HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:26:30 GMT
From: aub@access.digex.com (Aubrey Philipsz)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air
Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 672, Message 5 of 12

In article <telecom12.664.8@eecs.nwu.edu> ddssuprs!tom@uunet.UU.NET
(Tom Gillman) writes:

> I, too, would like to know why cellular phones are prohibited by law on
> aircraft. Please post or email any relevant info.

I have been told by someone in the airline industry that there has
been a ruling on this which now allows for cellular use while the
aircraft is on the ground; this was sort of confirmed recently when
the Captain of a USAir flight borrowed my cell phone to allow an irate
passenger to make a phone call when the aircraft had been holding,
waiting for ATC to clear it to take off, for about an hour and a half.

Use of cellular inflight falls under the much more broad restriction
on transmitting devices.  The basic reason is that electronics in an
aircraft are pretty important to the safety of the passengers and
crew.  The draconian measures may seem excessive, but this is a
"better safe than sorry" situation.  I will note that there IS
interference with navigation systems from radio signals, it really
does happen, and it is a bit unnerving to have to shoot landings with
instruments that you suddenly can not trust.

Of course, there is always the question of operating a cell phone at
30,000 feet; sounds a BIT higher than the antenna altitude
restrictions for cellular.


Aub
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 19:23:26 EDT
From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: CWA Union Hall Aids Hurricane Relief Efforts
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 2 of 6

Here is a press release from the AFL-CIO which mentions that the union
hall of Communications Workers Local 10511 in Jackson, Mississippi, is
being used for hurricane relief efforts.

 Labor Assists Victims Of Hurricane Andrew
 Contact: Sharolyn Rosier of the AFL-CIO, 202-637-5010

   WASHINGTON, Aug. 27/U.S. Newswire/ -- The AFL-CIO/American Red
Cross Disaster Response Network has been activated to aid relief
efforts for victims of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana and Florida.

   The Network of 144 local unions allows the Red Cross to use their
halls in the event of disaster.  The following union halls have been
mobilized: Carpenters Local 1765 and Plumbers Local 803 in Orlando,
Fla.; Electrical Workers Local 349 in Miami; Carpenters District
Council in Hialeah, Fla.; Electrical Workers Local 985 in Baton Rouge,
La.; and Communications Workers Local 10511 in Jackson, Miss.

   The halls are equipped with staff to assist with such services as
housing, food, and damage assessment.

   AFL-CIO Community Services liasons who have more information on
labor's outreach efforts are:

   -- South Florida -- Billy Tindle or Frank Culver at
                       305-324-2523 or 324-2525
                       or Marilyn Jacobs at 305-579-2267.

   -- Baton Rouge/Jackson -- Walt Norris (phone lines are
                             down, please call Chris Marston
                             at 202-637-5010.)

   "The union halls are the backbone of the hurricane response plan
for the gulf coast and much of the eastern United States," said Armond
Marscelli, manager of disaster operations at the American Red Cross.
"Services are provided much quicker because the halls can be readily
used as staging areas, watch districts and headquarters."
From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Area Code 700 Number For ANI Read-Back?
Date: 2 Sep 92 03:43:00 GMT
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 676, Message 8 of 8

I was told that there is a 700 number that reads back your own number.
A check of telecom back articles at our site doesn't pull up any
references.  If it exists, could somebody pass the number along?


Bill Mayhew      NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-9995  USA    phone: 216-325-2511
wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu   (140.220.1.1)


[Moderator's Note: None that I know of. 700-555-4141 tells you which
long distance carrier is assigned to your line however.   PAT]
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 17:47:01 EDT
From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Telemarketer Identification (was Automated Hate Calls)
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 678, Message 4 of 11

I seem to recall New York enacting a law similar to those in other
states that requires telemarketers to identify themselves, their
company, etc.  and I've received two from one within a matter of days
and both stated the same thing in the preamble.  I don't recall the
effective date, though.

The other day I received a telemarketer call who spewed the preamble
and after the person was finished, I told her that I didn't want the
product they were selling and not to call me again and to inform their
company of that.

Last night, another telemarketer from the same company called and that
really ticked me off.  I'm now thinking of writing the company a
letter demanding that they stop or I'll think seriously of taking some
sort of legal action.

This company is a national chain most recently noted for deceptive
auto repair practices in several states.

I'm already battling NYTel over a billing problem and I won't mind taking
on another so called pillar of the community.


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 11:00 PDT
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool
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 669, Message 7 of 9

gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:

> I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal.  Is that one
> to get it it down and one to cut?

That is sometimes necessary, but ...

> Does any one color indicate which side has the blade?  (Neither side
> on mine seems to trim the cable.)

The tool is shipped with the CUTTING end inside the handle. You are
apparently using the NON-CUTTING end. Loosen the big screw near the
blade, pull the blade out, swing it around, push it back in, and
tighten the screw. You will see that one side of the blade now has a
sharp ridge that will trim the copper wire. It will be obvious which
way to hold the tool (you do not want to cut the business end of the
wire, but rather the excess).


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115
    john@zygot.ati.com      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 15:22:34 -0400
From: matt lucas <matt@telestrat.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Conference: Commercializing Internet
Reply-To: ml3a@andrew.cmu.edu
Organization: TeleStrategies Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 679, Message 9 of 15

TeleStrategies is hosting "Commercializing Internet: Issues,
Opportunities and Entrepreneurial Strategies" on September 15-16.

The following topics will be discussed:

- New opportunities for computer vendors, information service entrepreneurs
  and telecommunications carriers.

- NSF acceptable use.

- RBOC, IXC and entrepreneurial strategies for multimedia and gigabit
  networking.

- Creating public network services from the emerging national research
  and education network.

Also, there will be a one day pre-conference tutorial "Understanding
Internet for Non-Engineers" on September 14.

For more information call (703) 734-7050, ask for Matt Lucas, or Eva
Waskall.  Or, if you e-mail your postal mailing address to
ml3a+@andrew.cmu.edu I will send you a brochure.


Matt
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:48:07 EDT 
From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Disaster Reporting
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 664, Message 2 of 12

What with the two disasters on our hands -- the fire in California and
the damage caused by Hurricane Andrew, I was wondering if people
located in those areas who have power and telephone service and
receive the Digest could keep us posted on the efforts to recover from
these calamaties.

My sympathies go to those living in those areas and hope that their
losses are minimal which unfortunately aren't.


Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093


[Moderator's Notes: Very little word is coming in or out of Dade
County, and the news that is reaching us is horrible. The town of
Homestead, with 30,000 residents was wiped out of existence. Utility
poles and wires are laying on the ground in a jumble, ripped and torn
from their poles, etc. Utility service will not be fully restored for
many weeks. I forward articles to comp.dcom.telecom using nntpxmit
through several sites including cs.miami.edu, and they have not
responded to telnet since Monday. I sincerely hope that telecom people
everywhere will rally to the support of Dade County. The California
disaster is of equal concern right now but to some extent was over-
shadowed by the enormity of Andrew's fury this week.  And now we have
Louisiana to deal with ... so much to do. Please take a few minutes on
Thursday and help out however you can: Florida, Louisiana, California.
Thanks, and if you hear from folks in these areas, pass along news.  PAT]
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:05:14 GMT
From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch?
Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu
Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 666, Message 10 of 13

In article <telecom12.661.7@eecs.nwu.edu>, stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill
St. Louis) writes:

> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will
> work.  (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC)
> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.)  Will
> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs?

The jacks are the same, except for the notch.  The difference is in
the cable.  A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so
that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end.  A notched
cable is wired straight.
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:09:42 GMT
From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: How Do I Locate Graybar?
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 664, Message 10 of 12

Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar".  Is
this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store?  Do they have a
catalog?


Mike Schuster
NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM
The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com   | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 16:00:42 GMT
From: rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Help Needed: Programming Info on an EXTROM HMS-612EE
Organization: University of Western Ontario
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 662, Message 2 of 14

I got the phone system at a flea market.  It works just fine, but I
want to change the programming (line ringing, toll restrict, SMDR,
etc.)  A copy of a programming manual would be appreciated.  Could
anyone help with info?  Thanks a million ... 


rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin)
Western Business School  --  London, Ontario
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 17:43:37 GMT
From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Deaf Dialtone
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 678, Message 9 of 11

Hi, I have GTE (shoot me now), and a couple of times in the last year
(more this last week then ever), I have a dial tone that does not care
if I dial or not ... it is DEAF.

For example, I dial a phone number, and when I am done dialing, the
dial tone is still there ... nice huh? So I hang up, try it again,
same problem.  Finally ... I'll try it five minutes later and it is
fixed.

What the heck is the deal?


Marshal Perlman - Huntington Beach - California - USA - Earth - Milky Way


[Moderator's Note: Nothing 'got fixed' five minutes later. You simply
got a different piece of the central office common equipment than you
had earlier ... the 'deaf dialtone' is still hanging around out there
giving grief to someone else.  PAT]
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 07:18:55 CDT
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 800 Portability
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 669, Message 4 of 9

In article <telecom12.661.6@eecs.nwu.edu> wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill
Huttig) writes:

> I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean
> that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be
> phased in?

> Will every possible exchange become avaiable? 

   NOTE:  The following is opinion -- the details are still being
          "worked out" in various industry committees.

   Every exchange (NXX) can be made "portable", in theory.  Since some
of them are already "portable" in the sense of using the LEC 800
databases (that is, the LEC "NXX" codes), I don't believe you'll see
an "at once" scenario.  A local CO might cut all remaining NXX codes
at once (maintaining the same routing after the database query as
before), but it will take some time to get all the COs to use the new
database for all 800 calls.  Once that total change-over is complete,
it will be possible to change the routing of a given number.

> Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as
> a large company?

> Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing
> problems?

   See above NOTE.  Correction of problems is a major concern of the
industry.  Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases
with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing
against each other???  The only one that comes to mind is the default
carrier assigned to equal access lines.

> I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different
> times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I
> would hate to have to write that database).

   The database is already "written" for the capabilities you've
mentioned, and others.  But maintaining them ALL accurately is going
to be much harder than building them ever was. And, of course, you're
likely to be billed based somewhat on the complexity of what you're
asking the system to do.


Al Varney -- remember, it's just MY opinion
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:16:54 CDT
From: Andrew C. Green <acg@hermes.dlogics.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Do-It-Yourself Car Phone Installation?
Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 664, Message 6 of 12

I've been toying with the idea of picking up a used cellular phone for
my wife's car, primarily for some peace of mind (both hers and mine)
in case of breakdown. At this time, neither of us have one and I'm
(obviously) not an expert on the subject. For various reasons, I want
a permanently-installed model.

Now the question: how difficult is it to install? I have extensive
experience with car electrical systems, sound systems and the like,
but the few articles I've seen on the subject make it sound like brain
surgery; they blather on about how to choose a good installation
outfit, but don't clarify what's so darned difficult about it.

Two more questions: Does the antenna require any kind of adjustment
(i.e. tuning) after installation? Finally, what sort of bureaucracy is
involved in obtaining service? This sort of paperwork is usually done
by the installation outfits, but as I said, I'm hoping to do this
myself. Thanks in advance for the net.wisdom ...


Andrew C. Green
Datalogics, Inc.      Internet: acg@dlogics.com
441 W. Huron          UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg
Chicago, IL  60610    FAX: (312) 266-4473
From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker?
Date: 4 Sep 92 04:56:25 GMT
Organization: Rice University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 683, Message 6 of 10

In article <telecom12.673.11@eecs.nwu.edu>, mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu
(Michael Rosen) writes:

> Is it possible to make a calling card call and not have to wait for
> the <bong> to enter your card number?  I'd love to be able to just
> dial it all straight and not have to wait those extra few seconds.

If you are calling the "home" number associated with the card, you can
usually just type in the card number (instead of the phone number then
the card number).  This will generally give you the "two-tone" and
connect you with your home number.

I have done this with both Sprint and MCI cards, so I would guess that
it's standard.  No guarantees -- your mileage may vary.  :-)


Robert Book   rbook@rice.edu
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:18:55 CDT
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 800 Portability
Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 668, Message 8 of 12

In article <telecom12.661.6@eecs.nwu.edu> wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill
Huttig) writes:

> I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean
> that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be
> phased in?

> Will every possible exchange become avaiable? 

   NOTE:  The following is opinion -- the details are still being
          "worked out" in various industry committees.

   Every exchange (NXX) can be made "portable", in theory.  Since some
of them are already "portable" in the sense of using the LEC 800
databases (that is, the LEC "NXX" codes), I don't believe you'll see
an "at once" scenario.  A local CO might cut all remaining NXX codes
at once (maintaining the same routing after the database query as
before), but it will take some time to get all the COs to use the new
database for all 800 calls.  Once that total change-over is complete,
it will be possible to change the routing of a given number.

> Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as
> a large company?

> Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing
> problems?

   See above NOTE.  Correction of problems is a major concern of the
industry.  Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases
with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing
against each other???  The only one that comes to mind is the default
carrier assigned to equal access lines.

> I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different
> times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I
> would hate to have to write that database).

   The database is already "written" for the capabilities you've
mentioned, and others.  But maintaining them ALL accurately is going
to be much harder than building them ever was ... and, of course,
you're likely to be billed based somewhat on the complexity of what
you're asking the system to do.


Al Varney -- remember, it's just MY opinion
From: kbeau@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Kevin Beauchamp)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: ATM Introduction Wanted
Date: 31 Aug 92 18:15:28 GMT
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 675, Message 8 of 12

I would like an introduction to Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM)
technology.  I would like a general overview of the technology, and
perhaps a glossary of related terms.

How does ATM interface with Ethernet?

Will ATM interface with FDDI?

What is the relation of ATM to SONET?  ISDN?

What is the projected maximum bit rate?

When will product be available?  

How expensive will it be vis-a-vis FDDI?

Can someone on the net help me out?


Thanks,

Kevin Beauchamp   kbeau@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 06:40:55 GMT
From: shadmas@sdf.lonestar.org (a real lamer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Warning: Deceptive Use of This Account by Phreaker/Cracker
Reply-To: sysadm@sdf.lonestar.org
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas - 214/436-3281
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 680, Message 2 of 9

	#    #    ##    #####   #    #     #    #    #   ####
	#    #   #  #   #    #  ##   #     #    ##   #  #    #
	#    #  #    #  #    #  # #  #     #    # #  #  #
	# ## #  ######  #####   #  # #     #    #  # #  #  ###
	##  ##  #    #  #   #   #   ##     #    #   ##  #    #
	#    #  #    #  #    #  #    #     #    #    #   ####

The person previously using this account (and now barred from it) has
apparently been deceptively posing as a PBX equipment buyer named "Tom
Downs".  This is *NOT* the name of the user.  He is also known to have
used the alias "Patrick ONeal".

This person is a teenage or early 20's "phone phreak" known (primarily
to other phreaks) as "shadow master".  It is expected that his intent
as posing as a PBX buyer is to obtain information on PBX systems which
are large (easier to conceal diddling), remotely configurable, have
outdial capability (to thwart CLIDs and call tracing during
"phreaking"), and voice mail (phreakers communicate with each other
via stolen VMB's).

If you have a system of this type, and have revealed it to this
person, it is quite probably has been cracked already.  He apparently
has acquired access to phone company databases and other sources of
information to seek out places to break into.  Even casual posters to
Usenet should beware if they manage or deal in such equipment.

This is certainly not the first or last time for such an event.  It
would be prudent to exercise caution in dealing with ANYONE who posts
and mails from public access systems such as this one.

This will be the final posting from this account, and it is being used
for this purpose since we expect it increases the chances of this
posting being seen by people who had formerly been in contact with
this person.

The actual identity of this person will be made available to any
authorized law enforcement agency in the case any criminal proceeding
ensues.

	In utmost sincerity,

	The sdf system administration group.