HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: airgun!fvance@uunet.UU.NET (Frank Vance)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Risks Of Cellular Speech
Date: 9 Nov 92 19:46:52 GMT
Organization: Western Geophysical, Div. of Western Atlas Int'l, Houston, TX
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 834, Message 6 of 11

I for one have been quite disappointed in the way the entire cellular
privacy issue has been handled by the cellular providers and the US
government.

1. First of all, why did the various cellular providers make promises
of "safe and secure communications" when they knew anybody with a
little money could buy a receiver to listen in?

2. Why, instead of fixing the technical deficiencies in their product
do they go sniveling to Congress to make it illegal to listen (as if
they are ever going to be able to enforce it)?

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.

Who actually believes that just because it is illegal to listen to
cellular telephone conversations that people are not going to do it?
Especially those for whom it is not "recreation", but a method of
gathering information to be used to commit fraud or some other illicit
money-making.

IMO, the cellular companies should come clean on the privacy issue
with their customers and potental customers.  They should also spend
their money on developing true solutions to the problem instead of
lobbying to develop and pass unenforcable regulations.  But I am
afraid this is just another example of our society's inability to
understand that the government can not fix every injustice, much less
every annoyance, and that we (individually and corporately) need to
take more personal responsibility to fix them ourselves.


Frank Vance +1.713.963.2426	Western Geophysical
fvance@airgun.wg.waii.com	10001 Richmond Avenue Fax:
+1.713.963.2758			Houston, TX 77042 USA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 15:30:20 CST
From: rfranken@cs.umr.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Telco Handling Of Cable Cut
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 831, Message 7 of 13

> A recent Bell Canada TV commercial shows a raccoom chewing through a
> cable.  A voice-over indicates that even if a line goes down in their
> network, calls will be rerouted so that they are not lost or even
> noticed by the parties at each end.  Is this true?

> I always thought that voice switches used circuit switching, which
> means that is a call is interrupted, it has to be re-established
> manually.  I agree there are redundant trunks to by-pass the cut cable
> but always thought that there were no automatic rerouting.

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.
 
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.  In this case, the end-to-end path from one switch to
another has not been lost, and your connection will stay up (as far as
the switch and you know nothing ever happened).  The multiplexor will
instead send that channel over an alternate path.  As one example,
imagine a loop of, say, three COs connected by a loop of fiber, each
portion of the loop (i.e. from CO A to CO B, B to C, and C to A)
having capacity for 24 voice trunks (much smaller than actual value,
of course, but it will work for an example).  Then imagine that the
telco only uses 50% of the bandwidth (12 trunks from A to B, B to C,
and C to A).  Now, if the fiber from A to B is lost, the 12 A-to-B
trunks can be rerouted over the spare bandwidth on th C-to-A and
B-to-C fibers.  If this is done by the fiber multiplexing equipment,
all you will notice is a bit of noise as the change to the alternate
path is made.  Some real-world implementations are done as loops, but
there are other topolgies also, and newer equipment, can do a lot of
fancy re-routing.
 

Brett   (rfranken@cs.umr.edu)
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 15:34:05 GMT
From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (22475-adams)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Alcatel Kirk Delta Phone Help Needed
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 828, Message 3 of 7

Hi,

My cousin in Denmark sent me a very lovely Alcatel Kirk Delta
telephone with repertory and a number of other features.
Unfortunately, the explanation of some of the settings of the feature
switches is in Danish and I'm too embaressed (not knowing Danish all
that well) to call them and ask for an interpretation.  Among the
things I would like to know about the settings of the switches is: How
do I set it for DTMF dialing?  What ringer tone patterns are
available?  Etc.  The glossy user guide is in Danish, but contains
very meaningful information (i.e., it tells how to make and answer
calls, use the repetory features, etc.)  I would like some kind soul
who might have an English version to mail me a copy or I could e-mail
the relevant Danish phrases for translation.  In case all this fails,
I can always just fool around with the switches and hope for the best.


Jack (John) Adams		 Bellcore NVC 2Z-220
(908) 758-5372 {Voice}		 (908) 758-4389 {Facsimile}
jadams@vixen.bellcore.com	 kahuna@attmail.com
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:38:51 -0500
From: grayt@SOFTWARE.MITEL.COM (Tom Gray)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Music On Call?
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 837, Message 10 of 11

In article <telecom12.823.6@eecs.nwu.edu> leichter@lrw.com (Jerry
Leichter) writes:

> 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

> [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]

A more likely possibility is that you received a call from someone
behind a PBX. Hearing your answering machine message, this person
attempted to make a new call by depressing the switch hook to get dial
tone. He did this so quickly that the off hook was interpreted as a
switch hook flash by the PBX. The PBX put you on soft hold while it
waited for the user to set up the conference call or what not.

You heard, the PBX's MOH signal while the originator blithely went
about his business not knowing of the connection to your phone.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 22:30:35 GMT
From: iqbal@omaha.eel.ufl.edu (M.Iqbal)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: PAM: Pulse Amplitude Modulation Questions 
Organization: University of Florida
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 825, Message 8 of 11

Hi,

I have been thinking on the pulse amplitude modulation lately a lot.
I made up following two diagrams that I have not seen in any
communication book. I appreciate if somebody can comment on it.

1) The following is natural sampling PAM diagram that I made with a
LPF and an impulse train. What I have seen in almost every
communication book is a pulse train at the mixer. However, I modeled
pulse train with an impulse train and a LPF. The LPF acts as a
short-time integrator.  I think that in doing so one can understand
flat-topped PAM better which is shown in the figure of #2.

                            Switch

 Analog(message) ----------(X)-----------> PAM with natural sampling
  Signal input              |
                            |----------
                            |         |
                            |         >
                            |         <  <--- resistor
                         -------      <
                         | LPF |      |
                         -------      |
                            |        ---
                            |        GND
       Impluse train--------|

The time constant of the LPF is small enough so that LPF capacitor
discharges before next impulse arrives. During the time capacitor is
charged, the output follows input as the switch in on.

2) All I did here is moved the LPF in the output branch from the input
branch. Since LPF transfer function is similar to an integrator, any
product of the impulse and the analog-message siganal will be held.
Thus we will have sample and hold circuitry in the output branch.

                                   -------
Analog(message) ----------(X)------| LPF |----> Flat-topped PAM
 Signal input              |       -------
                           |
                           |
                           |
                           |
      Impluse train--------|


Any comment will be appreciated. I have skipped math as it is very hard to
put in ASCII the summation signs and other symbols.

Please email your reply.


Thanks,

iqbal@sioux.eel.ufl.edu   University of Florida
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 14:29:49 GMT
From: bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: ISDN and Stuff
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 831, Message 1 of 13

In <telecom12.820.7@eecs.nwu.edu> mmt@redbrick.com (Maxime Taksar
KC6ZPS) writes:

> In article <telecom12.814.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, root@sanger.chem.nd.edu
> (Doctor Math) writes:

>> Question: Why are things this way? When current modem technology
>> approaches the speed of one ISDN B-channel over an unmeasured dial-up
>> line for one-fourth the CPE cost and less than half the base monthly
>> charge, why would I want ISDN? 

> Modem technology will never get near the speed of an ISDN B channel.
> I think that the theortical limit for a modem over a POTS line is
> somewhere in the 25-30Kbps range (someone please remind me how fast a
> Shannon modem is).  This isn't even half of what an ISDN B channel is.

Also, although none of the terminal adaptor manufacturers seem to have
thought about it yet, there is no reason why they could not implement
V.42bis in an ISDN TA. This would nearly double the 64 kbit/s rate.

In the trials at U of WV, from reports that I have heard, users at
home accessing the LAN over a single B-channel are quite happy with
the speed.


Bob
From: david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Australian Phone Numbers to Become Eight Digits
Date: 6 Nov 92 03:01:16 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 823, Message 3 of 6

[Seen on last night's television news and in today's {Sydney Morning
Herald}.]

Austel (Australia's Telecommunications regulatory body) has announced
its plans to renumber all of Australia's 15 million telephone numbers.

The current plan with 54 area codes containing five to seven digit
numbers will be replaced with four area codes with eight digit
numbers.  Tasmania and Victoria will share 03 (currently allocated to
Melbourne), New South Wales will use 02 (currently Sydney), Queensland
will use 07 (Brisbane) and the Northern Territory, Western Australia
and South Australia will use 08 (Adelaide).

Capital city numbers will add the digit 9 to the front while regional
numbers will add the current area code (without the leading zero). For
instance:

	(02) 893 9182	->	(02) 9893 9182
	(042) 21 3802	->	(02) 4221 3802

The changes will start in Sydney, most rural areas of NSW and parts of
SE Queensland in 1994. Melbourne will follow in 1995, NT, Adelaide and
the rest of Queensland and NSW will follow in 1996, Perth and Tasmania
in 1997 and Canberra in 1998.

Austel's chairman Mr Robin Davey said the changes were necessary
because the country was fast running out of numbers (especially in
Sydney and Queensland Gold Coast). Only 13% of the 96 million numbers
the current scheme allows are currently in use but it was not feasible
to use numbers from less-populous areas in the cities because it would
destroy the geographic mapping that people like in telephone numbers.

In addition, the international access code will change from 0011 to
006 and in a move to free up the 00 prefix for international access
the 008 code will change to 180 and 0055 will become 190.


David Wilson			  +61 42 213802 voice, +61 42 213262 fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong  david@cs.uow.edu.au
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 13:53:26 EST
From: normt@ihlpm.att.com (Norman R Tiedemann)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Very Weird Telephone Problem
Organization: AT&T
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 835, Message 11 of 11

> The phone rang a third time. This time it *was* my sister on the line,
> but it was a very bad connection, as if she was in Argentina or
> something. I asked her if she had called me the previous two times,
> and she said, "No, I just got home. And anyway, you just called *me*".
> We determined that we had *each* heard the phone ring, and picked it
> up, and found ourselves connected to each other!

> or something ... is this a pre-Halloween prank, or what?

Halloween Prank is the best explanation. It is possible (not very
likely) that something "went wacko" in the phones and set up this
bizarre interaction. (Note: "went wacko" and "bizarre" are the
official Bell Labs terms for these event. :-))

But, I have listened to a DJ here in Chicago do this exact thing. He
calls two people (often same last names), connects them and then
listens to the results. Normally, the results are like you described
two semi-confused people arguing about who called whom. The reason for
the first rings and no one on the line, is the DJ must time the two
calls so you both answer about the same time. In your case, you
answered but your sister did not yet, so the DJ had to wait until they
answered (leaving you in silence) or keep trying both numbers until
you were both near enough to the phone to answer at about the same
time.

Next time this happens, tune in the local "wild and crazy" radio
station and check if you hear yourselves. (Or start shouting
obsenities.)


Norm Tiedemann		AT&T Bell Labs  IH 2G-429
att!ihlpm!normt		2000 Naperville Rd.
normt@ihlpm.att.com	Naperville, IL	60566
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:25:23 GMT
From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Help Needed With DTMF Tones
Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
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 5 of 14

I assume you looked up the frequencies -- I haven't checked them ...
but what do you mean by "average" of the tones.  Both tones have to be
broadcast simultaneously.  The spacing SHOULD be adequate, but I think
you might need to shorten the tone. My modem will send 10 tones/second
and the phone system will handle it correctly, but I don't know the
on/off ratio.


Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything 
important.
From: stevedav@netcom.com (Steve Davidson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: ISDN From Intel PC Computers
Date: 8 Nov 92 02:09:16 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 829, Message 5 of 9

Is there a newsgroup for ISDN questions?

Can anyone direct me to information regarding how I might get ISDN
capability on an Intel PC?


Steve Davidson   Email: steved@cfcl.com   Phone: 415-355-6535


[Moderator's Note: There is comp.dcom.isdn, although such commentaries
are welcome here also in the general discusison.  Perhaps a Digest
reader will have an answer for you.   PAT]
From: john@mojave.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Do Tell!
Date: 9 Nov 92 07:36:21 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 833, Message 9 of 9

richg@hatch.socal.com (Rich Greenberg) wrote:

> The text block at the bottom is a pitch for CentraNet(r) service from
> our old friends from GTE.

I find the ad for "CentraNet" and the concept of Centrex from GTE
highly amusing on two fronts. First and formost is the fact that one
has major difficulty adding so much as two trunks to a PBX in an
industrial park in Long Beach. So how is it that GTE can deliver 50,
60 or 200 lines of Centrex when it cannot even deliver two more
business lines to a phone-starved enterprise in the middle of a major
city? This is either a case of advertising when there is in reality no
product to deliver OR -- GTE is withholding service from its regulated
side so that it will have sufficient facilities on its unregulated
side where the profits are higher. It is one of the two -- both of
which are disgusting.  (In the Long Beach case there simply are no
facilities.)

A second, minor amusement is the fact that ISDN is not available on a
GTD-5, GTE's CO switch of choice in many areas. This means that
"CentraNet" is the weeniest form of Centrex: all features are simple
codes and hookswitch flashes. There are no display features or direct
single key activated functions, unless there is some type of
proprietary phone only available from GTE. (Speed dial from the phone
does not count.) Pac*Bell and most other LECs using NT DMS or AT&T
5ESS offer ISDN features on Centrex, allowing the use of standard ISDN
feature phones, something not possible in any way on a GTD-5.
(Centrex itself has only been available for the last couple of years
on the GTD-5.)

An interesting point comes to mind here. Here in Contel country, the
switches are all DMS and 5ESS. This means that it is technically
possible for ISDN to be offered. If this had been originally a GTE
area (as it soon WILL be), the dreaded GTD-5 switches would have been
installed everywhere in the high desert area, precluding even the
possibility of any ISDN offering in the forseeable future.


John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com> (hiding out in the desert)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:42:56 GMT
From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Splits This Month
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 834, Message 11 of 11

In article <telecom12.831.13@eecs.nwu.edu> mcrware!!troyf@uunet.UU.NET
(Troy Frericks) writes:

> Anybody keeping track?  How many area codes are left (unused)?

> [Moderator's Note: There are just a couple left under the old
> numbering format; several hundred are available using the new scheme
> set to begin in a year or so. 

I feel really sorry for the people in the area where the first "new
scheme" area code is implemeted.  Can you imagine the number of people
that will not be able to call them because of COCOTs, PBXs, etc., that
will reject the call because the second digit isn't a 0 or 1?


Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com


[Moderator's Note: I feel sorry for anyone who gets victimized by an
idiot, which is how a lot of PBX and COCOT administrators could be
defined, although not all by any means.  About ten years ago I
regularly used a ROLM PBX here which could not seem to understand that
a zero or one was permissible as the second digit in a seven digit
local number.  I kept turning in trouble reports, using the approved
method of doing so, to tell the people involved that (among others)
518 was a perfectly valid prefix in the 708 area. All my reports went
into the circular file I suspect; nothing was ever changed. Finally I
dealt with this problem by changing *my phone number* in the company
records to 708-518-xxxx which was a number I used to use occassionally.

Since I only went to see these people whenever they called me with a
problem of one sort or another, that meant there would soon be some
hassles that might bring about a fix to the phone system. Sure enough
about three days later, they are calling me from a pay phone in the
lobby of the building. I gave them a stall and told them I would have
to 'check my files, and could they call me back in about ten minutes.'
I knew that would tick them off, having to go back to the lobby pay
phone again; so I did it twice more, each time telling them to give me
another ten or fifteen minutes to 'research my records'. When I went
by a couple days later, I was told the Vice President - Operations had
gone to see the Telecom Manager with fire shooting out of his nostrils.  
Presto!   For the past few years now, I've been taking care of that
PBX system myself on a part time basis, spending a few hours each week
making requested changes in service and reconciling telco billings.  PAT]
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992  17:35:21 EST
From: FZC@CU.NIH.GOV
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: AT&T to Eliminate Holiday Rates
Reply-To: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.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 824, Message 8 of 9

I found the following advertisement, "buried" on page A9 on today's
(November 4) {Washington Post}.  I suspect what it means is that AT&T
wants to eliminate holiday discounts.  Has anyone else heard about the
following?


Paul Robinson -- TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM
Any opinions are mine alone and no one else is responsible for them.

                             --- 

NOTICE TO AT&T LONG DISTANCE CUSTOMERS

On November 2, 1992, AT&T filed tariff revisions with the Federal
Communications Commission to reduce the number of Special Rate
Occasions (occasions when special lower rates apply to Evening and
Night/Weekend Dial Station calls) from ten (10) Evenings and nine (9)
Night/Weekends to zero (0), and to reduce the number of Floating
Holidays (those holidays over and above the regular ten (10) federal
holidays) from four (4) to zero (0).

These changes are scheduled to become effective on November 16, 1992,
and will apply to both general and commercial long distance schedules.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:27:36 GMT
From: kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Silent Caller From Different Numbers
Organization: Open Software Foundation
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 831, Message 10 of 13

In article <telecom12.822.6@eecs.nwu.edu> Mike Honeycutt <ecsvax!mah@
uncecs.edu> writes:

> A student complained about receiving frequent phone calls where the
> person does not say anything.  The call can last up to a minute then
> the caller hangs-up.  This pattern is repeated several times a week
> (weekdays only) and occurs between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.

> Before [...] I start writing the sequel to "The Cuckoo's Egg", can anyone
> offer a logical explanation for these events.

Sure can. His number is a misprint of a legit fax number that state
offices would have a need to call often.


Kenny Crudup, Contractor, OSF DCE QA
OSF, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA 02142	+1 617 621 7306
kenny@osf.osf.org	OSF has nothing to do with this post.