Talk:Signaling (telecommunications)

message: This does not appear to be a disambiguation page.  It seems to be a poorly written article.  It wasn't tagged as a dab until the cleanup tag was added.  I do believe cleanup is necessary, but do not believe it is a dab. Tedernst | talk 02:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... maybe not! I added the tag as I was trying to disambiguate various signal page links... but I'm not sure what this page is. I'll accept it if you say it's not a dab. - grubber 04:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Since I wrote most of the article I may be blind to its shortcomings, but having just reread it some months later I'm not sure what the problem is. My intended structure was a definition section, followed by a classification section (defining the axes of classification) and then a section describing how some of these axes of classification are either or not orthogonal. Don't pull your punches; I can take it :-). Let me also say that it is indeed not a disambiguation page. JanCeuleers 08:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: dab?

message: I reorganized some of the information (headings and the such) and when I get home from vacation I plan on correcting and improving it further. (I'm on a HipTop2, so I can't do much information-wise.
--Nelson 04:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reorganized! 

message: Can this entry be merged with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(electrical_engineering)? I think it deals on the same thing (lectrical signals carrying information).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.18.27.5 (talk) 09:17, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging proposal

message: This page does not give much info on out of band signaling. 71.173.24.76 (talk) 17:16, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the circular reference. ~Kvng (talk) 16:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does In Band Signaling have its own page and Out Of Band Signaling does not? 

message: I have a concern about the definition of Out of Band signalling.  The definition given refers to Common Channel Signalling.  In a telephony channel, which is nominally a 4 kHz channel there is a pass band of 300-3,400 Hz.  This is the pass Band referred to, which a frequency is either In or Out of.  If  signalling is 2,400 Hz, 2,600 Hz, C4, C5, 2,280 Hz or 500/20 Hz these are In band.  If signalling is dc or earth/loop or 25 Hz it is outside the pass band and will require another piece of equipment to move into the pass band. If it is 3,825 Hz it is Out of Band and we are using E&M to drive it.  If signalling is C6 or C7 it is somewhere else, and so not an Associated Channel Signalling (ACS) method.
Sorry I used English spelling here, in Talk, for Signalling but that matters little in discussion.  We were always used to adopting many of the US signalling methods into the UK and Europe before we went away and got our own.  There were good reasons why the US got in there first with 2,600 Hz SF for example.
Europe had a system CEPT R2 using a 3,825 Hz SF frequency, whose SF tone was never heard because it only existed between the Channel Translating Equipment which derived the E&M.  This was more often used for Inter-Switch Trunks between International Switching Centres in European cities.  E&M was also derived in the Multi-Frame rotation of TS16 in a 2 Mbit/s CAS link or the robbed bit in the frame of a 1.5 Mbit/s link.  As multiplexers became easily available scope was widened to make asymmetrical link designs in order to be more creative.  E&M from 3,825 Hz was in a very few occasions used for signalling between terminals in private networks and private circuits.
A lot of the science of using Signalling Systems referred to private circuits for voice, FXO/FXS, inter-PBX, etc.  This does seem a bit historic now with the facilities of the WWW and the latest mobile phone Apps.  The article does need a bit of re-jigging maybe to separate signalling for inter-switch trunks and private circuit telephony but is it worth it ?  It's all very ancient now.  This was big in the 1970s to 1990s when I used to do it for a living.  I could go on about this sort of thing for ages, but is anyone going to be interested ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Midnight Hour (talk • contribs) 20:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Concerned.