HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:16:22 GMT
From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 911 Run-Around
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 584, Message 2 of 9

In article <telecom12.582.9@eecs.nwu.edu> dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave
Niebuhr) writes:

In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 578 I wrote:

>> In TELECOM Digest Volume 12 : Issue 571 Carl Moore (VLD/VMB)
>> <cmoore@BRL.MIL> writes:

>>> Some phone books do list non-emergency numbers, and I take them to be
>>> for matters which should get police attention but are not as urgent.

>> The problem with my PD (Suffolk County, NY) is that if I wanted to
>> make a non-emergency call but yet talk to a policeman/woman, I would
>> be told to call 911 in about 90% of the instances.

In the city of Los Angeles, there are non-emergency numbers for the
LAPD dispatchers which do not pass through 911. I use them to call
regarding loud parties, gangbanger conventions, etc. They usually
result in a wait -- often zero-time, but more typically a minute or
two, occasionally 20 minutes. They DO dispatch for this stuff, believe
it or not.

One night I was awakened at 2 AM to the sound of rap. I went to the
window to see where it was coming from, and it was from the rear of a
medical building about 800 feet from my house and maybe 15 stories
down the hill. With binoculars, I looked to see what was going on and
saw that a couple of guys had a mom-and-pop-type business cleaning and
checking the oil on airport shuttle buses. They would do this stuff
all night and have the vans ready for their first runs in the morning.
(The site is on Stocker St., a standard shuttle route from downtown
L.A. to the airport).

The guys had one van door open with the stereo blasting, and because
of the late hour and the altitude of my house, I could hear it
perfectly, in violation of the LA Noise Abatement Laws, which specify
that no amplified music system may be heard more than 150 off the
property, whether public or private.

I called the LAPD non-emergency number, they dispatched in about 10
minutes (I saw the car arrive and read those guys big-time), and I
never heard those guys again, despite their continuing to use the site
for that business for another year afterward.

If you called 911 for something like this in L.A., you'd be laughed
into humiliation. 911 is for the real stuff -- life and/or property in
immediate danger. (Incidentally, during the riots, it typically took
5-10 minutes to get DIAL TONE, and another 20 to get to 911. It made
me realize that when the Big One arrives, we are going to be in deep
doodoo.)
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 12:20:48 PDT
From: konstan@elmer-fudd.cs.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 583, Message 6 of 15

In TELECOM Digest V12 #578, Ang Peng Hwa writes:

> My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.

The most common problem I have with AT&T cordless phones (love my
5500) is that the contacts on the phone and charger get dirty.  If the
model you have has a "Charging" light, check to see if it stays on
when the phone is in the base.  If not, get steel wool (can use other
scrubbers, but steel wool works best) and clean off all of the
contacts.  In general, I've needed to do this every two or three
months after owning the phone for about a year.

If that isn't it, and you really trashed the battery, I'd just go and
buy a new NiCad either from AT&T (more expensive) or any electronics
dealer.


Joe Konstan     konstan@cs.berkeley.edu
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 19:11:28 CST
From: Leroy.Donnelly@ivgate.omahug.org (Leroy Donnelly)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Product Review: Kittyhawk Personal Storage Module
Reply-To: leroy.donnelly%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org
Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 586, Message 6 of 11

 From the July 27, 1992 issue of {Radio Communications Report}:

PALO ALTO, Calif. -- Hewlett-Packard Co. said it has introduced a disk
drive the size of a small matchbox that can be used in portable
computers, cellular phones and other wireless technologies.

    The HP Kittyhawk Personal Storage Module combines miniaturization
with the cost benefits of conventional disk-drive technology,
according to Hewlett-Packard.  The PSM can be used in a number of
applications, including cellular and other communications products,
palmtop, pen-based and sub-notebook computers, printers, facsimile
machines, medical equipment and digital-imaging devices.

    "Practically any product that uses a microprocessor becomes a
candidate for the Kittyhawk storage module," said Bruce Spenner,
general manager of HP's Disk Memory Division.  The Kittyhawk can store
the equivalent of more than 14,000 typed pages, Hewlett-Packard noted.

    For the cellular industry, the disk drive will be able to store
text messages once cellular phones become more advanced, said Randi
Braunwaler, a marketing communications representative at Hewlett-
Packard.  "We're thinking real futuristic here."

    The disk drive also could be used to receive voice mail in
traveling salespeople's personal computers, Braunwaler added.

    The disk drive -- touted as the world's smallest -- measures 0.4
inches by 2 inches by 1.44 inches, and weighs about one ounce.  It was
designed with HP's calculators in mind.  The unit can withstand an
operating shock ten times that of larger 1.8-inch and 2.5-inch disk
drives, the company said.

    "Today's 2.5-inch and 1.8-inch drives are limited as storage
solutions for new generations of mobile computing devices because they
are too big and too sensitive to shock Spenner said.

    Evaluation units of the Kittyhawk are available for $450,
Braunwaler said.  When mass production begins this fall, the volume
OEM price is expected to be $250.


Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1
DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha  402-896-3537  (1:285/666.0)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 00:32:24 -0700
From: Jeff Sicherman <sichermn@beach.csulb.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: An Open Letter to PAT and John Higdon
Organization: Cal State Long Beach
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 592, Message 14 of 15

In article <telecom12.589.7@eecs.nwu.edu> acg@hermes.dlogics.com
writes:

> 1) You, PAT, our Esteemed Moderator, and
> 2) John Higdon, of Green Hills and Cows fame.

> We were wondering if the two of you would take a few minutes from
> your busy schedules of doing whatever it is you do, and tell us
> all about whatever it is you do. Please add whatever biographical
> details of interest you feel like throwing in to let us know how
> you got where you are today, as most people would say that their
> earlier jobs were infinitely more interesting than what they're
> doing right now!

  You mean BESIDES run their virtual mouths at the slightest
provocation? I thought that was their jobs ...


Jeff Sicherman
From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 911 Nightmare
Date: 28 Jul 92 05:08:37 GMT
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 592, Message 4 of 15

In article <telecom12.590.6@eecs.nwu.edu> 73670.1164@CompuServe.COM
(Robert K. Ricketts) writes:

> Our Esteemed Moderator replies to a post:

>> The modern CO does not know the difference between one off-hook and
>> another *until it finds time to go and get the caller's request.* At

> But it depends on what point during call setup that the busy was
> issued.  If the subscriber dialing 911 encountered busy going off-hook
> instead of dial tone then I agree.

   "Busy" going off-hook instead of dial tone is usually just lack of
dial tone, right?
 
> But if a DTMF receiver was available to the 911 caller giving dial
> tone, then I see no reason why the originating CO cannot be programmed
> to initiate call setup ahead of all other call requests.  If this
> means seizing the very next trunk to come available or even seizing an
> active trunk carrying a non-emergency call (as indicated by the call
> request being 911), then so be it.

   Most (but not all) 911 systems use dedicated trunks from out-lying
COs to a central tandem, in order to get ANI or be able to prevent
disconnect.  If you get "all circuits busy" or "regular busy", then
you called during a burst of 911 calls.  The system cannot tell how
important your 911 call is (pressure sensitive keypads??), and will
not drop another until an attendant ends a call.  One could always
argue that more dedicated trunks or attendants are needed, but would
you really want to pay for it??

   As I've mentioned before, the real 911 problem from the "Garth
Brooks" mass ticket sale is not lack of trunks.  It's lack of quick
dial tone.


Al Varney - just MY opinion.
From: rop@hacktic.nl (Rop Gonggrijp)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cracker Running Rampant!
Date: 25 Jul 92 21:42:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: eecs.telecom12.583.2
Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 583, Message 2 of 15

dag@ossi.com (Darren Griffiths) writes:

> You're correct of-course, this is a hassle, particularly if the site
> in question has incompetent system administrators, which sounds like
> it's the case.  There is one other thing that must be done as well,
> and that's call the police.  The 'cracker' has identified himself in
> the sample mail, so finding his real name should not be a problem.  If
> he is out of state then call the FBI, past experience has shown me
> that with a little bit of hassle they will do something, and if he is
> in Australia call the CIA, they have also become involved in previous
                        ^^^
> cases if you bug them enough.

You mean the CIA is in the business of chasing kids that play with
someone else's SUN? That is absurd!  Aren't they supposed to be
killing union leaders, and mining foreign harbors?

More seriously: Do you have any documented cases of the CIA getting
involved in the chase of a hacker (that is not also spying for
countries other than the U.S.)?
Date: 25 Jul 92 19:31:06 GMT
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 583, Message 7 of 15

The last thing you want to do to a NiCad battery is to run it
completly dry.  You run the risk of destroying one of the cells which
sounds like you may have done.  All is not lost however, there are
commercial battery houses that sell replacement batteries and they
aren't that hard to replace.  You will have to disassemble the handset
and this may involve soldering/unsoldering.


Ron
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 17:51:14 GMT
From: smw@sage.cgd.ucar.edu (Steve Welch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: House Wiring
Organization: National Center for Atmospheric Research
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 577, Message 6 of 13

> STOP.  10BASE-T is not suitable for residential use, because it emits
> a boatload of EMI.  (10BASE-T systems don't meet FCC class B.)  If you
> operate a 10BASE-T network, there's a good chance your TV will be
> useless, and your neighbors' sets might also be impacted.  FCC rules
> say that it's your responsibility to limit EMI, so you could find
> yourself forbidden to operate this network.

I had U.S West put in six pair all over the house (cost about $1K),
intending to use extra pairs for some random twisted pair network, but
I chickened out, mostly because I was worried about phone inteference.
So I put in a short (~30m) bit of thick Ethernet, and a bunch (eight
planned) of transceiver cables.  I have no EMI problems (my wife is a
shortwave listener, so this is a pretty good test), except I get a
small amount of RFI injected into my CATV coax at 50-70Mhz from some
high-frequency electronic ballasts (!?).  It figures that with a
zillion computers in the house, I'd have problems from fluorescent
lights...

I also pulled some RG-61 coax, just in case, since I had a roll of it
from an earlier project.  When the phone guy did the wiring, I told
him what I wanted to do, and he warned me I might not be happy.  He
said some people do Appletalk with no problems, but he had heard of
inteference from 10 Mbit networks when using spare phone company
copper.  I had him go ahead and pull the six pair, figuring I could
run RS-232 or some such over it in a pinch.  One thing I did, which
was smarter than I thought, was to buy a few hundred feet of spare
wire off of him.  It's come in very handy when I found out I had
placed a few of the jacks in the wrong place, and when I finished an
office in the basement for the wife.

Oh, I ended up using four pair, anyway ...

> I figure you can't have too much copper in a house.

Amen to that.


Steve Welch    <smw@sage.cgd.ucar.edu>    Voice: 303-530-2661
National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO  USA
also: Complex Systems Research, Niwot, CO   Fax: 303-581-9820
Date: 29 JUL 92 20:03   
From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Pac*Bell CLASS Features
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 597, Message 3 of 10

In Telecom 12.592, John Higdon <john@zygot.ati.com> writes:

> As you know, GTE has decided not to play at all and will not be
> offering CLID now or in the future. It is also questionable whether
> the company will even offer any of the other features.

GTE has had at least two CLASS features available for some time:
distinctive ringing (ringmate) and busy number redial.  I have had BNR
for over a year.  I believe it does BNR by terminator queueing.  Of
course, only numbers in my switch can be used.

GTE has a target date of November 1992 for offering the rest of CLASS,
except for CLID, Call Trace, and Call Return.  Call Trace should be
available later, after the public education program.

I have been told by GTE that they are adding SS7 links by "market
clusters" -- they group nearby switches into clusters and implement
SS7 between them.  Then they link the clusters to each other via SS7.
I've also been told the target date for SS7 links to PacBell is late
1993.  My switch is in the Laguna Beach/ Huntington Beach/Westminster
"market group" and is scheduled to have SS7 links to the others by
November 1, 1992.


Randy Gellens            randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com
>>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<<
Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself.
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 07:26 CDT
From: allen@sulaco.lonestar.org (Allen Gwinn)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Ham Radio Operators Running Rampant!
Organization: sulaco
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 592, Message 15 of 15

Geez, guy!  Calm down!  Pat is essentially correct with his statement.
Have you ever listened to 2 meters in California?  How about 10 meters
in West Texas?  There has been a migration of idiots from 11M to other
"more desirable" bands (without licenses of course) for as long as I
can remember.

Other things I'd like to know include what Radio Shack's 10M rig has
done to the band.  :-)


Allen, N5CKP


[Moderator's Note: Two meters (144-148 megs) is a mess here sometimes.
The guys just don't seem to care any longer. And most Radio Shack
transcievers are as dirty as they come. Talk about slopping all over
the band and then some. Cobra made much better units; and not that I
would transmit illegally, but you could get 200 more channels (in
addition to the regular 40) out of the chips they used. With a little
effort they could even be fixed to oscillate way up into ten meters as
well as CB. So many guys were doing those mods the FCC finally raised
hell with Motorola; they had to quit making that chip.  PAT]
From: MCMANGPH@NUSVM.BITNET (Ang Peng Hwa)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Cordless Phone Not Charging
Date: 21 Jul 92 07:25:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: eecs.telecom12.578.5
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 578, Message 5 of 15

My AT&T cordless phone is not charging and I'd appreciate any input.
It was on for 20 days while I was on vacation. I then had to unplug it
for another 20 days. When I recharged it, the thing just lit up the
Battery Low light.
 
I figure it must be the NiCad remembering the charge. So I've
discharged the thing twice (waited for the low light to go out). It's
still on low after three days of charging.
 
Should I just wait longer for the memory to disappear, or leave it on
for the thing to charge?
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 15:37:56 -0700
From: Emmanuel Goldstein <emmanuel@well.sf.ca.us>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: 2600 Reply to Bellcore Lawsuit Threat
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 581, Message 3 of 12

The following reply has been sent to Bellcore. Since we believe they
have received it by now, we are making it public.


Emmanuel Goldstein
Editor, 2600 Magazine
PO Box 752
Middle Island, NY 11953


July 20, 1992


Leonard Charles Suchyta
LCC 2E-311
290 W. Mt. Pleasant Avenue
Livingston, NJ 07039


Dear Mr. Suchyta:


We are sorry that the information published in the Winter 1991-92
issue of 2600 disturbs you. Since you do not specify which article you
take exception to, we must assume that you're referring to our
revelation of built-in privacy holes in the telephone infrastructure
which appeared on Page 42. In that piece, we quoted from an internal
Bellcore memo as well as Bell Operating Company documents. This is not
the first time we have done this. It will not be the last.

We recognize that it must be troubling to you when a journal like ours
publishes potentially embarrassing information of the sort described
above. But as journalists, we have a certain obligation that cannot be
cast aside every time a large and powerful entity gets annoyed. That
obligation compels us to report the facts as we know them to our
readers, who have a keen interest in this subject matter. If, as is
often the case, documents, memoranda, and/or bits of information in
other forms are leaked to us, we have every right to report on the
contents therein. If you find fault with this logic, your argument
lies not with us, but with the general concept of a free press.

And, as a lawyer specializing in intellectual property law, you know
that you cannot in good faith claim that merely stamping "proprietary"
or "secret" on a document establishes that document as a trade secret
or as proprietary information. In the absence of a specific
explanation to the contrary, we must assume that information about the
publicly supported telephone system and infrastructure is of public
importance, and that Bellcore will have difficulty establishing in
court that any information in our magazine can benefit Bellcore's
competitors, if indeed Bellcore has any competitors.

If in fact you choose to challenge our First Amendment rights to
disseminate important information about the telephone infrastructure,
we will be compelled to respond by seeking all legal remedies against
you, which may include sanctions provided for in Federal and state
statutes and rules of civil procedure. We will also be compelled to
publicize your use of lawsuits and the threat of legal action to
harass and intimidate.


Sincerely,

Emmanuel Goldstein
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 15:20:40 MET
From: koos@kzdoos.hacktic.nl (Koos van den Hout)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Solve Three Problems (was Telecom Fraud)
Organization: Koos z'n Doos (BBS)
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 584, Message 4 of 9

gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes:

>    reduce fraud
>    keep AOSes from overcharging
>    provide a convenient means for calling without leaving a paper trail
> is to go to a stored value card as used by telco in most other places
> around the world.

Here in Holland (and in a number of European countries around here)
this system is used.

> Of course, someone can manufacture counterfeit cards,

That is VERY difficult. The 'value' is 'stored' in a bar of a material
with a certain refractive index for infrared light. 'Nickels' are
removed from the card by simply burning the appropiate pieces of the
bar.

In the bar is also a countrycode so you can't take the card to another
country.
 
I like this system. A high number of telephone boots here in Holland
accept them (esp. on stations), they are easy to purchase (at
'telephone shops', stations and so) and they fit easily into a wallet
(creditcard size).

And you're anonymous when calling. But in Holland you're always
anonymous since the (one) phonecompany we have is some years behind
(already one (1!)  added service : *21) so Caller-Id is just discussed
a little and far from operational.


Koos van den Hout (koos@kzdoos.hacktic.nl)
BBS Koos z'n Doos : +31-3402-36647
Date: 26 Jul 92 01:46:46 PDT
From: friedl@mtndew.Tustin.CA.US (Stephen Friedl)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Should I Keep My Cellphone Off When Not Using it?
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 586, Message 8 of 11

Hi telecom.folks,

     I use a carphone from PacTel Cellular here in southern CA, and it
turns out that I *never* receive calls.  Rather than give out my
cellphone number, I give my customers my pager number (which they need
anyway), and when they page me while on the road I make an outgoing
call.  I have no idea what my phone's ringer sounds like :-)

     Anyway, a friend of mine says that cellphones engage in sporadic
"here I am" conversations with the local cell sites, presumably to
limit how many cells have to light up on an incoming call.  Since I
will never receive a call, am I "wasting" resources in the cellular
system by keeping my phone on when I am not using it?  Would I be
doing them a favor by keeping my phone powered off until I need to
make a call?  Note that my phone is wired into my car, so battery
usage is not an issue like it would be with a handheld.


Thanks much,

Stephen J Friedl | Software Consultant | Tustin, CA |     +1 714 544 6561
3b2-kind-of-guy  | I speak for me ONLY |   KA8CMY   | uunet!mtndew!friedl