HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee)
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Can caller-ID be implemented on non-ISDN lines ?
Date: 19 Nov 92 21:37:45 GMT
Reply-To: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au
Distribution: aus

>It is is in many places including parts of the US (which has minimal ISDN).
							^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

What do you mean minimal ISDN ?  How can you have such a thing ?
You mean there are digital local loop in the U.S. that don't 
conform to the 2B+D standard ???

>From what have read in various newsgroups, between the first and second ring
>the exchange sends the phone number using 1200bps.  Some modems can look for
>this.

But that's mean having a modem in the phone.  
Wouldn't that be very expensive ?
--
Anthony Lee (Time Lord Doctor) (These are my opinions !)
email: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au	voice:+(61)-7-3651204 FAX:+(61)-7-3651999
SNAIL: Department Computer Science, The University of Queensland, 
       St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
From: davelec@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (David le Comte)
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Can caller-ID be implemented on non-ISDN lines ?
Date: 21 Nov 92 05:38:03 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia

malcolm@nutmeg.cs.ntu.edu.au (Malcolm Caldwell) writes:

>In article <11097@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) writes:

>   I am just wondering if caller-ID can be implemented on non-ISDN
>   lines and if so how ?

>It is is in many places including parts of the US (which has minimal ISDN).

>From what have read in various newsgroups, between the first and second ring
>the exchange sends the phone number using 1200bps.  Some modems can look for
>this.

>--

CLID works by using FSK in the quiet period after the first "true" ring as
against an Early Guard ring.  It is definitely not DTMF. Detection of this
signal is not as easy as it seems. Ones equipment is not "off-hook" by
definition, and ones detector circuit cannot load the line with too little (ac)
impedance.

System 12 exchanges from Alcatel will be offering the service as standard.
I am not aware if Ericcson's exchanges (AXE-11s) will be able to offer it
as a standard "Easycall" service.  I suspect it will be included in the swag
of new bits and pieces that have been heralded for the new year.

Despite having the capacity to offer CLID, the results of the investigation
into the Privacy aspects of whether or not CLID can be delivered have yet to
be announced.  Austel, as far as I know, have written a report to the Minister
on the basis of the Public Forums held around the country on the matter.  We
are waiting on the Minister I believe.  As it is election time, he may decide
to delay making a decision until after the election. Given the way the media
seem to like making issues out of anything, the Minister can only lose by
announcing any decision.


		David le Comte
		davelec@extro.ucc.su.oz


>Malcolm Caldwell       Email:   malcolm@pandanus.ntu.edu.au
>Technical Officer         Ph:   +61 89 466546
>Computer Science         Fax:   +61 89 270612
>Northern Territory University, Darwin Australia
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Call Waiting --- A better way of informing the user ?
From: malcolm@nutmeg.cs.ntu.edu.au (Malcolm Caldwell)
Date: 17 Nov 92 10:21:43
Distribution: aus
Organization: Information Technology , Northern Territory University, Darwin,	Australia.
In-reply-to: t9114145@phillip.edu.au's message of 16 Nov 92 19:04:08 ESTLines: 22

In article <1992Nov16.190408.13313@phillip.edu.au> t9114145@phillip.edu.au writes:

    If you can solve the problem of modems disconnecting when the lines 
    emits the "call waiting" tone that would be even better.


But sometimes the disconnect is an advantage.  If you use a protocol that lets
you restart transmission, or equivalent then the disconnect when someone
rings then lets you talk to that person and then restart the transmission
after.  In fact I use ppp to talk from home to work.  When the phone
disconnects nothing much happens.  As long as the conversation is finished
before the FTP timeout (which is a long time) then I can restart the
connection without a problem.  This works for any telnet connections as well.

I agree about the tones.  Some people in my house I suspect hear them but
do not respond.  I have had people get angry with me because I said I would
wait for their call but "no one was home".
--
Malcolm Caldwell       Email:   malcolm@pandanus.ntu.edu.au
Technical Officer         Ph:   +61 89 466546
Computer Science         Fax:   +61 89 270612
Northern Territory University, Darwin Australia
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Call Waiting --- A better way of informing the user ?
From: t9114145@phillip.edu.au
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:04:08 EST
Distribution: aus
Organization: RMIT (Bundoora Campus)

In article <11048@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>, anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) writes:
> One thing that I found difficult to use about Call Waiting is
> the way that a user is informed of another call.  Currently,
> this is done by the exchange sending a special tone but the
> problem is the user might miss the tone especially if it is too
> soft.  I am wondering, what if the phones are themselves modified

Ours is - certain members of the family (the same ones that can't program
the VCR, I might add) don't notice the tone ever. It's very annoying when 
you know someone is home and they won't answer.

> with flash detector circuit.  I propose a detector that looks for
> three consecutive circuit breaks (flash or recall), these breaks
> are of very short interval, should be even shorter then 
> what the recall button generates.  By waiting for three breaks from
> the exchange, the detector won't confuse that with the user pressing
> the recall button.  Having detected the three breaks, an LED would light
> up to indicate CW.  I think having a detector to detect the tone
> would make the phones far too expensive and hence my alternative
> proposal.  

A light is a good idea. If you can solve the problem of modems disconnecting
when the lines emits the "call waiting" tone that would be even better.

> 
> Any comments ?
> 
> --
> Anthony Lee (Time Lord Doctor) (These are my opinions !)
> email: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au	voice:+(61)-7-3651204 FAX:+(61)-7-3651999
> SNAIL: Department Computer Science, The University of Queensland, 
>        St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
-- 

Adam Eberbach    Computer Science student, RMIT.   t9114145@phillip.edu.au
               "We don' need no stinkin' signatures!"
From: dave@eram.esi.COM.AU (Dave Horsfall)
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Can caller-ID be implemented on non-ISDN lines ?
Date: 20 Nov 92 03:54:37 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Pacific ESI, Sydney, AUSTRALIA

In article <chris.722220370@suite.sw.oz.au>,
    chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby) writes:

| I think the signalling is more likely to be DTMF. You probably already
| have a DTMF processing chip in your phone/modem...

You have a sender.  DTMF receivers are more expensive.  Anyway, if it's
anything at all like the USA system, it will be Bell 212 (FSK) between
the first and second rings.  See comp.dcom.telecom for more details.

-- 
Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU)         VK2KFU @ VK2RWI.NSW.AUS.OC
dave@esi.COM.AU                ...munnari!esi.COM.AU!dave
           Disclaimer: "Me, speak for us?"
Newsgroups: aus.comms
From: stuarta@syd.dms.CSIRO.AU (Stuart Andrews)
Subject: Billing Pulses, Tytel Phone
Organization: CSIRO Division of Mathematics and Statistics, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:14:29 GMT

Hi All, A telephone question...

We all know that public telephones do their charging in multiples of 30c
(Telecom Owned ones) and that the way the phone works out when to hit you for
more $ is a 'billing pulse' is sent every so often that the phone detects.
(If you get the right line, you can actually hear the pulse...)

My Problem. I own one of those fan-dangle whiz-bang Tytel (Australian made,
from Artarmon - no longer exist) Telephones that makes you breakfast,
redials your call, and detects billing pulses to give you a fairly accurate
estimate of what your bill will be.

It works by counting local calls at one local fee (you tell it the fee
= $0.25 for home phone) and multiplying billing pulses by the local fee
to establish how much STD calls cost...

At least that is what the manual says...

The plot thickens... The phone also asks for the area code in which is is
operating so that when it catches you dialing a STD code, it can use
that and an internal data-base to work out the distance and thus the call
charge.

Yes, you are right, I have just contradicted myself.... Do we calculate time,
of billing pulses...?

Question (1): Does anyone know which way my phone is *really* working
              out my bill?

OK, now it gets even better... Given the cost of a local call, and the
local area code and the area code to which we are calling. The phone
also knows the time of day (it has a clock). The billing calculations
seem to be pretty accurate for peak times, but not so for Night and
Economy Rates... Suggests it is not using billing pulses but is
trying to calculate itself doesn't it...

Anybody got any clues...?
Do home fones actually get billing pulses?
Does anyone (ex-Tytel) know how to fiddle s/w in my phone to
make it smarter in calculating bills?

thanx
stuartb

-- 
  "Two to the power of one hundred thousand to one against.
    That's pretty improbable you know" (Ford Prefect)

"I do not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death
 for your right to say it" (Voltaire)
################################################################################
Stuart Andrews (stuarta@syd.dms.csiro.au)
Opinions posted here are mine and do not necessarily comply with those of CSIRO
From: scotth@frey.newcastle.edu.au (Scott Howard)
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Call Waiting --- A better way of informing the user ?
Date: 17 Nov 92 09:05:29 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: Maths Department, University of Newcastle, Oz.
NNTP-Posting-Host: frey.newcastle.edu.au

t9114145@phillip.edu.au writes:
>A light is a good idea. If you can solve the problem of modems disconnecting
>when the lines emits the "call waiting" tone that would be even better.

Just put the code to disable the Call Waiting in the modem dial string in
your comms program, so that each time originate a call from the modem, it
disables call waiting.  I'm not sure what the code is, but in many parts of
the US you dial  *70  and then wait for another dial tone, so you would make
the dial string something like :
   ATDT *70,
so that each time you made a call, it disables it!!!

----
  Scott Howard.
Newsgroups: aus.comms
From: sysnet@cc.newcastle.edu.au (David Morrison)
Subject: Re: Billing Pulses, Tytel Phone
Organization: University of Newcastle, AUSTRALIA
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 03:04:09 GMT

In article <Bxxpw5.EM3@syd.dms.CSIRO.AU>, stuarta@syd.dms.CSIRO.AU (Stuart Andrews) writes:
> The plot thickens... The phone also asks for the area code in which is is
> operating so that when it catches you dialing a STD code, it can use
> that and an internal data-base to work out the distance and thus the call
> charge.

If it uses STD area codes to work out charging, then its prices cannot be very 
accurate. Charging is based on distance, not on area codes. You can dial a 
"local" number, ie, no area code, and still pay STD rates.
-- 
David Morrison, Manager, Networks and Comms, Uni of Newcastle, Australia
sysnet@cc.newcastle.edu.au or (VAX PSI) psi%0505249626002::sysnet
Phone: +61 49 215397	Fax: +61 49 216910
From: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee)
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Call Waiting --- A better way of informing the user ?
Keywords: flash, recall
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:10:06 GMT
Reply-To: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au
Distribution: aus

In <1992Nov16.214259.16017@cs.su.oz.au> matthew@cs.su.oz (Matthew Geier) writes:

> The exchange doesnt signal the user via a loop break, its only the user
>to exchange. The CW tone is just that , a tone superimposed onto the Audio

Yes, but that's is a form signaling that goes way back to operator
switch boards where a subscriber taps the hook slightly leading to
a light flash at the operator console, hence the term "flash".
But I don't see any technical reason why it can't be used for 
exchange to user signalling.

>path. Old exchanges with CW might cause some thing that looks like a loop
>break when it switches the tone generator onto the circuit , but the only
>exchanges fitted with CW in Australia are digital. The tone can be added
>before conversion to analogue, hence no click, just a tone. 
> You would have to detect the tone. I doubt the tone is exactly the same
>between exchanges. The detector would have to be smart enough not to trigger
>on hearing that frequency in normal speech..

That's exactly my point, people who don't know about CW or have slight
hearing impairment either don't notice it or ignore it altogether.
If it is a light flashing then at least they will think what's the light
for or hangup in which case the waiting call can get through.
I am sure you can get a filter to detect the tone but surely such
a filter would make the typical telephone too expensive.
--
Anthony Lee (Time Lord Doctor) (These are my opinions !)
email: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au	voice:+(61)-7-3651204 FAX:+(61)-7-3651999
SNAIL: Department Computer Science, The University of Queensland, 
       St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
Newsgroups: aus.comms
From: chris@suite.sw.oz.au (Chris Maltby)
Subject: Re: Can caller-ID be implemented on non-ISDN lines ?
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd
Distribution: aus
Date: 20 Nov 92 00:46:10 GMT

In <11115@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au> anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) writes:

>>It is is in many places including parts of the US (which has minimal ISDN).
							^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>What do you mean minimal ISDN ?  How can you have such a thing ?
>You mean there are digital local loop in the U.S. that don't 
>conform to the 2B+D standard ???

He means that ISDN is not widely available in the USA, and that long-distance
ISDN is even more problematic, leaving aside billing issues.

>>From what have read in various newsgroups, between the first and second ring
>>the exchange sends the phone number using 1200bps.  Some modems can look for
>>this.

>But that's mean having a modem in the phone.  
>Wouldn't that be very expensive ?

I think the signalling is more likely to be DTMF. You probably already
have a DTMF processing chip in your phone/modem...
-- 
Chris Maltby - Softway Pty Ltd		Internet: chris@softway.sw.oz.au

PHONE:	+61-2-698-2322	"I'm waiting for X-Windows to become just that;
FAX:	+61-2-699-9174	 Ex-Windows" - A McGrath.
Newsgroups: aus.comms
From: david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson)
Subject: Re: Billing Pulses, Tytel Phone
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 02:08:01 GMT

stuarta@syd.dms.CSIRO.AU (Stuart Andrews) writes:
>It works by counting local calls at one local fee (you tell it the fee
>= $0.25 for home phone) and multiplying billing pulses by the local fee
>to establish how much STD calls cost...

As far as I know home phones do not get billing pulses (but I could be wrong).

>The plot thickens... The phone also asks for the area code in which is is
>operating so that when it catches you dialing a STD code, it can use
>that and an internal data-base to work out the distance and thus the call
>charge.

This is, of course, impossible :-) It needs more than your area code.

For example, a call from (042) 90 xxxx to (042) 3x xxxx [Helensburgh to Kiama]
you do not dial the STD code (as they are both the same) and yet this call is
charged at STD rates. Even if you did dial the STD code it would not help as
a call from (042) 90 xxxx to (042) 26 xxxx is a local call.

Similarly, a call from (02) 456 xxxx [Berowra] to (02) 520 xxxx [Engadine] is
charged at the Community call rate as the two zones are not adjacent.
-- 
David Wilson				+61 42 213802 voice, +61 42 213262 fax
Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong	david@cs.uow.edu.au
From: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee)
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Call Waiting --- A better way of informing the user ?
Keywords: flash, recall
Date: 15 Nov 92 00:44:16 GMT
Reply-To: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au
Distribution: aus

One thing that I found difficult to use about Call Waiting is
the way that a user is informed of another call.  Currently,
this is done by the exchange sending a special tone but the
problem is the user might miss the tone especially if it is too
soft.  I am wondering, what if the phones are themselves modified
with flash detector circuit.  I propose a detector that looks for
three consecutive circuit breaks (flash or recall), these breaks
are of very short interval, should be even shorter then 
what the recall button generates.  By waiting for three breaks from
the exchange, the detector won't confuse that with the user pressing
the recall button.  Having detected the three breaks, an LED would light
up to indicate CW.  I think having a detector to detect the tone
would make the phones far too expensive and hence my alternative
proposal.  

Any comments ?

--
Anthony Lee (Time Lord Doctor) (These are my opinions !)
email: anthony@cs.uq.oz.au	voice:+(61)-7-3651204 FAX:+(61)-7-3651999
SNAIL: Department Computer Science, The University of Queensland, 
       St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
From: scotth@frey.newcastle.edu.au (Scott Howard)
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Billing Pulses, Tytel Phone
Date: 19 Nov 1992 12:57:43 +1100
Organization: Maths Department, University of Newcastle, Oz.
Distribution: aus
NNTP-Posting-Host: frey.newcastle.edu.au

stuarta@syd.dms.CSIRO.AU (Stuart Andrews) writes:

>We all know that public telephones do their charging in multiples of 30c
>(Telecom Owned ones) and that the way the phone works out when to hit you for
>more $ is a 'billing pulse' is sent every so often that the phone detects.
>(If you get the right line, you can actually hear the pulse...)

Well, at the moment they do. Very soon telecom is changing many of it
exchanges so that calles at billed by the second, rather than in multiples
of 25 cents, so all long distance calls will be, on average, about 12.5c
cheaper, and your little machine, if it works on the pulses, wont work!

[....]
>Yes, you are right, I have just contradicted myself.... Do we calculate time,
>of billing pulses...?

>Question (1): Does anyone know which way my phone is *really* working
>              out my bill?

>OK, now it gets even better... Given the cost of a local call, and the
>local area code and the area code to which we are calling. The phone
>also knows the time of day (it has a clock). The billing calculations
>seem to be pretty accurate for peak times, but not so for Night and
>Economy Rates... Suggests it is not using billing pulses but is
>trying to calculate itself doesn't it...

>Anybody got any clues...?

Sounds a lot like the machine is actually using times to calculate the call
cost....

>Do home fones actually get billing pulses?

Yes, they do, at least those using AXE exchanges do.

----
  Scott Howard. (scotth@mystra.newcastle.edu.au)
Newsgroups: aus.comms
Subject: Re: Call Waiting --- A better way of informing the user ?
From: malcolm@nutmeg.cs.ntu.edu.au (Malcolm Caldwell)
Date: 19 Nov 92 15:54:47
Distribution: aus
Organization: Information Technology , Northern Territory University, Darwin,	Australia.
In-reply-to: dave@eram.esi.COM.AU's message of 17 Nov 92 23:31:14 GMTLines: 28

In article <1769@eram.esi.COM.AU> dave@eram.esi.COM.AU (Dave Horsfall) writes:

   In article <1eackpINN9rb@frey.newcastle.edu.au>,
       scotth@frey.newcastle.edu.au (Scott Howard) writes:

   | Just put the code to disable the Call Waiting in the modem dial string in
   | your comms program, so that each time originate a call from the modem, it
   | disables call waiting.

   Except that under AXE (in Australia), you must hang up after sending
   the facility code (*43# I think), and dial again.

Some modems let include * and #.
   
   Then remember to re-enable it afterwards.  Bloody primitive.

Very.  I believe that someplaces allow you to disable call waiting for one
call only.  It would be useful.

   -- 
   Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU)         VK2KFU @ VK2RWI.NSW.AUS.OC
   dave@esi.COM.AU                ...munnari!esi.COM.AU!dave
	      Disclaimer: "Me, speak for us?"
--
Malcolm Caldwell       Email:   malcolm@pandanus.ntu.edu.au
Technical Officer         Ph:   +61 89 466546
Computer Science         Fax:   +61 89 270612
Northern Territory University, Darwin Australia
Newsgroups: aus.comms
From: jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au (Jim Breen)
Subject: Re: Call Waiting --- A better way of informing the user ?
Keywords: flash, recall
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Distribution: aus
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 22:05:55 GMT

anthony@cs.uq.oz.au (Anthony Lee) writes:

>One thing that I found difficult to use about Call Waiting is
>the way that a user is informed of another call.  Currently,
>this is done by the exchange sending a special tone but the
>problem is the user might miss the tone especially if it is too
>soft.  I am wondering, what if the phones are themselves modified
>with flash detector circuit.  I propose a detector that looks for
>three consecutive circuit breaks (flash or recall), these breaks
>are of very short interval, should be even shorter then 
>what the recall button generates.  By waiting for three breaks from
>the exchange, the detector won't confuse that with the user pressing
>the recall button.  Having detected the three breaks, an LED would light
>up to indicate CW.  I think having a detector to detect the tone
>would make the phones far too expensive and hence my alternative
>proposal.  

>Any comments ?

The problem with this proposal is that it probably would require
mods to exchange hardware. I don't recall the facility in the codec
card on AXEs (for example) to allow them to generate (as opposed to detect)
circuit breaks. The big advantage of the present methos of signalling a 
call-waiting is that it all done by software, i.e. mucking around
with the bit stream. 

If Telecom or CCITT could standardize on the frequency and duration of
the call-waiting tone, or better still opt to
use one of the spare DTMF codes, e.g. the A-D codes, phones could
be easily made to detect that, and ring bells flash light, whatever.

-- 
Jim Breen                           JIS:$B%8%`!!%V%j!<%s(J
Department of Robotics & Digital Technology. Monash University. 
PO Box 197 Caulfield East VIC 3145 Australia (ph) +61 3 573 2552 
(fax) +61 3 573 2345  AARNet/Internet:jwb@capek.rdt.monash.edu.au  
Newsgroups: aus.comms