HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: 20 Aug 92 08:06:03 PST
From: Dave Johnston <DAVE@cs.santarosa.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Pounding on an OctothorpReply-To: 
Organization: Santa Rosa Junior College
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 649, Message 8 of 8

No, this isn't another attempt to start the whole pound/octothorp
issue again.  However, all this talk of octothorps does bring to mind
a humorous story from a previous job.  Well, at least I thought it was
humorous, I guess we'll find out if Pat thinks so.

I was working for a company that ran both a long distance resale
operation as well as an Interconnect business in the mid-80s.  We had
hired a new receptionist about a week previously and she had been
working out quite well.  One of her functions was to operate our PBX
console (Mitel SX-200) and she seemed to take to it very nicely.

The only problem she had was that she couldn't seem to make the paging
system work.  She would dial the code, but the speakers would never
activate.  It worked for the rest of us from our phones, but for some
reason wouldn't work for her.  The paging access code was #7.  Or as
we had told her "Pound Seven".

One day after she was frustrated with not being able to get the paging
to work and numerous funny looks from the rest of staff, since it
worked OK for us, she said, "I don't know why it won't work, I pick up
the phone and _pound_ the seven key, but nothing happens.

Once we explained that "pound" referred to the octothorp key and not
how hard she pressed the other keys, things worked much better for
her.

I hope the humor of the situation came through my feeble description.


Dave Johnston, WD6AOE             Santa Rosa Junior College
Supervisor, Campus Data/Telecom         1501 Mendocino Ave.
dave@cs.santarosa.edu                 Santa Rosa, CA  95401
Voice +1 707 527 4853                   Fax +1 707 527 4816


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for a smiling conclusion to this issue. I'll
see you all again over the weekend.   :)     PAT]
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 21:11:33 GMT
From: spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem
Reply-To: spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 632, Message 4 of 13

Something that came to mind as I read Paul's article (and mailed it to
him thereupon) but which no one has mentioned publicly yet -- the
low-tech solution.

This should work for ANY beeper using touch tone, although I haven't
tried it myself (disclaimer, disclaimer)

Simply issue ATDT<beeper number>,,,<number you want them to call back>
and insert enough commas to get past the ringing.  I think each comma
is two seconds or something. (No guarantees, but someone please try
this out and lemme know if it works :-) )

I guess you need a modem that's capable of dialing the # sign (let's
NOT get into a thread on how to pronounce that) ... my Dad had three
beepers and they all had you use # to signal the end of the number.
Although if I remember correctly you could just wait like three
seconds and it would assume you were done.


The opinions expressed in this article are solely mine.
sss/PU'94 Dept of CS (spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu)/JvNCnet (spencer@jvnc.net)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 12:08:02 PDT
From: lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Deterioration of Pots (vs. Monopolies)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 650, Message 1 of 10

 From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein)

> ...  Of course, Lauren and Pat seem to like having the Judge
> as a whipping boy.  I guess they so worship Ye Olde Bell System that
> they don't recognize the overpaid mucky-mucks who cooked up divestiture 
> as a way to rid themselves of a low-profit capital-intensive line of
> business.

If Fred will review my message that started the current "Pots
Deterioration" discussion, he'll find that I did *not* mention or
blame Judge Greene nor did I point to the lack of a monopoly Bell
System as the essential causes of POTS deterioration.  Nor will he
find statements from me in there suggesting that the old Bell System
monopoly should have been maintained.  He appears to have taken Pat's
comments to my message and assumed that I agree with all of Pat's
views.  I do not.  In the world of telecommunications there are many
points on which Pat and I agree, and there are many on which we
disagree (we're both cat lovers, however!)

The point of my original message was that the fragmentation of phone
service has caused problems for non-techie users, who have not been,
are are unlikely to become, the beneficiaries of most of the
competitively driven advances in telecommunications technology.  Lots
of fascinating alternatives and services will be opening up for
business users, but nobody really wants to spend a lot on the
residential POTS market (since it is mostly all regulated
services) -- and things are getting tougher for exactly that segment.
And contrary to some opinions we've seen, I do feel that it is
important for the technologists (that's us!) to watch out for "Aunt
Martha" and her needs as well.

There is an insanity to having to call umpteen different companies and
deal with seemingly endless finger-pointing to solve "simple" (let
alone complex!) service problems.  There are ways these problems could
be solved while still allowing competition and avoiding monopolies,
through coordinated service organizations and oversight, for example.
However, it seems unlikely that this will be accomplished by the
involved organizations themselves acting only of their own volition.


 --Lauren--
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 00:07:04 GMT
From: houle@nmt.edu (Paul Houle)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)
Organization: New Mexico Tech
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 626, Message 4 of 15

In article <telecom12.617.7@eecs.nwu.edu> goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob
Goudreau) writes:

> The only group of people for whom SV cards are a clear-cut win is
> the (very small) segment of the population which doesn't have a
> calling-card account (visiting foreigners, people who have no home
> phones, etc.).

	I don't have a home phone and I have an AT&T card.


[Moderator's Note: That's because AT&T still issues, and has for many
years issued a 'non-subscriber calling card'. It is mainly intended
for people who are temporarily transient; i.e. military, college
students, sales people who continually travel, etc.   PAT]
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:11:42 GMT
From: mcharry@mitre.org (John McHarry)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Who Administers the 800 Numberspace?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 645, Message 9 of 17

In <telecom12.643.11@eecs.nwu.edu> jms@misvax.mis.arizona.edu writes:

> Naturally, there is substantial opposition to this from a variety of
> interested parties, including parts of the phone company who don't
> want to do seven-digit database lookup for every 800-number call (can
> you say "increased rates?"  I knew you could.) 

This puzzles me.  I would think the LEC would get a bigger piece of
the pie for doing the translation, plus increased revenue from
churning the tables.  On top of all this, they can justify putting SS7
equipment in the rate base and then use it for all sorts of new
services.  It sounds to me like chucking the rabbit into the briar
patch.

(Just my ill-thought-out musings.)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 14:28:00 EDT
From: hpk@vax135.att.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Where Can I Get a VME Board POTS Interface?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 641, Message 4 of 13

I am interested in interfacing POTS telephone lines to a VME computer.
I would like a board with modular phone jacks (to which I can connect
either a phone line or a telephone set).  It should contain A/D and
digitization hardware and allow full-duplex connections.  Detection of
touch tones and other progress signals would be a plus.

Where can I buy such a beast?  If VME isn't available, I will settle
for a SBus board.  I am also interested in a similar interface to ISDN
lines.


Howard Katseff
Room 4G-622, AT&T Bell Laboratories, P.O. Box 3030, Holmdel, NJ  07733-3030
UUCP: att!vax135!hpk   Internet: hpk@vax135.att.com   908 949-5337
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 22:16:39 HST
From: ldoming@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 710 and ABCD?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 627, Message 13 of 16

I own a Computer Peripherals ViVa 9642 (v.32 v.42bis) external modem.
Much to my surprise, I discovered that they are capable of emitting
the "silver" ABCD tones (it's even mentioned in the manual!).  To use
them, I need only type ATDT15551212#,,D or ATDTA.

I tried dialing A, B, C, and D.  As soon as any of these tones are
dialed, I immediately get a reorder signal (fast busy) and am unable
to dial any further.

I tried playing the D tone continuously into the phone after dialing
15551212.  I'm not sure, but I believed it knocked the DA operator off
the line and gave me my dialtone back.  No "rapid dialtone pulse" was
heard which would have indicated I was in ACD mode as someone
described in another message here in the digest.

By the way, I'm in GTE land and am pretty sure that I am on an ESS
switch, although I'm not sure.  It could be one of those GTE switches.

I'll let you know if GTE security visit me tonight :').


Amadeus
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 19:06:00 GMT
From: Robert Freimer <freimer@cs.cornell.EDU>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: AT&T EasyReach Problems in Rochester, NY
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 629, Message 3 of 6

DREUBEN@EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU (Douglas Scott Reuben) writes:

> exceptional service.  Yet not being able to be reached from the second
                                                                  ^^^^^^
> largest city in New York state (at least in certain exchanges) is
> troubling. AT&T should act quickly to remedy this shortfall.

It's actually the third largest.  You forgot about either NYC or
Buffalo.


Robert


[Moderator's Note: Well, I doubt if he forgot to include Buffalo! :)  PAT]
From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Trademark Infringement
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:46:29 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 4 of 12

Alan Varney <varney@ihlpf.att.com> writes:

> {Yellow Pages may be Trade Marked by some Telephone companies or by
> some computer companies that think electronic look-up originated with
> them.}

British Telecom was the outfit.  I recall getting our most recent
version of SunOS for our Sun 386i workstations some little notes
explaining that Sun couldn't sell their software in the U.K. without
infringing on BT's copyright, so out went the name "yellow pages" and
in went "Network Information Service". (Or is that "Server"?  My
office didn't get a complete set of docs.)  A bit silly, really: in
this country, we have plenty of examples of companies doing business
using similar trade names without people getting huffy.  An example
would be the MacIntosh line of custom stereo equipment made by a
company of the same name and the Macintosh computer line made by Apple
Computer.  Heck, Apple Computer had to come to an understanding with
the faux record label started by the Beatles in order to business in
the first place ... the original agreement was that Apple Computer
wouldn't get involved with music, and Apple, the non-recording record
label, wouldn't make computers.  But there's an unhappy ending: now
that Apple Computer is getting big orders from recording studios, I
understand that lawyers for the Beatles' Apple are suing Sculley's
Apple Computer.


Robert L. McMillin                     | Voice:    (310) 568-3555
Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc.  | Fax:      (310) 568-3574
Los Angeles, CA                        | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com
From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: NYTel LATAs
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:15:12 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 2 of 12

This was probably kicked around in some previous posts concerning the
subject "LATAs Crossing State Lines" but I'll give it a go anyway.

The following information is taken from my most recent NYTel bill so I
am considering it authorative.

NYTel is broken into six LATAs serving broad parts of the state plus
small portions of Connecticut, Massachussetts and Pennsylvania.  The
LATAs by area are:

New York Regional Calling Area:
New York City (212/718/917 area codes); Long Island (516) except
Fisher's Island; Westchester, Rockland, Putnam and the southern portion
of Orange County (Greenwood Lake, Highland Falls & Tuxedo) - Area Code
914; the Greenwich/Byram section of Connecticut (area code 203) which
is served by NYTel;

Pughkeepsie Regional Calling Area:
The remainder of Orange, Dutchess, Ulster and Sullivan Counties - all
of Area Code 914.  Also includes Area Code 717 exchanges 296, 491, 559,
686 and 828;

Albany Regional Calling Area:
Capital District and Adirondack Region - all of Area Code 518 and Hancock,
Massachussetts in Area Code 413);

Syracuse Regional Calling Area:
All of Area Code 315 and the northern-most portion of Area Code 607,
including Cortland, Ithaca, Newfield, Lansing, Groton, McLean and
McGraw;

Binghamton Regional Calling Area:
Area Code 607 except the area covered by the Syracuse Regional Calling
Area; includes Pennsylvania Area Code 717 exchanges 461, 537, 549,
596, 623, 635, 663, 882 and 888.

Buffalo Regional Calling Area:
Area Code 716 except Rochester; includes Pennsylvania Area Code 814
exchanges 228, 6907 and 698.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
From: tijc02!pjs269@uunet.UU.NET (Paul Schmidt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Solicitation Slime
Date: 18 Aug 92 13:46:28 GMT
Organization: Advocates for Self-Government - Davy Crockett Chapter
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 642, Message 8 of 10

john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes:

> This afternoon, my private line rang with someone who identified
> himself as being from the {Chronicle}. I said, "I'm sorry, I do not
> accept solicitation on this line", and hung up. The phone immediately
> rang back and I was greeted with, "Rude dickhead [slam]". Since then
> there has been a stream of one-ringers.

> Needless to say, I have notified the {Chronicle} concerning this. And I
> have now been convinced that telemarketing is a practice that needs to
> be eliminated -- by whatever means.

I have also been annoyed by telemarketters, but not in the form of
harrasment you described.  I have been harrassed, though, and other
people in my family have been harrassed.  I think that it is easier to
rid the problem of telephone harrassment by concentrating on the
incedents rather than focussing on an industry or group of people,
many who are not harrassing people.  Banning a collective group for
the actions of one can lead to strange conclusions like banning taxis
because of poor cab drivers, or all animal rights groups because of
the illegal actions of individuals in one group.  Actions are
committed by individuals, and punishments should be levied against
individuals.


Paul Schmidt: Advocates for Self-Government, Davy Crockett Chapter President
706 Judith Drive, Johnson City, TN 37604, (615)283-0084, uunet!tijc02!pjs269
From: unregistered@newcastle.ac.uk (Scott A. McIntyre)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: New 900 MHz Cordless Phone
Date: 13 Aug 92 14:08:34 GMT
Reply-To: S.A.McIntyre@durham.ac.uk
Organization: NeXT Campus Consultant
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 631, Message 13 of 13

I'm fairly sure this is the same phone I saw advertised in the August
issue of the Sharper Image Catalogue ... $299 USD was the selling
price.

Other features included twenty channel searching (I think) and ten
number memory ... intercom, speakerphone from base and so on.

My question is: is it legal in the United Kingdom?  I'm in the market
for a good cordless phone, but the best I've seen here is two
channels, and very primitive at that ... (manual switching).

Does anyone know if the 900MhZ is legal in the UK for public use?
BABT approval aside that is ...


Scott
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:34:36 GMT
From: fff@microplex.com (Fred Fierling)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 710 and ABCD?
Organization: Microplex Systems Ltd.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 643, Message 5 of 13

In article <telecom12.628.6@eecs.nwu.edu> fff@microplex.com (Fred
Fierling) writes:

> In article <telecom12.627.10@eecs.nwu.edu> James.VanHouten@f544.
> n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) writes:

>> Radio Shack supposedly has one.  Model # 43-139.
>                         ^^^^^^^ Wrong!!

Abject apologies; it appears I am responsible for some of the noise
that netters complain about.  Model 43-139 does NOT have the ABCD
keys.  A respondent to my original posting and I had a misunderstanding.


Fred Fierling    fff@microplex.com       Tel: 604 875-1461   Fax: 604 875-9029
Microplex Systems Ltd   265 East 1st Avenue   Vancouver, BC   V5T 1A7,  Canada
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 10:14:17 EDT
From: Daniel Wynalda <danielw@wyn386.mi.org>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 634, Message 4 of 12

Today I recieved the following in the mail and thought it would be of
interest to TELECOM Digest readers:

              --- begin quote ---

Dear Network Service/AT&T Customer,

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for using the AT&T
private network.  You can continue receiving large discounts and high
quality on the AT&T SDN network.

In our continuing effort to serve you better, I would like to announce
two (2) new services that will save your company time and money.

First, is the "Call America Preferred" calling card.  If your company
has people on the road, this card can save you 25% on local calling
card calls and is 40% less than standard AT&T calling card rates for
long distance.  All calls are carried on the AT&T SDN network.  Along
with your savings, consider these added advantages: One (1) card is
all you need for local or long distance calling.  Calling card traffic
is included in your AT&T bill with the summary reports you have come
to expect.  Because it's 800# access, you will never receive a bill
from an alternate operator service that might cost 200% more.  ALL
calls will be carried by AT&T.  Your PIN number is your social
security number plus zero, so you don't have a lot of numbers to
remember.  If you would like cards for your company, please fill out
the enclosed order form, or for further details please call our
customer service department.  There is no cost for the cards.

The second service available is authorization codes which allow you to
enter a two (2) digit code to add security and accounting capabilities
to your specific location.  These codes are also available to you at
no cost.  If you are interested or need additional details call us at
1-800-xxx-xxxx, we are here to serve you.


xxxxxxx xxxxx
Customer Service Manager

         --- end quote ---

Things I notice of specific interest:

1.  800 number access to an *AT&T* long distance network (as opposed
        to 10288 or 10732 access) -- this is new to my knowledge.

2.  Social security number plus zero for calling card number.  I 
        don't know that I really like giving out my social security 
        number to the telephone company so I can make calls *AT
        WORK*.  Something seems risky -- but still convenient.

Just thought people might like to know some of the things going on in
the SDN world... BTW I have been very happy with the service.  I get
listings of numbers called most often, longest calls, area code
studies, line studies, etc all on my bill in the way I like them. --
All FREE, and cheaper than standard LD.

Disclaimer:  I have nothing to do with Network Services/AT&T or any other
company mentioned here other than as a satisfied customer.


Daniel Wynalda       | (616) 866-1561 X22 Ham:N8KUD Net:danielw@wyn386.mi.org
Wynalda Litho Inc.   | 8221 Graphic Industrial Pk. | Rockford, MI  49341