HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:01:23 GMT
From: stamandp@ccsua.ctstateu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Motorola Alphanumeric Pagers? Any Info  
Organization: Yale University, Department of Computer Science, New Haven, CT
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 840, Message 2 of 16

Hello Net,

I'm looking for information on a Motorola Advantage Alphanmumeric
pager.  I've search the newsgroup is this seems to be just about the
closest match to post a message to.

I'd like some technical specs on sending formatted data to one of
these pagers and take advantage (no pun) of any advanced feature that
the pager has.  Does any one now if tech specs exists and can mere
mortals get a hold of them.  


Thanks,

Paul R. St. Amand                    | DECNET(ctstateu) CCSU::STAMANDP
Central Connecticut State University | Internet stamandp@ccsu.ctstateu.edu 
ITT Hartford, Finance                | BITNET   stamandp@ctstateu.BITNET
DECUS CVLUG                          | (203) 547 - 4030 (Business)

 Disclaimer: These comments are mine and do not reflect the administration
           or policies of Connecticut State University or ITT Hartford.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:30:39 GMT
From: mwgordon@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Gordon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Need Widget to Connect Two Faxes or Modems Together
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 835, Message 7 of 11

In article <telecom12.825.11@eecs.nwu.edu> root@yclept.chi.il.us
(Root) writes:

> A friend wants to connect two fax machines together via their telco
> connections so that the machines could be used as copiers.  Also, she
> wants to connect a fax modem equipped PC to a fax machine so that the
> fax machine could be used both as a scanner and as a printer.

> She would like a small and inexpensive piece of euipment with two
> modular telephone jacks with just enough "smarts" to supply a dial
> tone and appropriate ringing signals.  

    I just saw this in the Tiger Software Catalog.  (Sorry, its at
work, so I don't have the phone number.  It should be available at
1-800-555-1212.)

    The device is called Fax Scanner and it connects any fax machine
with any fax modem to allow the fax machine to be used as a scanner
and a printer.  Because it says 'any' fax and fax modem, I'm sure that
the connection is via the telephone line connections.  Since there was
not any mention of special software (other than the usual fax modem
software) I assume that it provides the usual dial tone, ringing and
talk battery.

    I have never actually seen this item work, so my info is just what
I read from the ad and speculated.  If anyone out there has this
device, maybe they'd like to tell us how it works.  It could have some
widespread use as the "telco line simulator" that everyone here has
been looking for.

    I believe the price was $90.  (Don't qoute me on that.)
 

Mike Gordon   N9LOI 99681084@uwwvax.uww.edu
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 16:19:41 CST
From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Music On Call?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 832, Message 9 of 12

> I came home recently to find a strange message on my answering
> machine: Several minutes of music.  There was no voiceover anywhere in
> the message, or before or after it -- just music.  The sound was of
> surprisingly good quality; I'm quite sure we're talking about a direct
> electrical connection, not pickup by a handset of music playing in the
> background.

> The music was symphonic; I didn't place the piece, but would guess
> Debussy as the composer.  (Definitely NOT the schlock you typically
> get for music-on-hold.)

> [Moderator's Note: My guess is someone was playing games. They called
> your machine and let it rack up a long 'message' by simply playing
> music for however long it lasted before the machine clicked off.  PAT]

Another possibility is that it was generated by music-on-hold, but not
by someone deliberately placing you on hold to leave you a long
message.  On many PBXs, to initiate a three-way call or transfer a
call, you FLASH and then dial another number.  This places the
original call on hold temporarily, and many PBXs will play
music-on-hold to the caller that has been placed on hold.
 
In your case, what may have happened is that the caller decided he
didn't want to leave a message on your answering machine, but he had
another call to make, so he hung-up briefly and then dialed the next
number.  If his hang-up wasn't long enough, it would be interpreted as
a FLASH by the switch, which would place you on hold.  After he dialed
the number, the switch would patiently keep you on hold until he
completed the three-way conference or transfer.  Of course, he never
did this, as it was his intention to hang-up on your machine, and was
unaware that it was on hold.  Thus, you got hold music (which was
recorded by your machine) for the entire duration of his second call.
(What would happen when he hung-up his second call depends on the
model of switch that his company has).
 

Brett    (rfranken@cs.umr.edu)
From: eli@cisco.com (Steve Elias)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Fax Back From DTMF Selection?
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:59:20 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 835, Message 4 of 11

Please see my replies in comp.dcom.fax, comp.dcom.patents, or call
Brooktrout for product information.  617 449 4100 / faxback 617 449
9010.  Anyone with pointers to other vendors, please post or email.


eli
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 07:07:00 +0000 
From: Greg (G.T.) Stovall <gstovall@bnr.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US? 
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 832, Message 3 of 12

turner@dixie.com writes:
  
> I recently received a newsletter from Telos.  Telos, as some may
> know, is a prominent manufacturer of DSP hybrids for the broadcast
> industry.  Anyway, in the newsletter, Telos writes:

> "As far as we can tell, the worst phone line conditions in the US
> exist in the Dallas/Fort Worth and Miami/Fort Lauderdale areas.  The
> 'Dallas' software [firmware actually -- PMT] is optimized for these
> difficult line conditions."

> I seem to recall that GTE is the LEC in Miami.  Is this correct?
> Who tied them in Dallas?

Dallas is served by Southwestern Bell.  Some of the outlying areas
(like Plano, etc.) are served by GTE.  I personally have never had any
problems in all the years I have lived here, but a friend of mine had
some problems with one of the SWB offices having a line "too hot" (the
signal was being clipped), which really screwed up his modem
transmissions to work.  Strangely enough, it only affected
communications between his home and work.  He could dial every other
place without problem, and I had no problem dialing into the same work
modem from my home ...


Gregory T. Stovall        <gstovall@bnr.ca>      
Bell-Northern Research    Richardson, Texas, USA   (214) 684-7009
My opinions are not necessarily endorsed by BNR.
From: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Sprint/United Telephone Wants Your Old Equipment
Date: 9 Nov 92 00:25:00 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 828, Message 5 of 7

Here is a place Ron could sell his old system, and you might have
stuff for them also.  I received this Fax message over the weekend:

 United Telephone - Northwest
  (A Sprint Company)

CASH FOR USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER EQUIPMENT!
==============================================

United Telephone (a Sprint Company) is interested in purchasing your
USED TELEPHONE or COMPUTER equipment.

   -- ALL models and manufacturers wanted!
   -- Parts or complete systems -- Large or Small!
   -- Offers quoted within three days!
   -- WE PAY SHIPPING!

             PHONE:  503-387-9195    FAX: 503-386-0185
                  QUESTIONS?    PLEASE CALL OR FAX

So anyone with old equipment they don't want might consider this as
one way of getting rid of it -- and help Sprint upgrade their service
at the same time, yuk, yuk!      


PAT
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 15:47:08 GMT
From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 836, Message 11 of 13

In article <telecom12.831.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, rfranken@cs.umr.edu writes:

>> A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing ...

> It depends on what kind of multiplexing equipment they use.  In
> general, the switches will not dynamically reroute a call should a
> trunk fail.  That is, if a switch has multiple paths available, and
> one fails, your call will be lost, but the next call will be routed
> over a path that is still functioning.

Correct.

> On the other hand, if the trunks are connected to some kind of
                     ^^
> multiplexor/ DACS, it may handle the rerouting without knowledge of
> the switch.           ^^^

Not true.  As soon as the circuit (circuit switched voice call) is
lost, supervision on the circuit indicates it has gone idle.  I know
of no switching system (I could be wrong here) that will automatically
reconnect the ends of a failed circuit switched call.  Furthermore, I
have not experienced voice trunks that are switched through a DCS
(Digital Cross Connect System) after the End, Tandem, or Access Tandem
machine finishes switching them.  There are multiple ways of routing
(Hierarchical, Dynamic Non-Hierarchical-DNHR, and Real Time
Non-Hierarchical-RTNR), but all of these are accomplished through
routing tables contained in the switches themselves.


Jack (John) Adams	Bellcore NVC 2Z-220	
(908) 758-5372 {Voice}	(908) 758-4389 {FAX}	
jadams@vixen.bcr.com	kahuna@attmail.com
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:59:27 GMT
From: edsr!gwr@uunet.UU.NET (George Rapp)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: No Caller-ID in Texas 
Reply-To: edsr!gwr@uunet.UU.NET
Organization: EDS Research
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 841, Message 4 of 5

Just heard on the radio that Caller-ID has been officially denied to
Texas residential subscribers.  It was just a snippet, so no details
were provided, but the issue was recently presented to the Texas PUC
(Public Utilities Commission), and I assume they made this decision.

The major point of contention was not the privacy issue, as it has
been in other states, but the Texas state law that prohibits attaching
"wiretap" or "trap and trace" devices to phone lines.  (From what I
understand, a "trap and trace" device is defined as one that is
capable of recording the phone number from which a caller is calling.
I have no idea why this type of device was ever outlawed.  Looks like
we have a law that needs changing.)

Telemarketers and ACLU privacy fanatics, rejoice -- you win.
{grumble, grumble} (I'm not happy about this ... 8^)


George Rapp        Electronic Data Systems Corporation
gwr@edsr.eds.com	(EDS Research)

The above opinions are mine alone.  As far as I know, EDS does
not share them.
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1992 05:11:41 GMT
From: betsys@cs.umb.edu (Elizabeth Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cordless Phone Newbie Questions
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Boston
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 830, Message 2 of 9

I thought I was a rather techie person, but I just picked up my first
cordless phone and am I confused! A few questions:

1) What's the range on these things? This is a Sony SPP-75, if it matters. 

2) What's the "auto security code system" for? Does that keep my phone
 from ringing when someone else's does? From hearing someone else's
call?

3) What's the relationship between the security codes and ten
channels?

4) Is this thing supposed to be left in the base or can I bring it
outside and wait for it to ring? Does it have to stand up in the base?

5) The manual mentions computers and interference. Will the phone
interfere with the computer, or vice versa? If I get a second line,
the phone could have the opportunity to interfere with the modem.

6) Finally is this a particularly good or bad phone? 

As you can probably tell, I bought this on a whim during a big sale
and didn't get to talk to the salespeople. There's a 30-day return,
though.

Thanks very much for any advice! Probably best to answer by email and
I'll summarize if there's interest ... I suppose the experienced techs
on this channel don't want to read about Sony buttons.


Thanks, 

Betsy
System Administrator      Internet: betsys@cs.umb.edu
MACS Dept, UMass/Boston   BITNET:ESCHWARTZ%UMBSKY.DNET@NS.UMB.EDU
100 Morrissy Blvd         Boston, MA 02125-3393
Date: 6 Nov 92 00:44:42 PST (Fri)
From: john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: The Worst Phone Lines in the US?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 826, Message 10 of 14

David Lesher <wb8foz@SCL.CWRU.Edu> writes:

> BS is still under investigation for a multi-million fraud case re:
> repair. Seems that if a problem exists longer than 24 hours, the PSC
> must be notified in the yearly report, and the sub gets a refund.
> Guess what. Virtually EVERY ticket got 'kicked' before 23.9 hours.

This is exactly what GTE California has done to EVERY SINGLE trouble
report that I have ever submitted. Spot checking with friends and
associates reveals similar experience. You report trouble to repair
and when there has been nothing done, you call back. You are told that
the problem has been corrected. When you complain that it certainly
has not, another ticket is opened. Using this sleazy trick, GTE
manages to maintain better looking repair resolution records with the
PUC.

> At long last, a fired supervisor spilled the beans to the PSC and the
> press. When I last talked to my contact in state goverment, they were
> still turning over rocks on the case ...

GTE employees are usually too busy toting the company line, blaming
customers for all the company's deficiencies. Look how much flack I
have taken on this forum from GTE-types for merely relating
experiences and observations. Rather than fix the problems, it is
easier to just attempt to discredit me.

 From the "GTE Definitions Handbook" by Yours Truly:

Smart Park-- n. A place where GTE has actually installed enough
facilities to provide real telephone service. No real service is
generally provided, however.


John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com> (hiding out in the desert)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 23:13:42 -0500
From: shri%unreal@cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech
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 837, Message 5 of 11

In article <telecom12.834.6@eecs.nwu.edu> airgun!fvance@uunet.UU.NET
wrote: 

> 2. Why, do they [Cellphone cos] go sniveling to Congress to make it illegal

Easier for them than to take on very complicated issues in encryption.

> 3. Why in the world did our government accept the snivelling and pass the
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, instead of telling the cellular
> providers to go fix their own problems?  Most agencies of the government
> understand the problem well enough.  That is why a great many of them have
> implemented digital scrambling on their own radio systems.

  Perhaps easier for the government to pass a law than to open what is
really proving to be a can of worms .. legal status of encryption
technology in the context of national and international security.

   Consistently there has been a desire from all governments not to
have too many encrypted messages buzzing around, except what their own
military needs. If encryption were to become common, how can law
enforecement work?

  (This takes us right into that controversy, and I hope we dont waste
c.d.t bandwidth on this (OK government need to monitor, but what about
my privacy, they can misuse ...) unless someone has real news :-) The
topic has been beaten and all views possible have been expressed in
such groups as comp.risks, sci.crypt and I'm sure many others.)

  But that still does not convince me why they could not specify and
authorise a "weak" encryption system for cellular. Tho' I think I can
see it ... how can a govt live up to face the fact that they
deliberately wrote into law a system known to be "weak". Also it is
not easy to ban export of encryption schemes and yet have to import
your phones from Taiwan ... hmm what a bind!

  No government has ever been technically faulted for administrative
laws, and therefore it is easy to see why they's prefer such a step to
a slippery technological one. Till said technology comes to be
accepted enough.

Me thinks so ...


shrikumar ( shri@legato.cs.umass.edu, shri@iucaa.ernet.in )
From: jbutz@hogpa.ho.att.com (John J Butz +1 908 949 5302)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Phone Service in the Great White North
Date: 5 Nov 92 15:36:58 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 825, Message 2 of 11

I hear that Canadian phone service underwent/is going through a
divestiture, similar to the one AT&T experienced.

Could anyone write to me and explain the current situation, the major
players, the regulators, recent deals, etc.  Perhaps there are good
articles in newspapers or trade journals that explain the current
Canadian telephony environment?

If I get sufficient replies, I will post them here for your reading pleasure.


J "Hoser" Butz		ER700 Sys Eng
jbutz@hogpa.att.com	AT&T - BL
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:53:00 GMT
From: Mark.Wuest@att.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: South African Telecom
Organization: AT&T
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 840, Message 4 of 16

I have a friend who is trying to economically exchange e-mail with
someone in Johannesburg, South Africa.  He personally uses Compuserve
(they have internet access).  For some reason, Compuserve in South
Africa is quite expensive.  MCI Mail can't give a straight answer on
how his friend would connect.  His friend is pretty net-illiterate.
Can people in South Africa e-mail me any ideas?  I'll post a summary
and let the Moderator decide if it's interesting enough to use up

bandwidth.  ;-)


Mark Wuest      *MY* opinions, not AT&T's!!
mark.wuest@att.com   mdw@cheshire.att.com (NeXT Mail)


[Moderator's Note: In this same issue, I've included some comments by
Stephen Davies of Capetown on a different topic. Perhaps if he sees
this he will correspond with you; or you could contact him. He
describes himself as a 'computer-nerd'; might be just your man!  PAT]
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 21:06:54 GMT
From: berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu (Mike Berger)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Phone Directory on CD
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 832, Message 5 of 12

system@coldbox.cojones.com (Bryan Lockwood) writes:

> Ken Jongsma <jongsma@swdev.si.com> writes:

>> Phone Disc: This $149 product includes telephone listings of 70
>> million U.S. residents plus more than seven million U.S. businesses.
>> DAK Industries, Inc., of Canoga Park, Calif., can be contacted at
>> (800)325-0800.
>> I was a bit surprised to see DAK selling this. One usually associates
>> DAK with closeout merchandise. Perhaps the listings are a bit out of
>> date?

> Au contraire. DAK has been working very hard to sell these things. I
> get a flyer about every other month. DAK seems to be working quite
> hard to bring CD-ROM prices down into the realm of affordability for
> the common man.

Are you sure this is the very latest version?


Mike Berger    Internet    berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu
From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Alleged Phone Harasser Arrested While Paying $18,000 Bill
Date: 6 Nov 92 09:57:00 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 825, Message 1 of 11

The {L.A. Times} reported in its Saturday, October 24, 1992 Orange
County Edition (I'm a little behind -- I'll probably find out who won
the Presidency someday next week) that a man wanted in Denver for
allegedly making several thousand harassing calls was arrested after
trying to pay his $18,000 bill at an Irvine, California cellular
telephone office.

Among his alleged victims are a city councilwoman, a police detecive,
and a gay and lesbian suicide prevention hot line, which was forced to
shut down for a while because of his flood of calls.

The Times reported that he is alleged to have been making these calls
for at least ten years, and was arrested seven times before.  It said
he had a lot of money available to him, and made harassing phone calls
to anyone he didn't like.

The man, David George Neuman, was said to live in a motor home with
nine dogs and twelve cellular phones which he used to allegedly make
the calls.

He was arrested in Denver, but set free by accident, and has eluded
police up to now.

He was arrested because police allerted cellular phone companies
nationwide, and the Irvine company (no name given) called police and
said he was coming in to pay his bill.  Other cellular companies have
been asked not to give him service.

The story did not say why he used cellular phones to make his calls.


Randy Gellens                randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com
A Series System Software                 if mail bounces,  forward to
Unisys Mission Viejo, CA                         rgellens@mcimail.com
Opinions are personal;   facts are suspect;   I speak only for myself
From: hansm@cs.kun.nl (Hans Mulder)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Caller ID Approved In Arizona
Date: 9 Nov 92 12:15:08 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 835, Message 2 of 11

In <telecom12.822.7@eecs.nwu.edu> the Moderator notes:

> [Moderator's Note: It is not his 'girlfriends Caller-ID equipped
> phone', it is *his* phone at home equipped that way that ratted on
> him. His only option would be to press *67, and I'm afraid that would
> make the wife suspicious also.   PAT]

But he *did* press *67.  Unfortunately, his girlfriend's phone had per
line blocking and the *67 unblocked it.  How could he have known?


HansM