM" part is trademarked and the
"AT" part is trademarked, but the "PC" part is not.

As you say, "PC" was well established at the time, meaning what we
would now call a workstation.  Of course, today people THINK that "PC"
means an IBM/Intel/Microsoft 80x86 machine.  But that's a marketing
success, not a trademark.


Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 20:07:07 -0500
From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Stray Thought ... IRcordless? (was Cordless Phones)
Organization: UMass, Amherst MA + Temporal Sys & Computer Networks Bombay India
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 912, Message 10 of 15

Hi,

In article <telecom12.906.9@eecs.nwu.edu> crum@fcom.cc.utah.edu ...

> It seems like cordless phones will soon be digital, just as phone
> answering machines are making the transition to digital recording
> storage.  While on an America West airline flight, I saw a catalog of

    Are there any cordless phone anywhere in the world (not likely in
US) that use InfraRed instead of RF?

  There are these IR stereo headphone gadgets that work fine, so no
reason why a IR cordless should not work. These would be untappable
and provable safe.

  Not likely to find such a gadget in the US market, (a) I haven't of
any such and (b) people here like to walk from room to room with their
cordless.

  Not that people in other countries dont walk :-) but I know the
there are phone feature combinations available in the Japanese market
that are not available anywhere ... so worth this query!


shrikumar (shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in)

[Moderator's Note: There are some 'cordless headsets' with a range of
around 10-15 feet which use infra-red I believe. They seem to be quite
expensive in my opinion. They are good for people who wear headsets at
work and wish to walk around within a short area looking for files and
other items as they chat with their caller.   PAT]