HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 21:03:06 EDT
From: David Leibold <DLEIBOLD@VM1.YorkU.CA>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Global Connections Subscriptions Available
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 756, Message 3 of 8

Here is the info on how to request free subscriptions to Teleglobe
Canada's {Global Connections} which comes out every two or three
months, and describes various Teleglobe successes, new services and
other relevant developments. A few of the articles have been posted
in TELECOM Digest recently.

Contact:    Patricia Kirby, Editor,
            Global Connections
            Teleglobe Canada Inc
            1000 de la Gauchetiere St West
            Montreal, Quebec, Canada  H3B 4X5
            +1 514 868.7118

Be careful to specify how many copies of each issue are to be sent. I
just got a significant wad of G.C. copies this week, and now have to
figure out where to distribute them all.


dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 12:30:07 EDT
From: morpheus@entropy.mcds.com (morpheus)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Speech Recognition Added to Telephone Messaging System
Organization: the pickle factory at Langley, Virginia
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 745, Message 6 of 10

Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL> writes:

> Speaking of speech recognition:

> I called those Dallas-area voice recognition phone numbers recently
> published in the Digest.  I had at least two cases of "seven" going
> through as "two".

Intrestingly, I had multiple occurances of five being recognized as
seven.


morpheus@entropy.mcds.com  <->  morpheus@f208.n2606.z1.fidonet.org
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 11:52:18 -0400
From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Modem Recommendations For Developing Nations Installation
Organization: UMass, Amherst, MA + Temporal Sys & Comp Net, Bombay, India
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 741, Message 9 of 9

In article <telecom12.738.12@eecs.nwu.edu> davidson@ccrs.emr.ca

> I am putting in some IBM RISK 6000s into Czechoslovakia (CSFR) which
> will have an internal modem. I have been warned that the phone lines
> are incredibly noisey and inside cities "switched" so that short
> interruptions are common. Can anyone recommend either a brand of modem
> or some suggestions of specs that I should look for? I require a very
> robust modem 2400 or 9600 baud, and preferable internal.

   The Trailblazers do very well under similar circumstances
you mention.

   They use a PacketEnsemble Protocol, which ping pongs packets
between the two ends, in a very fast training half duplex mode.  With
auto-retransmits on error and ARQ.  So they are inherently rugged
against "dropouts" in the lines.

   Also they split the spectrum into 512 carrier, each is QAM
modulated. Naturally, each little carrier does not have a very large
bandwidth, which also leads to a conclusion that they'd also be fairly
tolerant of spikey noises that stay for a very short period of time.
Also, they can turn off selective sub-carriers so that noise with very
strong spectral lines (most third world type telephone noises) does
not affect connection.

   We used Trailblazers very effectively during the first inceptional
stages of the ERNET network, the academic network that brought E-mail
networking to India. And believe me, they worked under lines with such
bad noise and (worse) echo conditions, that even 2400 bps MNP modems
gave up under. I believe several Trailblazers are doing very good
service in India now. We were getting consistent 7.1Kbps on the
connections, which compares with figures that JUnet had obtained in
their early stages on dial-up lines.

   I'd not know much about the RS/6000, but I guess they are not PC
ISA architecture. However, I wonder if internal modems would be
feasible. External will surely do.

> I would prefer if you would reply to me directly, and I can then post
> a summary of the replies for others interested.

   BTW, can anyone give me pointers to any patents that cover the
Trailblazer technology. I'm sure that the documentation would mention
numbers, but I don't have them handy, so I'd appreciate patent numbers
if someone has them (thanks in advance). I can look up the patents in
our library.

   If someone on the list has some more insight into the patents
covering the Trailblazer, I'd welcome that also.


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


[Moderator's Note: In closing this issue, permit me to extend my best
wishes to our many reader/participants in the Digest of the Jewish
faith as another New Year begins. I believe I speak for all members of
the Digest family in sending my kind regards.  PAT]
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 13:01:16
From: wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org (William Degnan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Two-Line Switching Device
Reply-To: wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 741, Message 6 of 9

26 Sep 92, Jim Morton writes:

> What I'm trying to do: Install a FAX machine so incoming calls are
> answered on an outside telco local number, but outgoing calls from the
> FAX machine use an internal PBX line/trunk which goes through a T-1
> and gets much cheaper long distance rates. I would need some type of
> box that when it sees an off-hook request switches to the internal
> line and busies-out the external line (no need to busy-out the
> internal line when off-hook from an external call-in).

The Siemon Company makes exactly the device you are looking for. I
don't have the product info handy today but you have described its
application.

Try your local supply house or call Siemon at 203 274-2523.

(Disclaimer: I've talked to them on the phone before. That's it.)


* Origin: Private Line - Fidonet<>uucp for Central Texas (1:382/39)
William Degnan,  Communications Network Solutions
-Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology-
P.O. Drawer 9530       | wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org | mfwic@mdf.fidonet.org
Austin, TX 78766-9530  | !wdegnan@attmail.com  | Voice +1 512 323 9383
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 14:29:31 CST
From: Jack Decker <Jack@myamiga.mixcom.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: LD Transmission Quality Comparison
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 742, Message 4 of 9

In message <telecom12.725.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, ruck@zeta.ee.ufl.edu (John R.
Ruckstuhl Jr) writes:

> Can I safely extrapolate -- AT&T LD quality is superior?

Not necessarily.  I've seen situations where folks had noise on AT&T
and got better quality by using another carrier.

What I think you can deduce is that something is not hooked up right
at one end or the other. Most likely it's either a problem of
inadequate volume levels, or clock slip (all systems not synchronized
to the same master clock). The thing is, the problem will never be
fixed if no one reports it. The other problem is that very few of the
carriers OR the local telcos are equipped to deal with trouble reports
 from knowledgeable customers. I would suggest writing a letter
describing the problem, and send copies to the long distance carrier,
BOTH local telcos, and maybe the Public Utilities Commission in both
states.  I would think that it would be primarily the responsibility
of the interexchange carrier to (the long distance company) to fix the
problem (or arrange to get it fixed), but putting the telcos on notice
that there is a problem couldn't hurt.

One thing that really bothers me is that now that everything is
digital, volume levels on many calls seem a lot lower than they used
to be, regardless of carrier used (and I've noticed this in several
cities, using several different types of phones including
telco-provided public phones).  Usually calls within the same exchange
are of adequate volume (though not always!) but toll calls (or even
local calls to different exchanges) are often of lower volume.  I
really think that some agency (the FCC, perhaps?) needs to set some
standards for minimum acceptable volume level at the receiving end
(and if there currently IS a standard, it needs to be increased!).

I also wish there was a simple add-on circuit for phones that would
increase the receiver volume level WITHOUT increasing sidetone.  Most
"amplified" handsets can raise the volume of a long distance call, but
when you talk you blast yourself in the ear!  I'd LOVE to see a phone
with both adjustable receiver volume AND adjustable sidetone ... would
that be too much to ask?


Jack Decker   jack@myamiga.mixcom.com    FidoNet 1:154/8


[Moderator's Note: I've always wondered about this also. I have
various amplified handsets around and if I get a call with very poor
transmission I turn the volume up ... all I wind up getting is lots
more sidetone and very little increase (if any) in the voice on the
other end.  PAT]
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 12:40:37 EDT
From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL.MIL>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 752, Message 14 of 15

>> In New York and New Jersey, you dial 1+ before an area code.

> Not quite correct.  Area code 516 which adjoins area code 718 does
> not require 1+ dialing for any type of call.  It's N0X/N1X-NNX-XXXX
> for out of area code and NNX-XXXX.

Strictly speaking, it should be N0X/N1X-NXX-XXXX for out of area code;
and the NNX-XXXX shown above is within area code (516 not having N0X/
N1X prefixes that I know of).  This applies to 516 and also to
southern part of 914 (another part of country code 1 still having this
method is the San Jose part of area 408 in California).  The rest of
New York state, as far as I know, has 1 (+area code, if different from
where you're calling) + 7D for long distance.  I guess that N.Y.state
outside of NYC would change to the NYC method (7D within area code and
1 + NPA + 7D for other area codes) to prepare for NXX area codes.
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 10:16:17 CDT
From: Bill.Pfeiffer@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Digital Cable Radio
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 758, Message 4 of 5

In a recent TELECOM Digest, john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes:

> mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com writes:

>> * a 24-hour toll free number to call to get the current selection and the
>> two previous selections on any of the channels, listing artist, selection
>> title, CD title, and publisher.

> The system on my cable provides the current selection information
> (title, composer, artist, record label and number) right on the remote
> control in real time.

That service is called DMX (Digital Music Xpress) and although our
slouch cable company will not offer it, I agree, it is superior to DCR
for the very reason John mentions.  The ability to 'see' the selection
playing.

DMX is affiliated with TCI who runs the cable system 'across town' and
I belive that is why our cable company (Prime Cable of Chicago) does
not carry it.  I think this type of system is great and would gladly
subscribe if I could.

If there IS a ghod, let him/her/it bring me DMX.


William Pfeiffer
Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal
To subscribe, send e-mail to rrb@airwaves.chi.il.us
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 8:52:26 EDT
From: cmwolf@mtu.edu (CHRISTOPHER WOLF)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Non-Air Air-Phone
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 753, Message 12 of 18

When I took the ferry across Lake Michigan from MI to WI this summer,
there was a phone or two on board that looked like the phones on
air-planes.

How does this work being only 100ft off the ground, in the middle of a
lake?


Christopher Wolf   cmwolf@mtu.edu


[Moderator's Note: Maybe they were not Airphones but were operated
like marine radios.   PAT]
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 13:00:50 CST
From: Joseph.Blough@ivgate.omahug.org (Joseph Blough)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: A Hypothetical Question :-)
Reply-To: joseph.blough%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 743, Message 5 of 8

A while ago there was quite a discussion about the fact that telephone
directories were no longer copyrightable, at least that is what I
think the end result was.
 
What would be the problem (other than the phone company not liking it)
of starting a service that goes as follows:
 
Obtain telephone directories from most major cities and many smaller
ones.  Use a page scanner and OCR software to create a database of
literally millions of names, addresses, and telephone numbers.
 
Then offer a variety of services from this information, such as custom
reports based on various criteria, searches for various individuals,
etc., and even such things as checking for listings for certain
numbers.
 
This could even be on line (on a subscription basis, or, God forbid,
on a 900 line) for interactive queries.
 
Does anyone see any substantial legal problem with this?  I know some
may consider this a privacy issue, but all of the information is
already out there available to the public.
 

Thanks and Happy Hacking.          JB
Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1    (1:285/666.0)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 18:54 EDT
From: syd@dsinc.dsi.com (Syd Weinstein)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What Does a DS-3 Circuit Terminate at?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 739, Message 4 of 17

In comp.dcom.telecom is written:

>> The T-3 Backbone of the Internet/NSFNet runs on IBM's RS/6000-based IP
>> routers -- does anyone know if IBM is selling these commercially yet?

> Nope.  The NSFnet runs on IBM PC/RT machines.

I beg to differ.  The T-1 backbone of the NSFnet runs/ran on PC/RT's,
the T-3 backbone is on RS/6000's.  An it uses special boards for the
network side that I don't think IBM is selling yet.  I do know they
were changing out the FDDI and Ethernet boards a bit recently due to
some upgrade problems.


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.3PL11
Datacomp Systems, Inc.                 Projected 2.4 Release: Oct 1,1992
syd@DSI.COM or dsinc!syd      Voice: (215) 947-9900, FAX: (215) 938-0235
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:22:20 GMT
From: davidr@socrates.ucsf.edu (David Rivkin%Kollman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Additional Thoughts About Voice Mail Systems
Organization: Computer Graphics Laboratory, UCSF
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 752, Message 8 of 15

In article <telecom12.748.3@eecs.nwu.edu> jdgretz@northridge.
witchcraft.com (John D. Gretzinger) writes:

> I thought I would add some details to the Voice Mail discussions
> currently underway.

> Most (I used to say all, but after talking to John Higdon have to
> revise that) PC based voice servers require the system to be brought
> out of service when any service is required.  This includes backup of
> data, retrieval of billing information, replacement of components,
> etc.

> GTE uses a mixture of machines in it's COs, but the primary machine is
> from Digital Sound Corportation.  DSC is not interested in small
> sites, and thus does not have a machine for the small business.  Also,
> their IVR capability is severely limited at this time.  They have
> announced capabilities for next year that other players have available
> now.

> If I had my choice, I would buy anything else.  My first choice would
> be Centigram, then Octel.  I really like Centigram's approach to
> business, machine management, and IVR development tools.  This is not
> to say Octel is not real close.  Simply my impression and choice.

> If you currently want to do IVR with DSC, you need to be very good
> with low level C code, 'cause that's what you got now.

1.  Do you have good contacts you can refer me to at Centagram and
Octel (Phone, Fax, e-mail)?

2.  I agree that most developers of PC based Voice Mail have not
looked into the aspects that you mention, but that does not mean that
everyone has not.  In designing Winfon, Because it is run from a
multitasking environment like Windows, OS/2 or X on Unix, such backups
were included and allowed to happen while the system was still taking
calls.  Currently we are making the system be admined and user
controled over a LAN (even WAN) via e-mail facilities.

We have, however, found very little interest in these features that we
feel are so very important to how things are done.  The Voice Mail
industry seems reluctant to get things moving toward integrated
information "At your fingertips".  We have the solution today, but
no one is interested.

Just wanted to put in my two cents.


David Rivkin   UCSF   Winfon Engineering   davidr@cgl.ucsf.edu
Date: 30 Sep 92 05:45:55 GMT
From: alan@acpub.duke.edu (Alan M. Gallatin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: British Call Waiting (was My Favorite Intercepts)
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 748, Message 9 of 12

In article <telecom12.744.13@eecs.nwu.edu> phil@rochgte.fidonet.org
writes:

> The most boring intercepts are those from Germany (right to the
> point), the French outer territories (which always seem to be running
> on the winner of the wow and flutter tape unit award), India, which
> barely makes it out, and the old British standby, the long tone, which
> doesn't allow us to hear anything at all. :-)

The British have won my award for best call waiting handling anywhere.
A week or so ago, I was talking to a friend who lives outside London.
In the middle of our conversation, she got what she thought to be a
call-waiting beep (this was the first time she encountered
call-waiting over there ...) -- anyway, I hear her say "hold on"
followed by a click.  A few seconds later, I hear (in a VERY proper,
English voice), "I'm sorry, but the other person is temporarily
engaged on another call.  Please hold the line."  This cycled a few
times with a good ten seconds between repeats.  The recording got
interrupted by another click and my friend returning to the line.

I, for one, hate call waiting (I got it under protest, but enough
pepole that I talk to insisted that I get it).  I despise the idea of
making someone wait.  However, if you're going to do it, at least do
it with style!


Alan M. Gallatin <alan@acpub.duke.edu>
Duke University School of Law; Durham NC


[Moderator's Note: At one point Illinois Bell was considering music on
hold for the held party in a call-waited conversation. Nothing ever
came of it, but it might have been a pleasant addition, and certainly
one that IBT could have charged another dollar a month for!  :)   PAT]
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 00:10:03 -0400
From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: What is the Purpose of the Tri Tones?
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 735, Message 8 of 13

In article <telecom12.730.2@eecs.nwu.edu> vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET

> In a message from Andy Jacboson he mentioned "tri-tone" ...

>> Special Information Tones (SIT), as defined by the CCITT consist of a
>> sequence of three precise tone segments whose specific frequency and
>> duration are of technical importance.  Detailed information on SITs is
>> available in CB 154, "Specifications for Special Information Tones
>> (SIT) for Encoding Recorded Announcements," Issue 3 (Bellcore, June
>> 1983).  These tones are used by automated call-detection devices to
>> identify call attempts terminating in announcement systems.  Typical

   Now, if only some of those nifty modems decoded these tones ...

   Oooops, did I let the cat out of someone's bag ?


shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu )
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 9:53:11 EDT
From: Charles McGuinness <jyacc!charles@uunet.UU.NET>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: N0N/N1N Exchanges and 1+ Dialing
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 750, Message 9 of 13

In Vol 12 Issue 744, wariat!catfood@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu coments:

> Within area codes which contain N0N or N1N exchanges, is it always
> required to dial all ten digits of numbers within the area code?  If
> not, how can the switching network distinguish between (for example)
> the following two calls made from Manhattan:

> 1-818-xxxx (In-area, calling 818 exchange);
> 1-818-www-xxxx (Calling 818 area code).

The first gives me a fast busy, the second goes through.  Of course,
Manhattan is a bad example, as all calls in 212 are "local"*, and 1+
is only to be used to precede an area code.

* There is no such thing as "unmeasured" service, just untimed in
Manhattan.  All calls cost at least 10.6 cents, minus time of day
discounts.


Charles
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 19:14:29 GMT
From: Graham Toal <gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Speech Recognition Added to Telephone Messaging System
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 742, Message 3 of 9

In article <telecom12.733.1@eecs.nwu.edu> shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu
writes:

> And my Asian/Indian-accented "two" was always consitently read as a
> "zero". It did get my two correct when I deliberately put on the best
> American accent I could manage.

Got my Scots accent 100% no problem.  Mind you I always have said
we're the only country who speak the Queen's English properly :-)

But seriously, I was impressed.  It's the best recognition system
*I*'ve ever used.  However at the price of a call from Britain I
wasn't going to call their 'further info' number to get prices etc.
Anyone have the rest of their details online?


G
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 17:44:45 GMT
From: rdippold@Qualcomm.COM (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Funny 800 Number Spelling
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 735, Message 13 of 13

The icing on the cake has to go to a number for one of those late
night ripoff chat lines, you know, the ones with models in lingere
lounging around the furniture in their house, trying to make you
believe that they have nothing better to do than spend their evening
talking to lame-o party line callers.  It's a 900 number, but close
enough ... 1-900-FUN-DUCK.  Take a look at that "3" key ... I wonder
how that one got by.