HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 23:40:30 GMT
From: bakerj@gtephx.UUCP (Jon Baker)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Call Return vs. Call Forward
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 647, Message 8 of 11

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

> 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?

 From TR-NWT-215, CLASS Feature : Automatic Callback (this is
basically the same feature as Call Return):

Interactions With Call Forwarding Don't Answer :

'If the called station has the Call Forwarding Don't Answer feature,
and the called party does not answer, the call should be forwarded to
the remote station.'

The interaction can depend on what type of CF you have, whether you
have SCR active, and it might be different for Call Return (though I
doubt it).  But you can extrapolate the above requirement to indicate
that, in most circumstances, the call would be forwarded.


J.Baker    enuucp!gtephx!bakerj
I am not an official representative of AG Communication Systems.
From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp
Date: 21 Aug 92 04:36:20 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 652, Message 11 of 13

Is Octothorpe related to Oglethorpe, who founded the great colony of
Georgia in 1733?


Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA 
Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements.
Date: 18 Aug 92 04:51:23 EDT
From: terry@spcvxb.spc.edu (Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr.)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Fiber-Optic Cable Demo
Organization: St. Peter's College, US
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 643, Message 9 of 13

In article <telecom12.633.3@eecs.nwu.edu>, rah@btr.com (Richard A Hyde
rah@btr.com) writes:

> Suppose, on a dark night, (hypothetically, mind you), I dug up a major
> fiber trunk and sliced it in half.  What would I see?  Could I use it
> like a flashlight?  Would the cut end sparkle (assuming that the
> computer continued to send data)?  Would there just be a dim glow?

  Well, short-haul runs (in the few thousands of feet) such as you
find used for campus networking uses relatively large diameter (62.4
micron) multimode fiber with low-power LED's, usually operating near
the infrared area. These are visible if you look at them straight on,
and it's relatively harmless to do so.

  Extended runs (like the cross-country runs you're looking at) use 8
micron single-mode fiber. These are lit with genuine lasers. While the
smaller fiber diameter makes it harder to see, these would be _very_
bright if you viewed them end-on. I wouldn't do it 8-).

  As to the illumination you'd get, I don't think they'd be very
useful. These are a large number of tiny point sources (one per
fiber), not a wide beam the size of the cable. Most of the cable is
steel bands and stiffeners.


Terry Kennedy		Operations Manager, Academic Computing
terry@spcvxa.bitnet	St. Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ USA
terry@spcvxa.spc.edu	+1 201 915 9381
From: me@stile.stonemarche.org (Mark Eklof)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213
Date: 18 Aug 92 20:26:24 GMT
Reply-To: me@stile.stonemarche.org
Organization: Stonemarche Network Co-op
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 642, Message 6 of 10

In comp.dcom.telecom, article <telecom12.636.8@eecs.nwu.edu>, David
Gast writes:

> Yesterday I received some mail from GTE, no doubt at ratepayer's (that
> is, my) expense.  They want me to convert my XXX card to a GTE card,
> where XXX should be immediately obvious to all loyal telecom readers.
> (GTE is just a little behind the Baby Bells in implenting the change).

	I got one of these from GTE last month.  Given my past
experiences with GTE, it wasn't all that surprising, even though the
phone number/account for which they wanted to issue this card had been
closed over eight months ago, when I moved to a different town (having
phone service provided by someone other than GTE was an explicit
requirment I gave to real estate agents while looking for a house).


Mark D. Eklof    Brookline, New Hampshire, USA   me@stile.stonemarche.org
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 00:44:04 PDT
From: Dave Cantor <cantor@star.enet.dec.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: No Information For 900 Numbers
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 641, Message 11 of 13

I tried to get 900 directory assistance tonight from Nashua, NH
(603-888).  I got the following intercept:

  "Due to a change in network architecture, the 900 information number
   has been disconnected.  This is no further information available
   at this time."


David A. Cantor        cantor@star.enet.dec.com
Digital Equipment Corp., Nashua, NH  03062, USA
The views expressed herein are my own, except where attributed to 
someone else.  They are neither the opinion of, nor the responsibility 
of, Digital Equipment Corporation.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 03:58:50 GMT
From: aps@world.std.com (Armando P. Stettner)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 642, Message 2 of 10

I remember a time when there was a great deal of determinism regarding
how to dial a given phone number ...


aps


[Moderator's Note: But do you remember the Anti-Digital-Dialing League
which formed in Berkeley, CA in the early 1960's to fight the
conversion of named exchanges into three digit numbers?  PAT]
From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: SupraFAXModem 14.4 Voice Upgrade - What is it?
Date: 15 Aug 92 15:59:36 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 633, Message 5 of 10

I have a SupraFaxModem V.32bis at home, and we're buying scads and
scads of them here at MasterCard.  (That's not an official MasterCard
endorsement, just a statement of fact.)  I personally think that
they're the slickest thing on the market, other than a slight tendency
on the part of my home unit to warm up a bit after it's been on for a
while, and I know of nothing that beats it in price/performance.
 
I paid $325 (to Software Plus, here in St. Louis) for a modem that
supports all speeds up to 14.4 kbps V.32bis, data and fax, both MNP5
and V.42bis compression, and all error correction standards up through
MNP10, including a cable that can handle hardware flow control, and
your choice of DOS, Windows, or Mac software for terminal emulation
and background and scheduled fax send/receive.
 
The physical hardware is about 2/3 the size of a cheap paperback book,
has an internal speaker, seperate line and phone jacks, and a clever
front-panel: only a few lights (OH, SD, RD, and TR), and a
two-character alpha-numeric display that shows the rest of the status.
For example, when connected to another SFM V.32bis, it might rotate
between "CD" (carrier detect), "144" (14.4 kbps), and "LP" (LAPM, or
V.42bis data compression).  (I know, "144" is three characters.  It's
a bit-mapped display, so they squeeze the first "14" onto one display
character.)  And it auto-buffers connect speeds, so if you want, you
can just set your comm software to 57.6 kbps (or whatever your serial
port can handle) and let it handle the difference.
 
The Supra literature I've seen most recently says that there will be a
PROM and software upgrade available soon that will allow it to handle
voice mail as well, plus deliver Calling Number ID (presumably as part
of the RING message).  This was announced at the February (SanFran)
MacWorld Expo for August, but now the ads read "3Q92" ... par for the
course, their Macintosh fax software vendor ran them about a month
over their last target date.
 
On a reasonable analog line with uncompressed data, V.32 bis plus V.42
bis ought to average about 4 x 14.4 kbps, or 57.6 kbps.  That's close
enough to one ISDN B channel that I'm not going to work myself up into
a lather waiting for ISDN.
 
At a recent party, I got into a brief discussion with a bunch of
people who were claiming that the Telebit T.3000 (?) did everything
the SupraFaxModem V.32bis did plus Telebit's PEP and PEP2 protocols,
for about the same price.  Is this true?
 

J. Brad Hicks   Internet: mhs!mc!Brad_Hicks@attmail.com
X.400:    c=US admd=ATTmail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad
I am not an official MasterCard spokesperson, and the message above
does not contain official MasterCard statements or policies.
Date: 16 Aug 92 16:40:07 GMT
From: 1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Pager Fraud Conviction
Reply-To: 1012breuckma@vmsf.csd.mu.edu
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 637, Message 1 of 7

 From {The Milwaukee Journal} 8/16/92

Angry Callers Help Convict Man Behind Beeper Scheme

New York, N.Y. - A Manhattan man has been convicted of leaving
messages on thousands of beepers for a telephone number that cost $55
to call.  While the defendant, Michael Brown, 23, never made a dime,
prosecutors said he stood to make millions before he was caught last
year.  They said he tried to defraud thousand of potential victims.

US Atty. Otto Obermaier said Brown hooked up two computers in his
apartment and then attached them to two telephone lines.  On one line,
the computer placed more than 4,000 calls a day to pagers that people
carry with them.  A message said that a return call for telephone-
based informational services should be made to a special 540 number on
Brown's second line tied to the second computer.

What the unsuspecting people who returned the calls were not advised
is that it would cost them $55 a call, in violation of a New York
State Public Service Commission regulation requiring operators of toll
numbers to advise incoming callers of the cost so they can hang up
before being charged.  But Brown devised a scheme in which the
computer kept callers on the line for at least 20 seconds, the time
required so they could be billed for $55 by the telephone company.  

In a six-day period in February 1991, the first computer spewed out a
total of 26,000 calls.  But the fraud did not last long because irate
subscribers inundated New York Telephone with complaints of the $55
charge.  By the time the company notified federal prosecutors and
disconnected Brown's two lines, he had billed a total of $198,000.
But prosecutors said that he never collected a dime, and that New York
Telephone made no efforts to collect the bills.  After his conviction
last week, Brown faces up to five years in prison and a fine of
$250,000 when he is sentenced on Oct. 28.  He is free on $30,000 bail.
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 10:51:51 SST
From: Ang Peng Hwa <MCMANGPH@NUSVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 648, Message 4 of 10

I'm thinking of getting two Picturephones to connect my sis-in-law in
the US and my wife in Singapore. Is the picture quality so bad that it
is not worth doing it? (There are two cute nephews whom we miss.)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 92 11:06 EDT
From: jbutz@homxa.att.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: AT&T EasyReach Problems in Rochester, NY
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 625, Message 3 of 4

> I called AT&T about this, and after being told some silly story about
> how Rochester Tel has no OSPS links to AT&T's network (which is absurd
> -- they have had them for years), and calling Rochester Tel to confirm
> that this was not true, I was told that the "real" reason why
> EasyReach calls couldn't be placed from SOME exchanges in Rochester
> Tel's area is that they aren't running the proper software on their
> ATT 5ESS machines.

Disclaimer:  I know absolutely nothing about Rochester Tel and will not
	     even try to speak for them.  I hear they have an excellent
	     reputaion as a service provider.

> My question is: Why is the software that Rochester Tel uses on its
> 5ESS machines any different than what a BOC (like New England Tel)
> uses? Is this really a correct answer, or just another one of AT&T's
> stories which they liberally employ to get rid of (legitimate)
> concerns regarding their service?

Let's not confuse a 5E in the AT&T network and a 5E in a BOC network,
they are two different animals.  The AT&T 5Es (as far as ER700 is
concerned) are operating as OSPS switches, the 5Es in the BOC networks
are usually configured as local, CO switches.  This is a very
important point!  (Also, AT&T updates their 5E's with each release of
5E software, while outside companies have to pay for this priviledge!
Quite often, they cannot make a business case for the new features in
each release of the software and therefore do not purchase them.)

How Rochester Telephone is connected to AT&T is the real question
here, NOT how their 5Es are configured, what switch they are running
etc.  That is something Rochester Tel will have to answer.  Posting
this information would be great.

The bottom line is: AT&T is not trying (legitimately or illegitimately) 
to get rid of concerns regarding their service.  We have made every
effort to satisfy our customers, just sometimes these glitches raise
their ugly heads.

> I am generally quite happy with AT&T EasyReach ... it is an
> exceptional service.  

Great, Thanks.

> BTW, two of the exchanges in question were 716-461 (Field St. CO) and
> 716-263 (Stone St. CO). AT&T says there are many more :(

That's interesting. It would be interesting to know how/why/where/
switches/etc these exchanges are serviced on.  Any info would be
appreciated, though I personally cannot do anything to fix this
particular problem.

All information and spelling errors are mine and do not represent my
employer etc. etc etc.


Later,   John Butz  jbutz@homxa.att.com   ER700 Systems Engineering
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 16:00:15 -0500
From: Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo)
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 646, Message 1 of 10

Our esteemed Moderator writes about Judge Greene and the MFJ:

> [ ... And his defenders always say, "But the judge didn't do
> anything!  AT&T agreed to divestiture and signed off on it!" Of course
> they did; how long can any large corporation fight the federal
> government until its resources are totally depleted? AT&T wisely quit
> before they were totally ruined. 

   How long can a large corporation fight an antitrust suit?  A lot
longer than the government can!  Both the AT&T suit, and a similar
suit filed the same day in 1969 against IBM, were defended by large,
corporate law firms, who totally out-manouvered the DoJ every step of
the way.  (Indeed, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure had to be
rewritten to ban some of the dialatory tactics invented by the
defendents in both suits.)

   By 1982, the Reagan antitrust division wanted to get both cases off
their dockets (because they had been consuming inordinate resources
for 13 years with no sign of a conclusion), and decided to settle.
IBM refused to concede anything, and their suit was just dropped.  The
same day, AT&T and the DoJ announced their preliminary agreement on
divestiture.

   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.
Date: 12 Aug 92 00:23:55 GMT
From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: More Notes About German Telekom
Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey)
Organization: The Hole in the Wall  Hollywood California U.S.A.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 623, Message 4 of 11


In article <telecom12.613.9@eecs.nwu.edu> is written:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 613, Message 9 of 14

Talking about being a Telekom customer in Germany:

> We don't have a touch tone phone, but we do lease the cheapest one
> they offer.

> I brought over a rotary unit that I keep plugged into my modem.  One
> thing your note didn't mention is a big gripe of mine ...  there is a
> big charge for having a second phone (extension) in your house ... and
> it's not the same as in the USA ... according to the lady that took my
> order, there is a law against two units listening in on the same line.

	Yes, the Germans will tell you that it is "technically
impossible" to have more than one extension operating on the line at
one time. Bullshit. The German phones will cut off when the line
voltage gets too low (second extension going off hook). They will add
a second extension with the crapola exclusion device so only one
extension can be on line at once. But if you put real phones (AT&T,
GNT (Danish), Plessey (UK)) on the line, they will work like U.S.
phones.  The U.S. standard is that three 500 sets (standard rotary)
can be off hook and  working at once.  Bugger the law, you are the
customer, phones are for communication.

	By the way German line voltage is 60 Volts - U.S. voltage is
48.

> Of course, it may be an attenuation problem since my PC is
> about 10 meters away from the phone jack.  

	I seriously doubt this, you probably have 5 Kilometers of 0.5
mm wire between your modem jack and the Telecom CO (Exchange). Another
10 Meters of wire is not going to add any attenuation you can measure.


Yours, 

Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com  N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA
742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 00:56:06 GMT
From: dag@ossi.com (Darren Alex Griffiths)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: L O U D Indoor Ringer Wanted
Organization: Open Systems Solutions Inc.
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 628, Message 4 of 11

MPA15C!ARTHUR@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com writes:

> I'm trying to locate a supplemental ringer that will enable an
> elderly, increasingly hard-of-hearing relative to be aware that the
> phone is ringing.  The lower tones of an electromechanical bell would
> probably be a lot better than the frequencies typically produced by
> electronic devices.  It would be an asset if the unit did not require
> external power, and if it didn't deplete my wallet too severely.  It
> wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that the device should be
> obscenely, unpleasantly clangorous.  Recommendations are most welcome.

Radio Shack used to sell a device that would flash a table light when
the phone rang.  Basically, you would plug it into to the phone and
inbetween power and the light, when the phone rang the light would
flash.  I have no idea if they still sell them however.

Considering as we all pay an FCC surcharge in order to help people
with hearing difficulties I suspect you may have some good luck
calling your local phone company and see what they can do for you.


Cheers,

Darren Alex Griffiths        dag@nasty.ossi.com
Open Systems Solutions Inc.  (510) 652-6200 x139
Fujitsu Ltd.                 Fax: (510) 652-5532
6121 Hollis Street           Emeryville, CA 94608-2092
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 12:44:44 EDT
From: Paul M. Wexelblat <wex@cs.ulowell.edu>
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 2 of 8

In article <telecom12.646.3@eecs.nwu.edu> was written:

> Two billion, one hundred fifty-six million, six hundred forty five
> thousand, four hundred thirty two" (last n digits changed to protect
> my mother who still lives in (now) twelve billion, one hundred fifty
> x) (Philadelphia)

> Once or twice an Operator actually tried to parse the number -- I
> think Philadelphia was amongst the last to do away with the letters.

> [Moderator's Note: Indeed, Philadelphia was the last, with Pennypacker
> and a couple other curious exchange names.  PAT]

The exchange included the area with Pennypack Park (through which
Pennypack Creek flowed) [Is "flew" the past participle?  -- Oh yes,
and it was/is pronounced "crick"].  

I think the exchange was really Pennypack, but always called
Pennypacker for some spurious reason.  One more real Philadelphia
exchange obscurity; The phone books always listed (in the front
the book) the exchanges with the relevant names capitalized (as I'm
sure all co's did this). In Phila, the exchange names were ALWAYS
the first n letters e.g. GRA xxxx (then GR2 xxxx) (then GR n
xxxx) except for Chestnut Hill; that was listed as Chestnut Hill
n xxxx > (which was the same as CHestnut hill), but always listed that
strange way.  Oh well, enough of this sillyness that you probably
aren't overly excited about.


Best,

Wex 


[Moderator's Note: One exchange whose origin is obscure here (if there
ever was any 'story' behind it -- I don't know) is BITtersweet
(312-248).  Another one is NORmal (667) whose origin in Hyde Park
might have come from its proximity to the Chicago Normal School a long
time ago.  Another Hyde Park exchange is FAIrfax (324), which it is
said was named in honor of a University of Chicago trustee, Fairfax
Cone.  MUseum-4 (684) references the Museum of Science and Industry,
and the much earlier World's Columbian Exposition on the same spot a
century ago in 1892-93. (The MSI is an exhibition hall left over from
the 1892-93 fair.) Incidentally, the telephone directory for the
village of Hyde Park, IL in 1892 showed the administrative phone
number for the Columbian Exposition to be 'Hyde Park 6'.  PAT]