HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 23:06:32 GMT
From: ariel@world.std.com (Robert L Ullmann)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Trademark Infringement
Organization: The World in Boston
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 646, Message 9 of 10

I'll give you two more examples of friendly agreement on trademark
issues. My present employer, Process Software Corporation, advertised
our product (TCPware for VMS<TM>; shameless plug ;-) with the slogan
"Hot Stuff", and a picture that included a small bottle with a roughly
familiar diamond logo.

Yup, we heard from their lawyers. The agreement is beneficial to both
sides: we still use the picture, but now it says TABASCO, McIlhenny
Island, and all the rest. And the small print acknowledges their
trademark.

The other example is better. DEC ran into a problem with the "VAX"
trademark in the UK (which belongs to a vacuum cleaner company), and
that company wanted to sell their product in the U.S. (It should be
noted here that in the "Prior US Class", computers were in 35, and
vacuums in some other class; under the international trademark
classes, they are both in 8, hence the conflict as both firms went
multinational.)

The rumor is that DEC agreed to exchange licences, on condition that
the vacuum cleaner company stop using their slogan:

	"Nothing SUCKS like a VAX!!"


Robert Ullmann		Ariel@World.STD.COM	+1 508 879 6994 x226
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 08:14:36 GMT
From: FR130801@ysub.ysu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Educational Materials Sought
Organization: Youngstown State University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 637, Message 7 of 7

I teach in the department of Communication at Youngstown State
University.  I am writing to get information or suggestions about
education in telecommunication.
 
Our program is not an engineering program, although we try to give our
students some exposure to technology and examine its possible
consequences.  I am looking for either video tapes or computer
instructional programs concerning:
 
     o basic telecommunication technology
     o ISDN (I have a demo program from Bellcore)
     o Broadband ISDN, or SONET
     o any material on telecommunication management
 
Our program is an undergraduate program only.  We give students
experience with our computer system, our LAN and programming our
campus subcarrier frequency.
 
Any information would be appreciated.
 
 
Walter Mathews   FR130801@ysub.ysu.edu
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 13:08:13 GMT
From: davidson@ccrs.emr.ca (David Davidson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Help Needed Wiring an Old Phone
Organization: Canada Centre for Remote Sensing, Ottawa
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 638, Message 9 of 12

I bought an old phone; a 1947 Sweedish Ericsson LM. It only has three
wires coming out of it, and is missing the green which I need to hook
it up. I have descibed the terminal setup inside.  If this makes any
sense to you, and if you can tell me which wires to move to hook it up
properly, I would be greatly in your debt. If you can't, well I can
take it to a shop, but I would love to have a go at it myself. Do you
have any ideas?

There are two rows of terminals, offset like two steps on a stair
case.  The top row of screw-down terminals is 1,3,5,7,9.  The bottom
row is 2,4,6,8,10.

There are wires attached to the top of these terminals by screws, and
to the bottom by solder.

The wires attached to the top of the terminals:

*the dial has three wires:
- term #1=red
- #2=blue
- #3=white

*the handset has three wires:
-#5=red
-#7=black
-#9=yellow

*the line out has three wires:
- #6=red
- #8=black
- #10=yellow

The wires soldered to the bottoms of the terminals:

The bell, hook, and "guts" are strung together into a bundle, which
are attached to the bottoms of the terminals. It would be difficult to
sort them out.

Please accept my thanks in advance.


Regards,

David D.     davidson@ccrs.emr.ca
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 09:25:57 GMT
From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II
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 637, Message 4 of 7

A long time ago far far away, Randy Borow posted here about having
seen an enhanced version of the AT&T 1337 Digital Answering Machine --
one having voice prompts, time/date stamping, etc. When I asked him
about it, he said that the AT&T store that had it on display no longer
did.  Nobody was able to find this animal, or verify its existence.

Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what new features
it has ...


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: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:01:18 GMT
From: fff@microplex.com (Fred Fierling)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 710 and ABCD?
Organization: Microplex Systems Ltd.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 628, Message 6 of 11

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

> using them as voicemail passwords also, however I have never seen a 16
> digit handheld DTMF encoder.

Radio Shack supposedly has one.  Model # 43-139.


Fred Fierling    fff@microplex.com       Tel: 604 875-1461   Fax: 604 875-9029
Microplex Systems Ltd   265 East 1st Avenue   Vancouver, BC   V5T 1A7,  Canada
From: ms6b+@andrew.cmu.edu (Marvin Sirbu)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS
Date: 20 Aug 92 03:44:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: eecs.telecom12.646.2
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 646, Message 2 of 10

Excerpts from netnews.comp.dcom.telecom: 15-Aug-92 Deterioration of
POTS by Lauren Weinstein@vortex.

> [Moderator's Note: Let's face it, Lauren: Between Judge Harold Greene
> who disgraced his robe and courtroom to wreck the public telephone
> network in the USA; the ripoff companies who moved in to feed on the

May I point out that the breakup of AT&T was a CONSENT DECREE entered
into at the request of AT&T and presented to Judge Greene for his
approval.  It is not correct to blame Judge Greene for the breakup.
As various scholarly histories of the breakup have recorded (Temin,
Coll, Cole) AT&T chose divestiture over the other options presented by
Assistant Attorney General Baxter or by legislation then pending in
the Congress.


Marvin Sirbu


[Moderator's Note: Yes, you may point out that it was a consent
decree, as in I hold a gun to your head and you consent to be robbed
after I have offered you that choice versus being killed. Then later I
say I did nothing wrong: after all, you agreed robbery was best under
the circumstances. You'll note IBM refused to settle at all and their
case was dropped. I think AT&T should have continued stonewalling in
the same way as IBM, flooding the court with semi-trailer vans full of
paper to read each day as part of the discovery, etc. For all I know,
some court employees somewhere are still trying to log in and file all
the paperwork IBM dumped on them. Obviously AT&T felt it was prudent
to take the best they thought they could get and walk away. I fault
Greene for stirring it up to begin with, and AT&T for not finishing
what Justice started. They should have rallied as many major
corporations in America as possible to aid in their defense and taken
a very aggressive stance like IBM did. After all, what 'Justice' and
Judge Greene did to AT&T and tried to do to IBM can be done to any
large corporation.  PAT]
From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: PreGreene
Date: 19 Aug 92 02:43:00 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 642, Message 3 of 10

Sorry, I couldn't resist responding to our Moderator's defense of the
good old days when phone companies were Phone Companies and users were
pampered children who couldn't be trusted.

Somewhere in my basement I've got a whole pile of DAA's (Data Access
Arrangements) which the old Bell required I install in order to
protect their sacred network from us users.  Protected monopoly's can
afford to provide very very good service.  After all, we have to pay
for it.  Having the option of not paying for unwanted "services".

At a hotel, I should have the option of not paying for a person to
turn my blankets at night and leave two $.25 mints which I don't eat.

Sad to say, competition is messy and inefficient and does impose the
burden of decision.  Things I don't like.

Remember when banks charged for all checks, didn't pay interest and
closed at 3 PM?  The good old days?
From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: LEC Bypass w/o Least-Cost-Routing
Date: 18 Aug 92 17:42:00 GMT
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 642, Message 10 of 10

Jeff@digtype.airage.com (Jeff Wasilko) writes:

> How is LEC bypass usually done? Is it a function of the LCR capability
> of a switch?

Bypass is done in one of two ways. Larger customers order a number of
direct trunks from the IEC of their choice and simply place any and
all calls over those trunks. The only reason LCR capability is
required is to assure that the calls are properly routed and to append
or insert any necessary digits required on those trunks. For instance,
on most IEC trunks a '1' is not used, but calls made within the same
NPA require the area code. It is much easier to have the switch do
this than to expect all the employees of the company to remember
special dialing instructions.

Smaller companies use FGB bypass. This involves using a 950 number and
a code to make calls that would normally be carried by the LEC.

> If so, is there any hardware that could be added to a switch that
> doesn't do LCR to route instate calls via another carrier?

Some of these companies with FGB access would be very happy to install
automatic dialers on each of your trunks to automatically route calls.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115
    john@zygot.ati.com      | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 00:55:21 EDT
From: capek@watson.ibm.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Small Key System Wanted
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 638, Message 11 of 12

I'm interested in advice on choosing a key system for a small office,
with four lines and about six phones.  The present system is a
(Northern Telecom?)  Vantage system, and it is felt to be too
difficult to use and a bit unreliable.  Comments on "must have"s or
things to watch out for, as well as suggestions of specific products
to consider are most welcome.  I'll summarize if there's interest.


Peter Capek
From: danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Dan Odom)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 710 and ABCD?
Date: 14 Aug 92 07:38:32 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 627, Message 6 of 16

No, they don't break the dialtone.  They just make noise.  ABCD are
rather high pitched tones, and the ESS doesn't seem to notice them.


Dan Odom        danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
Date: 22 Aug 92 03:54:33 EDT
From: "Toby Nixon" <tnixon@hayes.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise?
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 653, Message 4 of 11

In article <telecom12.641.3@eecs.nwu.edu>, jpc@avdms8.lambda.
msfc.nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) writes:

> Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a
> documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals.

> If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with
> respect to the other?

According to CCITT Recommendation V.11 (I don't have a copy of 422
handy, but V.11 is equivalent), if the voltage at A minus the voltage
at B is less than or equal to -0.3 volts, then it is a "1".  If the
voltage at "A" minus the voltage at B is greater than or equal to +0.3
volts, then it is a "0".  Translated into English, I guess this means
that if B is more positive than A, then it is a "1".

The chairman of the TIA TR-30.2 committee in charge of RS-422 is Fred
Lucas of General Datacom.  His email address is "flucas@attmail.com",
and he does check it regularly in case you'd like to pose this
question directly to him.

> Send mail, I'll summarize.

I tried, but it was bounced at ames.arc.nasa.gov.


Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer      | Voice   +1-404-840-9200  Telex 401243420
Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc.  | Fax     +1-404-447-0178  CIS   70271,404
P.O. Box 105203                     | BBS     +1-404-446-6336  AT&T    !tnixon
Atlanta, Georgia  30348             | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon  Fido   1:114/15
USA                                 | Internet                tnixon@hayes.com
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 18:25 GMT
From: Christopher Marcant <0005040494@mcimail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 626, Message 14 of 15

I tried to do the same a couple of month ago: the intent was to tie
the pager to our local Email system. After a couple of attempts, we
gave up as our communication software scripting facility was not that
reliable. Here is the way it used to work:

Dial 1800924-4342, 2400 7E.
ID= PAGE
Pager ID? xxx-xxxx
Message: your message here
Pager ID? etc...

I believe you just then type DISCONNECT to end the session. I had a
real hard time to find somebody competent at MobileComm to get this
information. Most of them knew the existence of the PC software they
were providing, but that was about it.


Christophe Marcant     Gensym Corp     Voice: 408-473-9933
cmarcant@mcimail.com   Western Region  Fax:   408-473-9931
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 03:26:19 -0500
From: James.VanHouten@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: RE: 710 and ABCD?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 627, Message 10 of 16

I have played around a bit with the ABCD on a DMS-100 in Washington,
DC I found that the 'D' when dialed after a number would bridge a fast
busy on the line (ie., if I called you at 312-555-5555D I would get
you and a fast busy at the same time.)  The 'D' could be press at
anytime during a call and the fast busy would appear.

The other keys did not even break dialtone.  I have heard of people
using them as voicemail passwords also, however I have never seen a 16
digit handheld DTMF encoder.


Internet: James.Vanhouten@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org  301.967.7220 (FAX)
From: lairdb@crash.cts.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker?
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:32:10 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 645, Message 3 of 17

In <telecom12.640.8@eecs.nwu.edu> jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu writes:

> On a dialing instructions booklet I received from AT&T recently, it
> suggests to dial a # after the last digit on international calls, so
> the call can be completed quicker.

[Pat mentions some situations when a pound terminator helps, and some
when it doesn't.]

Probably worth mentioning that if you're behind a modern PBX, the odds
change a lot.  When the PBX is eating up the digit string, some of the
strings are ambiguous, and since it wants the entire string for ARS,
the PBX may wait for a timeout on certain strings ("9,0" being a
notable example.)  Some switches will take the pound as a terminator,
in the same way that the carriers take it during CC calls.


Laird P. Broadfield   lairdb@crash.cts.com  ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 10:29:51 PDT
From: andrew@jester.USask.ca (Derek Andrew)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Call Return vs. Call Forward
Reply-To: andrew@jester.USask.ca
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 643, Message 3 of 13

In article <telecom12.634.2@eecs.nwu.edu>, by rees@dabo.citi.umich.edu
(Jim Rees) wrote:

> How does Call Return interact with Call Forwarding?  If I forward my
> phone to an innocent third party, then make a nuisance call, and the
> victim of the nuisance call does a Call Return, will the victim ring
> me or the innocent third party?

In Saskatchewan (and probably the rest of Canada) this will work as
suggested, however ...

The Call Return service as delivered by the telcos will first repeat
back the caller's number and then ask you to press '1' to complete the
call.  The number read back will the the nuisance (you). Further, if
they have Caller ID, it will be *your* number that is displayed.

Unfortunatly, the telephone that you have forwarded your calls to will
get no indication that you were an intermediary.  In effect, the line
that you made the nuisance call to will appear to be calling directly
to the line you have your phone forwarded to.

Please note that this description may perform differently elsewhere.
For example, I understand that some telco's implementation of Call
Return does *not* read back the caller's number.


Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0
Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808,  52 11 23N 106 48 48W


[Moderator's Note: The version here in Chicago does not read back the
number and I got a note yesterday from someone at IBT who said maybe
the software will be changed soon so that 'return call' will ring
through absolutely to the true calling party, ignoring forwarding
instructions. There are both good and bad points to this.   PAT]
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 15:13:48 EDT
From: hgschulz@gaia.cs.umass.edu (Henning Schulzrinne)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: What Does a CO Switch Cost?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 638, Message 6 of 12

Just curious: how much does a CO switch cost? I realize that this
question is about as precise as asking "how much does a car cost", but
I'm interested in any examples, be it a small rural switch or a large
tandem switch. I'm trying to get some feeling for the costs of
switching bandwidth.


Henning Schulzrinne  (hgschulz@cs.umass.edu)  [MIME mail welcome]
Dept. of CS and Dept. of ECE; Univ. of Massachusetts at Amherst
Amherst, MA 01003 - USA === phone: +1 (413) 545-3179 (EST); FAX: (413) 545-1249
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:33:16 -0400
From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 649, Message 4 of 8

In article <telecom12.646.1@eecs.nwu.edu> Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.
n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo) writes:

> I recall discussing divestiture in early 1984 with several
> management types from AT&T Long Lines, and they were quite gung-ho
> about it because (i) they felt they were getting the growth-oriented
> part of the market, and (ii) the MFJ let them out of a 1956 Consent
> Decree which banned them from the computer business (which they
> thought they could dominate).  My strong impression was that AT&T
> *wanted* divestiture; indeed, it is hard to see how it could have
> happened otherwise, since the antitrust suit was over BOC purchases
> from WeCo, and had nothing to do with divestiture.

Indeed.  An interesting sidebar to the "Breaking up IBM" cover story
in a recent edition of {Fortune Magazine} explored this topic too.
There were a lot of similarities between the AT&T and IBM antitrust
cases: both were filed in the waning days of the Johnson
administration; both dragged on for over a decade, generating millions
of pages of evidence, depositions etc. (not to mention employing
hundreds of lawyers); and both were bought to quick termination by the
Reagan administration.  

There the similarities ended: IBM "won" by keeping itself intact,
while AT&T "lost" by consenting to break itself up.  A clear case of
IBM doing better than Ma Bell, right?  As it turns out, no.  {Fortune}
points out that the holder of a share of AT&T stock in 1981 has since
enjoyed a vastly higher return on his investment (including dividends
and shares of the derivative companies which Ma begat) than has the
owner of a share of IBM stock.  The irony is that IBM is now
*voluntarily* splitting itself up in the same manner that it so
strenuously resisted for years.  As {Fortune} notes, Judge Greene's
divestiture order may be one of the best things that ever happened to
AT&T!


Bob Goudreau		Data General Corporation
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com	62 Alexander Drive	
+1 919 248 6231		Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA
Date: 16 Aug 92 00:40:10 GMT
From: n3hnr@hpb.cis.pitt.edu (Jason Galanter)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Toshiba Phone System For Sale or Trade
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 634, Message 12 of 12

I have a Toshiba phone system for sale. It includes the following:

	1 Strata VI Cabinet/backplane
	2 MCOU-MF2
	2 MSTU2
	1 MCCU2
	1 MTOU2
	8 EKT2102 telephone sets.


	This system supports six CO lines and many extensions, music
on hold, paging and much more. As of yesterday it was tested
completely functional.  Make me an offer.


Jason Galanter / N3HNR      n3hnr@hpb.cis.pitt.edu 
322 Mall Blvd., Suite 306   galanter+@pitt.edu 
Monroeville, PA 15146       (412) 521-6042